Tuesday, August 25, 2015

French Expert: 'Obama put more pressure on its friends, than on Iran'

French Critics of the Iran Deal - John Vinocur

 After initially nodding "yes" to the nuclear deal with Iran, the French have partially reverted to form reflecting their traditional hard-nosed antinuclear proliferation position. Citing the profound weaknesses of an agreement that allows controls over Iran to end after 15 years and the mullahs to keep an absurdly high number of centrifuges, a French official expressed concern about America's willingness over time to continue paying the enormous expense of its vast Iranian surveillance operations. He also said that the deal's concessions to Tehran made a pressing reality of Saudi Arabia's quest for an atomic weapon.

French security expert Bruno Tertrais wrote last month in the Canadian newspaper Le Devoir that "with pressure from the Obama administration," European negotiators' original intent deteriorated from a rollback of Iran's nuclear ambitions to their containment.

Camille Grand, director of the French think tank Foundation for Strategic Research, explained: "From 2013 on, the Americans gave the impression they wanted the deal more than Iran did. The administration put more pressure on its friends in the negotiations than on the Iranians."  
(Wall Street Journal)

The Saudis Reply to Iran's Rising Danger - Sohrab Ahmari

  • Anwar Eshki, a retired major general in the Saudi armed forces, has spearheaded Riyadh's outreach to Jerusalem. He made history in June when he appeared on a panel in Washington with Dore Gold, the director-general of Israel's Foreign Ministry. I sat down for an interview with Gen. Eshki on Wednesday in Prague.
  • Gen. Eshki said he was surprised by Secretary of State Kerry during the talks: "He supported the Iranians!" Kerry and his boss were willing to see things Iran's way, Gen. Eshki says, because they believe that moderates can outmaneuver hard-liners like Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his Revolutionary Guards.
  • "I believe Iran will not change its mind as long as that regime is in power in Tehran," he says. "They want to revive the Persian Empire. And also they want to dominate the Middle East."
  • It was the common Iranian threat that brought the general and Dr. Gold into a year-long strategic dialogue that culminated in the Washington meeting. "The main project between me and Dore Gold is to bring peace between Arab countries and Israel....My government knows about the project. My government isn't against it, because we need peace. For that reason, I found Dore Gold. He likes his country. I like my country. We need to profit from each other."
  • The U.S. doesn't figure much in the moral and strategic map Gen. Eshki paints of the region. "The United States doesn't like anymore to be involved in the Middle East." That may be preferable to many American voters, but it comes at the price of a diminished capacity to shape events and outcomes.
  • (Wall Street Journal)


    LHwrites said...

    The Wall Street Journal has not been a respected or reliable source since Rupert Murdoch took it over. You'll notice the French guy wrote for a Canadian paper. if you internet search the topic without using slanted terms (because we know you can find stuff for every viewpoint, but slanted terms just get you a lot of links to that WSJ article) you will find stuff like this: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/05/nuclear-deal-with-iran-europeans-scramble-for-persia

    The French, along with all the other leading nations are ending sanctions and looking towards renewed relations with Iran. The world wanted this agreement, not just Obama. He and the US have been pressured for years because the sanctions clearly weren't stopping a nuclear Iran, as you pointed out for years on this fine blog---they were only hurting the Iranian people and turning another generation of MidEasterners again the West.

    Bruce said...

    The sanctions were doing a pretty decent job, until we handed them a $150 billion dollar signing bonus.

    I suspect that those who now support the Iran deal [I believe you may be among them] will regret it in the future. Time will tell.

    LHwrites said...

    The sanctions were doing a pretty decent job??? Please define that! You have done a fine job of pointing out how Iran has marched towards nuclear capability for years now. That they were so close was the precipitant for both this agreement, and all the hawks calling for more stringent sanctions or military options. All the sanctions achieved was to make the populace suffer and turn them further against the West.

    Bruce said...

    The sanctions did the job of forcing Iran to the negotiating table.

    Bruce said...

    ...a tool, I should add, squandered by the Obama Administration.

    John Vagabond said...

    It's a Pyrrhic victory, at best, squeezed out because Obama has almost no foreign policy success to mark his presidency and he wants to go down in history as, if not the mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, then as the welcome mat for the Iranians to come in from the cold and counterbalance Saudi hegemony in the region.If (or more likely, when) they get the bomb, he'll wish he'd left the Persian bear out in the snow since it's a much more dangerous beast than the North Koreans. If war does break out, I hope Obama will have the decency to return his Nobel, but I am not optimistic about either.

    Bruce said...

    Right: a president who pushes for peace but puts the wheels in motion for war.
    No ways he'll return the Nobel. He's arrogant enough to think he deserves it.