Peace Talks – Now the Threats

    Jumping out of a C130 Hercules troop carrier 1,200 feet above the sand dunes of Palmachim, just South of Tel-Aviv, is a unique experience. Near the target landing area, the red “get ready” light goes on and the side doors are opened. The first thing you experience is a rush of hot air and the deafening noise of the powerful turbo-prop engines.

   Standing in the open door like a ski-jumper on the ramp, when the light turns green you push and step forward, straight into the noisy and turbulent backdraft of the nearest engine, and are immediately thrown sideways, horizontally, beyond the tale of the plane. Within seconds you feel a slight jolt as the static rip-cord deploys your main chute.
   And suddenly, as you seem to be just hanging there, you hear…absolutely nothing. Not a sound. The plane is already miles away. You’re platoon is scattered in two lines of olive green parachutes hundreds of feet behind you.
   After checking that your chute is fully open you look down to find the landing spot.  At first it seems that you are not moving at all.  But within moments the ground seems to be coming up towards you. At first very slowly, then faster and faster, until in the last few seconds it’s rushing at you so fast that you barely have time to brace for the impact.
  I remembered this while learning about John Kerry’s new threat tactic.
  Six months ago he was led to believe that after 65 years of failed attempts, he could establish a two-state resolution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict by the end of 2014. One of the key benchmarks, directly connected to the next Israeli prisoner release, is next month, when an agreed “framework” for final negotiations must be in place.
   With every trial balloon of possible “framework” issues having been rejected, so far, by both the Palestinians and the Israelis, and the March deadline rapidly approaching, we can guess what the Secretary of State is feeling: that the deadline seems to be approaching at ever accelerating speed. The ground is rushing towards him.
   Otherwise it’s hard to understand the series of unveiled threats to both Israel and the Palestinian leadership made by Kerry in recent days.
   According to reliable Palestinian sources, a frustrated Kerry recently threatened Palestinian president Abu Mazen that he would meet the same fate as his predecessor, Yasser Arafat, if he turned down Washington’s proposals for peace with Israel. Abu Mazen reportedly stormed out of the room. The Palestinians pounced on this statement as “confirmation” that Arafat was “murdered by Israel”.
   In December Kerry implied that if a peace deal was not implemented then Israel would face a third bloody Intifada. At a security conference in In Munich last Saturday, Kerry said that the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not sustainable. It is illusionary. For Israel there is an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it; there is talk of boycott and other kinds of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that?"
   That statement was celebrated in Europe and the Arab world as a US endorsement of the growing BDS (Boycott, Diverse and Sanction) movement, and in Israel as a direct US threat to its legitimacy and economy.
   In Middle East tradition, negotiations, even over small deals, frequently take a long time – measured in years and decades rather than weeks or months. Rigid timetables, deadlines and benchmarks rarely work (example: Assad’s failure to turn over Syria’s chemical weapons on time), neither do threats...at least not to Israel.
   The Israelis and Palestinians have known since the UN partition vote on November 29, 1947 that the eventual end result will be two states for two people. They also know that the negotiations may continue, with different leaders and various interim agreements and accommodations, another 67 years or longer.
   Both sides are rejecting, each in their own way, the threats and pressures of a super-power that is actively and rapidly disengaging from the Middle East.
   The perception of the “ground rushing up” is real…but different for each party. For Israel – it’s the immediate probability of Iran having nuclear weapons and the region’s growing instability. For the Palestinians – it’s the potential loss of their perpetual and highly lucrative refugee status. For John Kerry and the White House, according to most US and Middle East analysts – it’s the upcoming 2014 and 2016 elections.
    Kerry made three jumps from three planes – Peace talks, Iran nukes and Syrian chemical weapons. Each time his parachuting technique was by-the-book. But each time the green light went on and he took that giant step into the backdraft, Kerry’s pilot had been way off course and off timing. Each of the three meticulously planned drop zones was missed by miles. The missions, so far, are failing.
   Just because the ground is rushing towards you doesn’t mean you’re at the right place – or that threats and/or bribes will get you where you want to be.     
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

The Oracles of Davos

   Every era has its seers – inspired individuals (or charlatans) who can explain the present and predict the future.  Three thousand years ago in Assyria and Mesopotamia it was the “frenzied women” or “Mari”.  In ancient Egypt it was the goddess Wadget. The Greeks had Pythia, the oracle at Delphi, and in biblical times there were prophets. 

