This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2015/jun/30/negotiators-at-iran-nuclear-talks-give-themselves-another-week
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Negotiators at Iran nuclear talks give themselves another week | Negotiators at Iran nuclear talks give themselves another week |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| Today was supposed to be the big day, the deadline for completing a comprehensive and epochal nuclear agreement on the future of Iran’s nuclear programme. But, as with every other deadline along the road to this deal, some wiggle room has been found. | Today was supposed to be the big day, the deadline for completing a comprehensive and epochal nuclear agreement on the future of Iran’s nuclear programme. But, as with every other deadline along the road to this deal, some wiggle room has been found. |
| The negotiators now have an extra week or so before they face serious complications imposed by the US Congress, which would undoubtedly be mirrored by the Iranian Majlis. And there is clearly still a lot of work to do. Even if every detail was agreed, diplomats say it would still take a few days to get it down on paper and reviewed by lawyers. And there are still issues that have evidently not been agreed. | The negotiators now have an extra week or so before they face serious complications imposed by the US Congress, which would undoubtedly be mirrored by the Iranian Majlis. And there is clearly still a lot of work to do. Even if every detail was agreed, diplomats say it would still take a few days to get it down on paper and reviewed by lawyers. And there are still issues that have evidently not been agreed. |
| With that in mind, the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, returned to Vienna on Tuesday morning, after a day’s break for consultations in Tehran, accompanied by President Rouhani’s brother, Hossein Fereydoun, and the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organisation, Ali Akbar Salehi, who is still recovering from surgery for a perforated bowel. Despite his fragile health, Salehi’s presence was seen as critical for resolving some of the outstanding technical issues rapidly. | With that in mind, the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, returned to Vienna on Tuesday morning, after a day’s break for consultations in Tehran, accompanied by President Rouhani’s brother, Hossein Fereydoun, and the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organisation, Ali Akbar Salehi, who is still recovering from surgery for a perforated bowel. Despite his fragile health, Salehi’s presence was seen as critical for resolving some of the outstanding technical issues rapidly. |
| Zarif, who has himself suffered from recurring back trouble throughout the talks, immediately went to see John Kerry, who is on crutches following a bicycle accident. A western diplomat suggested, mostly in jest, that it might have been more convenient to organise the talks in a hospital ward. | Zarif, who has himself suffered from recurring back trouble throughout the talks, immediately went to see John Kerry, who is on crutches following a bicycle accident. A western diplomat suggested, mostly in jest, that it might have been more convenient to organise the talks in a hospital ward. |
| Zarif was also due to see his Russian and German counterparts, Sergei Lavrov and Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who flew in on Tuesday. | |
| Update: After his morning meetings, Zarif was upbeat. He denied he had had to fly back to Tehran to seek a mandate from his leaders, saying: “I already had a mandate to negotiate and I am here to get a final deal and I think we can.” | |
| The UK’s Philip Hammond, and France’s Laurent Fabius were in Vienna over the weekend and are due to return over the course of the week. The Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, is only expected if and when a deal is imminent. | |
| The new date looming in the minds of the harried negotiators is July 9, the deadline set by the US Congress in its Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act for the Obama administration to deliver a copy of the agreement to the legislature, which will have 30 days to look it over. | The new date looming in the minds of the harried negotiators is July 9, the deadline set by the US Congress in its Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act for the Obama administration to deliver a copy of the agreement to the legislature, which will have 30 days to look it over. |
| If that date is missed, Congress will have 60 days for scrutiny. That means an extra month in which it will be dissected, denounced and ridiculed by critics. Prodigious sums of money will be spent by fervent and monied opponents like Sheldon Adelson in the states of senators who are tentatively supportive of the agreement, but nervous about a backlash. | If that date is missed, Congress will have 60 days for scrutiny. That means an extra month in which it will be dissected, denounced and ridiculed by critics. Prodigious sums of money will be spent by fervent and monied opponents like Sheldon Adelson in the states of senators who are tentatively supportive of the agreement, but nervous about a backlash. |
| The congressional arithmetic is precarious. As things stand now, there are about 58 senators who would probably vote against a deal as outlined by a set of parameters agreed between Iran and six world powers in Lausanne in April. That is two short of the number the Republicans need to stop a Senate filibuster, and get a vote passed rejecting the deal. That would force Obama to use a veto, and if his opponents managed to muster 67 votes, they could over-ride that veto. | The congressional arithmetic is precarious. As things stand now, there are about 58 senators who would probably vote against a deal as outlined by a set of parameters agreed between Iran and six world powers in Lausanne in April. That is two short of the number the Republicans need to stop a Senate filibuster, and get a vote passed rejecting the deal. That would force Obama to use a veto, and if his opponents managed to muster 67 votes, they could over-ride that veto. |
| Getting to 67 currently looks like a steep climb, but given 60 days and a lot of money, it could be possible. Then would be all the years of negotiating would have been for naught. Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association said: | Getting to 67 currently looks like a steep climb, but given 60 days and a lot of money, it could be possible. Then would be all the years of negotiating would have been for naught. Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association said: |
| Additional time gives opponents of the deal space to undermine the agreement, and the stakes are too high to jeopardise the benefits of a good deal. Ideally negotiators will wrap up the final details within the next several days, giving the administration time to submit the required paperwork to Congress. | Additional time gives opponents of the deal space to undermine the agreement, and the stakes are too high to jeopardise the benefits of a good deal. Ideally negotiators will wrap up the final details within the next several days, giving the administration time to submit the required paperwork to Congress. |