   Today we have the statements of participants at the annual World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland.
   From the WEF website: “The World Economic Forum is an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas…the Forum is tied to no political, partisan or national interests.”
    Traditionally the Davos Forum is attended by world leaders or their representatives, diplomats, educators and many business executives – both active and retired.
    Though usually mostly technical and pretty boring, the Davos Forum always provides insight into the current state of the world in general, and the Middle East in particular (we remember how, a few years ago, Israeli president Shimon Peres stormed off the stage in the middle of a debate with Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan after the latter accused him of being a “murderer”).
   With Shimon Peres, Benjamin Netanyahu, John Kerry and Iranian president Hassan Rouhani all attending and speaking from the podium - this year’s crop of on-the-record quotes gave us an abundance of clarity as to where the current Middle East initiatives really are…and where they are heading.
   Here is what these modern-day oracles said – and what it means.
John Kerry about the peace talks:

• “The Palestinians need to know that at the end of the day, their territory is going to be free of Israeli troops…”
• There should be “a full, phased, final withdrawal of the Israeli army,”
• Mutual recognition of the nation-state of the Palestinian people and the nation-state of the Jewish people. 

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas (not at Davos)

• “Palestine can never recognize Israel as a Jewish state.”
• “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli — civilian or soldier — on our lands”
• “No Israeli settlers or border forces could remain in a future Palestinian state.”
• “Palestinians deem illegal all Jewish settlements within the land occupied in the 1967 Six Days War.”

Benjamin Netanyahu:

• “I have said it before and I repeat it today: I'm not going to evict a single community, I am not going to uproot any Israeli from his home.”
• “Any peace agreement with the Palestinians must include a long-term Israeli presence along the Jordan River”.
• “That presence would protect Israel from the importation of terrorists from Jordan into a Palestinians state”.

Iran president Hasan Rouhani:

• “I strongly and clearly state that nuclear weapons have no place in our security strategy, and Iran has no motivation to move in that direction.”

Netanyahu:

• "Rouhani is continuing with the Iranian show of deception.
• At a time when Rouhani claims that Iran is not interested in a nuclear project for military purposes, Iran continues to strengthen its centrifuges and heavy water reactor, and to arm itself with intercontinental missiles, the sole purpose of which is for nuclear weapons.
• Rouhani has admitted that a decade ago, he deceived the West in order to advance the Iranian nuclear program. He is doing this today as well.
• The goal of the Iranian ayatollahs' regime, which is hiding behind Rouhani's smiles, is to ease sanctions without conceding on their program to produce nuclear weapons.
• The international community must not go astray after this deception, and it must prevent Iran from attaining the ability to produce nuclear weapons."

   One does not have to be a genius to interpret the insights of the Oracles of Davos.  It looks like 2014 will be a year of Iran becoming a nuclear power (unless they are stopped militarily), and no final peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians (unless the Palestinians get better leadership).
    I find it strange, though, that the oracles are silent on foreseeing, in these dangerous times, the appearance of a new, “responsible adult” super power to rule the region and maintain security and stability. Historically one always arrives when there is a leadership vacuum. Maybe next year at Davos…
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

What Peace Process?

    Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. 

   The ongoing attempts over the past 65 years to establish a two-states-for-two-nations resolution in what was formerly the Western part of British Mandatory Palestine (The Eastern part is today’s Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), can be seen as the poster-child for Einstein’s definition.
   On November 29, 1947, the UN general assembly voted to partition the area into two separate states – a Jewish state, yet to be named, and an Arab state, yet to be named.
   The Jewish population accepted the partition and on May 14, 1948, David Ben Gurion declared the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel.
   The Arabs, both within the partitioned area and throughout the Middle East, rejected the partition vote almost unanimously. They launched an all-out war against the fledgling Jewish state with the declared goal of “throwing the Jews into the sea”. They were unsuccessful, but vowed to continue trying to remove the “Zionist Entity” from their midst.
   This is why the “Arab State” mentioned in the Partition Resolution was never declared or established.
   In 1964, frustrated by the lack of support of the Arab leaders, a number of terrorist  groups banded together to form the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), declaring: "... the right of the Palestinian Arab people to its sacred homeland Palestine and affirming the inevitability of the battle to liberate the usurped part from it, and its determination to bring out its effective revolutionary entity and the mobilization of the capabilities and potentialities and its material, military and spiritual forces".  For the PLO, then and today, “Palestine” includes all of Israel.
   The Palestinian nation was born, and the PLO is recognized worldwide, to this day, as its sole representative.  Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is the fourth Chairman of the PLO. 
   During the 1967 Six Day War Israel captured parts of Syria (the Golan Heights), Jordan (The West Bank) and Egypt (The Gaza Strip). Two weeks later the Israeli government offered to return everything, with minor border adjustments, to Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Israel’s only condition was a peace treaty that says “end of conflict.”
   When the PLO heads got wind if the Israeli offer they went ballistic, threatening the leaders of Egypt, Syria and Jordan that they will pay dearly for reneging on their promises of 1949 to destroy Israel.        
   Nevertheless, King Hussein of Jordan accepted the Israeli offer, but refused to receive back the West Bank. In 1970 a secret peace treaty was signed with Jordan, though the West Bank remained under Israeli control.
   Since 1967, there have been numerous diplomatic attempts to try to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue. They all failed. And for one simple reason: Since the PLO is the sole representative of the Palestinians, all negotiations, from the Oslo Accords in 1993 up to the current talks led by John Kerry, are with the PLO – not the Palestinian Authority. And the PLO cannot, according to its own charter, ever accept a Jewish State of Israel on what it calls the “sacred land of Palestine”. 
   More than that, the PLO charter specifically states that: "The claims of historic and spiritual ties between Jews and Palestine are not in agreement with the facts of history or with the true basis of sound statehood...the Jews are not one people with an independent personality because they are citizens to their states." (Article 18).
   And let’s not forget that Hamas, which represents at least 50% of the Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and abroad, is not participating and is on record that even just talking to Israel is a treasonous act – punishable by death.
     George H.W. Bush tried with Yitzhak Shamir and Bibi Netanyahu; Bill Clinton tried at Camp David with Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat. George W. Bush tried with Arik Sharon, Abu Mazen, Ehud Olmert, Tzippi Livni and the Roadmap. Hillary gave it a shot and now John Kerry is back for his 11th visit since taking office with “new and improved” proposals that are sure to displease both sides.
   So will there ever be a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians? I believe that there will be eventually, because there has to be.
   But it will take strong leaders on both sides able to “sell” the necessary compromises to their constituents in a way that will generate resounding positive votes in the inevitable respective national referendums.
   In the meantime it looks more and more that John Kerry, like his well-meaning predecessors, is just, as Einstein put it: “doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result…”
    Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Bring in the Clowns - Will 2014 be the Greatest Show on Earth?

As a young boy growing up in New York in the 1950’s, I remember looking forward to the annual family ritual of going to Madison Square Garden to see the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus. It was a three ring spectacle with five rings. At the age of eight, I was constantly shifting my gaze so as not to miss anything. It seemed like well-choreographed chaos…with clowns appearing from time to time to screw things up.

At the start of 2014, the Middle East reminds me of the circus. Wherever one looks there are major, ongoing events taking place simultaneously. While seemingly unconnected, they are all happening inside one large “tent”, and therefor will eventually have an impact, to a lesser or greater degree, on everyone inside. Here are just some of the events we will be following in the weeks and months ahead:

• The end of an era. With the notable exception of still very active Israeli president Shimon Peres, the imminent passing of Ariel (Arik) Sharon marks the end of the era of modern Israel’s founding generation. Soldier, politician and farmer, Arik Sharon was active at every major crossroad of Israel’s history. Frequently controversial, both revered and criticized, he has been instrumental, at many levels, in making Israel what it is today. I’ll cover his life in more detail in a future column.
• The Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks.   By all available accounts as of this writing, Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent series of meetings in the region did not advance the current round of talks. Key points of his proposed framework were rejected outright by both the Palestinians and the Israelis. In the meantime while the Israelis are continuing their promised release of prisoners, the Palestinians have hardened their positions, continue vicious public incitement against Israel, show hateful anti-Israel programs on educational TV stations and are allowing preparations for terrorist attacks. With Hamas and Fatah renewing reconciliation talks this week, no one believes that the nine-month timetable for reaching an agreement is realistic.
• Civil War in Syria: Though “Peace Talks” are schedule to begin this month in Geneva, Assad, with massive support from Iran and Hezbollah and the diplomatic backing of Russia and China, has no incentive to cut a compromise deal at this moment. The rebel Sunni forces are divided and fighting each other with no recognizable central command or credible political leadership. Also – Israeli Experts say that the over 20,000 international Jihadists now fighting in Syria against Assad, are already marking Israel as their next target. 
• Iran Nukes: Talks with P5+1 are scheduled to resume next week. As of this writing the “6 month hiatus” has still not yet started. Iranian high government officials brag that the Uranium enrichment is continuing at an accelerated pace, as is the completion of the Heavy Water reactor at Arak.
• Egypt: As the new Constitution comes into effect, presidential elections are already in preparation. It is all but confirmed that the highly popular strongman General Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi will run for the presidency – and in all probability win.
• Iraq: With violence now a daily occurrence, and in the noticeable absence of a peacekeeping or moderating power, the renewed Sunni-Shiite-Kurdish civil war is about to break out with brutal force. Can anyone say (with apologies to Yogi Berra): “Syrian déjà vu all over again”? 

   Just like at the circus, in the Middle East wherever you look there is action, danger, comedy, edge-of-your-seat nail-biting suspense…and, of course – clowns. Unfortunately, at the moment this circus doesn’t seem to have a ringmaster. And this is just the first week of 2014! Hold on to your seats and cotton candy – it’s going to be an interesting year...
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Geneva Deal Revisited

   My December 5th column: “A Murky Middle East Future” was critical about the then just announced November 24th “Interim Deal” that Iran had supposedly agreed to with the P5+1 in Geneva. 

   Several readers emailed me about the article. Some of the comments were positive and others constructive. I am always happy to hear from readers. Your feedback, comments, corrections and suggestions are most welcome, and though I don’t always reply right away, you can be sure that I read every email and take your comments very seriously.
   Remember though – I am an analyst – not a reporter. I glean information from various sources and try to deduct, based on my personal knowledge and years of experience, what this information says and what we may expect down the road. I also reserve, and frequently exercise, the right to alter my analysis based of new information, changing circumstances or other developments.
   With that in mind I would like to respond to an email from someone whose opinion I greatly respect.
   The writer expressed disappointment that every article about the Middle East: “appears biased and seldom evenhanded”.
   The writer also questioned why I did not mention the following “items” of the Agreement in my column:

• Iran will stop enriching uranium beyond 5%, and "neutralize" its stockpile of uranium enriched beyond this point
• Iran will give greater access to inspectors including daily access at the Natanz and Fordo nuclear sites
• There will be no further development of the Arak plant which it is believed could produce plutonium
• In return, there will be no new nuclear-related sanctions for six months if Iran sticks by the accord
• Iran will also receive sanctions relief worth about $7bn on sectors related mostly to precious metals.

   Out of respect for the writer, I reviewed the facts on which I had based the column, plus others that have surfaced since. Had I known then what l know now – the column would have been even more critical.
       Shocking as it may be, it turns out that:

1. No document was actually signed in Geneva on November 24th…or since.
2. There are at least three (American, European and Iranian) somewhat different versions of a so called unsigned “Agreement of Intent”. 
3. The “six month” period has not yet started. In the meantime Iran has declared that enrichment continues at full blast.
4. Iran has already received over $20bn in unfrozen cash and assets.  

 In all three versions of the “agreement”, during the six months of “negotiations”, Iran – already a nuclear “threshold” state according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA):

• Keeps all its already enriched Uranium (7 tons at 3.5%, 180 kg. at 20%)
• Does not dismantle any of its 13,000 centrifuges in Natanz and Fordow.
• Continues to enrich up to 3.5% (Iranian version: 5%) 
• Does not convert any of its enriched Uranium to “civilian-use” status.
• Continues manufacturing major parts for the heavy water reactor in Arak (Iranian version: continues construction)
• Allows IAEA inspectors to visit Natanz and Fordow, but bars them from its nuclear weapons development and production facilities, as well as its secret nuclear bomb warhead testing facility in the military base at Parchin.

In the meantime:

• No monitoring of Iran’s missile research, production launch bases and storage facilities.
• No US military strike.
• Iran and the P5+1 thrive economically since the sanctions are weakened.