| The required paperwork she was talking about was a “verification assessment” from secretary of state John Kerry, certifying that there are sufficient safeguards in place to stop cheating, and President Obama’s “determination” that the deal meets US nonproliferation objectives and does not jeopardise security. Those documents are being prepared in Washington but will still take some time to complete after an agreement. Realistically, the bargaining in Vienna will have to be finished by July 8. | The required paperwork she was talking about was a “verification assessment” from secretary of state John Kerry, certifying that there are sufficient safeguards in place to stop cheating, and President Obama’s “determination” that the deal meets US nonproliferation objectives and does not jeopardise security. Those documents are being prepared in Washington but will still take some time to complete after an agreement. Realistically, the bargaining in Vienna will have to be finished by July 8. |
| The work still to be done includes big issues and small details. The biggest concern, certainly for the Iranians, is the exact trade-off and sequencing of sanctions relief against steps taken by Iran to dismantle some of its nuclear infrastructure. Perhaps most critical for the US and its allies are the enduring limits placed on Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity after the initial decade of an agreement. They do not want a situation in which Iranian capacity suddenly expands exponentially from year 11 onwards, giving it the capability to make fissile material very rapidly. For its part, Iran is anxious its scientific progress should not be shackled in perpetuity. | The work still to be done includes big issues and small details. The biggest concern, certainly for the Iranians, is the exact trade-off and sequencing of sanctions relief against steps taken by Iran to dismantle some of its nuclear infrastructure. Perhaps most critical for the US and its allies are the enduring limits placed on Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity after the initial decade of an agreement. They do not want a situation in which Iranian capacity suddenly expands exponentially from year 11 onwards, giving it the capability to make fissile material very rapidly. For its part, Iran is anxious its scientific progress should not be shackled in perpetuity. |
| One issue that does seem to have been resolved is the question of access for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to Iranian sites and facilities. Iran has signalled that it will implement the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, giving its inspectors the right to visit any site, including military bases, if there is suspicion of undeclared nuclear-related activity. But Tehran does not want foreign inspectors have untrammelled access to all its military secrets. | One issue that does seem to have been resolved is the question of access for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to Iranian sites and facilities. Iran has signalled that it will implement the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, giving its inspectors the right to visit any site, including military bases, if there is suspicion of undeclared nuclear-related activity. But Tehran does not want foreign inspectors have untrammelled access to all its military secrets. |
| So how would disputes over inspections be resolved? A senior US administration official said a mechanism had been found: | So how would disputes over inspections be resolved? A senior US administration official said a mechanism had been found: |
| The entry point isn’t we must be able to get into every military site, because the United States of America wouldn’t allow anybody to get into every military site. So that’s not appropriate. There are conventional military purposes; there are military secrets that any country has that they’re not willing to share with other people. But if in the context of this agreement the Additional Protocol....if [the] IAEA believes that it needs access and has a reason for that access, then we have a process to ensure that that access is given. | The entry point isn’t we must be able to get into every military site, because the United States of America wouldn’t allow anybody to get into every military site. So that’s not appropriate. There are conventional military purposes; there are military secrets that any country has that they’re not willing to share with other people. But if in the context of this agreement the Additional Protocol....if [the] IAEA believes that it needs access and has a reason for that access, then we have a process to ensure that that access is given. |
| But even on issues that have been agreed in principle, there is endless tinkering to be done by experts to ensure there are no loopholes which could be exploited by the other parties, or critics back home. No one wants to be responsible for a small gaffe that might mean a lost Senate vote. A diplomat likened the process to engineers working on the intricate wiring of a rocket. Once it is launched, there is no calling it back. A tiny mistake means it blows up in mid-air. The senior US official put it like this: | But even on issues that have been agreed in principle, there is endless tinkering to be done by experts to ensure there are no loopholes which could be exploited by the other parties, or critics back home. No one wants to be responsible for a small gaffe that might mean a lost Senate vote. A diplomat likened the process to engineers working on the intricate wiring of a rocket. Once it is launched, there is no calling it back. A tiny mistake means it blows up in mid-air. The senior US official put it like this: |
| [T]his is staggeringly consequential for everybody. Everybody who’s involved in this negotiation understands and quite frankly feels the burden of the responsibility of what we’re doing. This is incredibly consequential for the national security of the United States. This is quite consequential for the national security of all of the [negotiating] partners, the regions, the Middle East, the world, and for Iran. And we have between the United States and Iran decades of enmity and mistrust. That’s very tough, and making this decision to actually do the joint comprehensive plan of action is a very, very, very big decision for everybody – very big. So it’s tough to do it. | [T]his is staggeringly consequential for everybody. Everybody who’s involved in this negotiation understands and quite frankly feels the burden of the responsibility of what we’re doing. This is incredibly consequential for the national security of the United States. This is quite consequential for the national security of all of the [negotiating] partners, the regions, the Middle East, the world, and for Iran. And we have between the United States and Iran decades of enmity and mistrust. That’s very tough, and making this decision to actually do the joint comprehensive plan of action is a very, very, very big decision for everybody – very big. So it’s tough to do it. |
Previous version
1
Next version