   So even during the six month “negotiations” period, Iran will continue towards its goal of having nuclear weapons while enjoying significant economic relief and an undeserved “legitimacy” from world leaders. 
   Yes, dear email writer – I was, and am still highly critical of the “Geneva agreement”. The only positive side to it, if any, is that the Israeli government may have to take matters in to its own hands. 
   This is not bias…it’s a careful analysis and concern that the P5+1 leaders are looking for a quick politically and economically profitable fix, rather than a real and permanent resolution. They seem to be following the philosophy of French king Louis XV, who infamously said: “Après moi le deluge”. After me – the flood.   
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Israel's Security Status in 2014

   On Monday, November 25th, Israel’s top intelligence officials met with members of Netanyahu’s exclusive inner cabinet for a secret briefing at a secure Mossad facility in central Israel. The ministers were presented with an evaluation of various possible developments in the world and the Middle East in 2014 that could have a direct impact on the security of Israel and Israelis.

   Though the details of secret briefings cannot be divulged, knowledgeable sources in Israel reported that the ministers left the briefing with a look of contentment. Apparently the threat assessment for 2014 was for the most part pretty optimistic. 
   It seems that in 2014, despite the overall turmoil in the Middle East, the chance of a major ground war using large armor and infantry formations, between Israel and one or more of the countries in the region, is very low to nil. 
   With Israel at peace with Egypt and Jordan, Syria fighting a bloody civil war and Iraq falling apart, there simply is no country, or potential coalition of countries, that has the military ability, motivation or political will to mount a serious ground campaign against Israel.
   However an air war, with missiles, rockets and aircraft is distinctly possible in 2014, though not very probable. Let’s look at the regional players.

• Syria: Even though Syria possesses thousands of rockets and missiles that can cause devastating damage and casualties to Israel, both the regime and the rebels are too embroiled in a harsh civil war. The last thing either side wants, at least until the dust settles, is to open a front against Israel.
• Hezbollah. Despite having over 100,000 long, medium and short range rockets aimed at Israel, Nasrallah’s status in Lebanon is growing precarious by the day. Heavy troop losses fighting for the Assad regime in Syria, and the inability to provide security at home, have tarnished Hezbollah’s image greatly. Knowing how disproportionately destructive an Israeli retaliation would be to rocket fire from Lebanon, Hezbollah leadership currently prefers to avoid a conflict.
• Hamas (Gaza): Same as Hezbollah. Rapidly losing popularity due to an inability to govern and provide basic services to the population, the Hamas leadership simply can’t afford to be blamed for even more misery after an Israeli retaliation. 

    So according to most analysts, barring an unforeseen circumstance there is very little chance of a full blown war in 2014 on the scope of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, or the 1967 Six Day War.
   That was probably the “good” part of the evaluation briefing.
   The more ominous part may have dealt with the growing security threats posed by various Sunni terrorist groups and their fanatical, religious obsession with the very existence of Israel. While there have been anti-Israel terrorist groups from as far back as the Fedayeen in the 1950s, this latest crop are more numerous, more sophisticated, better trained, better armed and highly motivated.
   Their Muslim Brotherhood inspired goal, be “they” Al Qaeda, Hamas, Taliban, Jabhat al Nusra, Islamic Jihad or any one of the alphabet-soup Jihadi Islamist groups, is simple and frightening: First, establish Sharia law in all countries with a Muslim population, second, reestablish the Caliphate in Sinai, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria and the whole Middle East. Third, expand worldwide.  Israel is obviously in the way.
   I would be surprised if the briefing did not include the increase in the number of Jihadists in Sinai, and how Egypt is fighting them. It may have also covered the threat to Israelis (though not to the State of Israel) by the growing presence in Jordan and Syria of elements of Hamas and Al-Qaeda affiliates – all highly trained, combat experienced and armed with large quantities of weapons looted from Libya.    
      Iran is a whole different issue. I can’t imagine that the intelligence heads did not remind the cabinet ministers of the fact that Iran is already a “breakout” nuclear state, and that thanks to the unfortunate “Geneva Agreement” a few weeks ago, will remain so in the foreseeable future.
   So without having been a fly on the wall at that secret intelligence evaluation briefing, I would guess that the smiles on the minister’s faces as they left the facility meant that Israel’s security status for 2014 is good. There is no major ground war on the horizon, terrorism is being dealt with…and based on Netanyahu’s speech at the Saban Forum last weekend – we won’t have to worry much longer about Iran’s nuclear break-out capability...   
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

A Murky Middle East Future

        “The future ain’t what it used to be”, quips the great American philosopher Yogi Berra. That seems to be the unanimous verdict of every Middle East analyst today. 

    Those of us born after WW II have lived most of our lives with a pretty clear general perception of the dynamics of the Middle East, which basically went like this:

1. Israel was established in the historical Jewish homeland 1948 following a narrow vote in the UN.
2. All the Arab countries in the neighborhood, themselves created during the prior 25 years by the victors of WW I to secure oil supplies, refused to accept the Jewish state and every ten years or so launched a war to destroy it...which Israel always won.
3. During the Cold War the super powers were deeply involved in the region, with the USSR mostly aligning with the Arabs, and the USA and Europe with Israel.
4. During each war (1948, 1956, 1970-71, 1967 and 1973) the super powers would play “responsible adult” and pressure their respective clients to agree to a cease fire…then re-supply them with more modern and more powerful weapons.
5. The periodic Israeli-Arab wars would continue, at varying degrees of intensity, pretty much forever, with the major powers making sure that they ended in a cease-fire within days.

   But things changed with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Some Arab states aligned with Russia, but most, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and others aligned with the US. 
   Israel remained a major beneficiary of an economic, military and diplomatic partnership with the US, creating a unique situation where both Israel and most of its enemies were now in alliance with the US. This led to the relatively quick signing of peace treaties between Israel and Egypt, and Israel and Jordan, and the establishment of quasi-formal but strong relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
   With Russia being a weak shadow of the former USSR, the United States became the single formidable and dominant super power in the Middle East. It signed official and unofficial economic and defense pacts with most of the Sunni Arab countries, from which Israel also benefitted.
   But a new super power has emerged - Iran. 
   With the imminent threat of a nuclear Shiite Iran that not only threatens to destroy Israel but also to exact a terrible historic “blood revenge”, in revenge for centuries of persecution by Sunni Muslims, and especially those in Saudi Arabia, the Sunni Arab countries in the Middle East turned to both the US and Israel for help against what they rightfully see as a clear and present danger to their survival.
  In interviews last week, Israeli, Saudi, Qatari and UAE leaders said that ironclad assurances were given by the US administration at the highest levels that the United States is unwaveringly committed that Iran will never have the capability to acquire nuclear weapons. They claim they were lied to by the US that had been negotiating for months with Iran secretly.
  This commitment was reiterated even as the P5+1 foreign ministers were in Geneva “closing” a deal that assures that Iran can not only keep its current high stockpile of enriched uranium and continue nuclear weapons development, but that evaporates the sanctions and establishes what was a pariah regime just last month as an equal sitting at the big boys table on international issues (Syrian peace talks…). Here is the executive summary:
For the next 6 months while “negotiations” are going on, Iran – already a nuclear “threshold” state according to the IAEA:

• Keeps all its already enriched Uranium
• Does not dismantle any of its 13,000 centrifuges in Natanz and Fordow
• Continues to enrich “certain quantities”
• Continues manufacturing vital parts for the Heavy Water reactor in Arak
• Keeps IAEA inspectors away from its nuclear weapons development and production facilities, as well as its secret nuclear bomb warhead testing facilities.
• Does not have to worry about an American military strike
• Thrives economically as American, Russian and Asian businesses are already drawing up lucrative contracts now that the sanctions are no longer being strictly enforced by the US.

   So even during the six month “negotiations” period Iran can continue to inch along at breakneck speed towards developing nuclear weapons, while enjoying significant economic relief. 
   And by the way, the six month period doesn’t start until January…in the meantime its business as normal in Natanz and Fordow.
  Over the past weekend every top Iranian leader said publically that the “Interim Agreement” is not finalized to their liking so the beginning of the negotiating period may be further delayed.
   It used to be, in the good old days when there were “responsible adult” super powers with vested interests in the region, that all you had to worry about was a short Israeli-Arab war every decade or so. 
   Today…”The future ain’t what it used to be”… and it seems to be changing daily.
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.