US-Iran nuclear talks to extend to second day

Secretary of State John Kerry met with the Iranian foreign minister on Sunday; while discussions were not originally planned to last until Monday, signs are that the two sides will keep at it in advance of a November 24 deadline.

The Obama administration is facing its last best chance to curb Iran's nuclear program — not just to meet an end-of-the-month deadline for a deal, but also to seal one before skeptical Republicans who will control Congress next year are able to scuttle it.

Years of negotiations to limit Tehran's nuclear production entered the final stretch Sunday as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and European Union senior adviser Catherine Ashton in Oman's capital. With no immediate agreement in sight, officials said the discussions were expected to continue into Monday.

The stakes are high as the Nov. 24 deadline approaches. A deal could quell Mideast fears about Iran's ability to build a nuclear bomb and help revive the Islamic Republic's economy.

It also would deliver a much-needed foreign policy triumph for the White House, which is being hammered by prominent Republican senators over its handling of the civil war in Syria and the growth of the Islamic State militancy in Iraq. Those same critics seek to put the brakes on U.S.-Iranian bartering, if not shut it down completely, once they seize the majority on Jan. 3.

The Obama administration "needs to understand that this Iranian regime cares more about trying to weaken America and push us out of the Middle East than cooperating with us," Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, said in a statement last week.

President Barack Obama told CBS' "Face The Nation" that his administration's "unprecedented sanctions" on Iran are what forced Tehran to the negotiating table. "Our number one priority with respect to Iran is making sure they don't get a nuclear weapon," he said.

But Obama also cited "a big gap" between Iran and world powers as they try for a final agreement. "We may not be able to get there," he said in the interview broadcast Sunday.

Over the past year, congressional Republicans have made little secret of their skepticism of Obama's outreach to Tehran. They say it has alienated Israel and kept the U.S. from maintaining a hard line on a number of foreign policy fronts, including Iran's detention of three Americans.

That skepticism is borne mostly of concerns that Iran secretly will enrich enough uranium to build nuclear weapons, even after a deal is reached. For years, Iran hid some of its nuclear facilities and blocked inspectors' access at others, raising widespread alarms about its intentions.

Penalties imposed by the U.S., EU and the U.N. Security Council aimed to punish Tehran for its covert nuclear program.

Iran has maintained that its nuclear activities are purely peaceful and necessary to fuel medical and energy demands.

Last week, Kerry, a former Senate Foreign Relations committee chairman, rejected suggestions that a GOP-controlled Congress would be able to change course on negotiations with Iran. He also noted that any Senate move would need overwhelming support to be approved. "As we have learned in the last few years, the minority has enormous power to stop things from happening," he said.

He also has said none of the world powers has an appetite for extending the talks beyond the Nov. 24 deadline, although that remains a remote possibility if an agreement appears close.

If a deal is struck before year's end, U.S. lawmakers may have limited ability to undo it. Experts believe most of the U.S. penalties against Iran's financial and oil markets can be suspended, if not lifted entirely, by presidential authority.

Beyond Jan. 3, however, and without an agreement in place, Congress could issue new sanctions without giving Obama that authority. Already, a plan to strengthen them if the negotiations expire without a final deal has gathered strong backing from senators from both parties.

If the two sides are close at that point, the administration almost certainly would move to veto any new penalties, which officials believe could violate the negotiating terms and lead Iran to step up its production of enriched uranium.

But if the negotiations drag on, the White House will have to decide whether it could accept sanctions with a threatened "trigger" to be enacted in future months.

"If Congress can be convinced that the overall framework for a deal is in place and it really is just loose ends that need tying, then I think it would probably wait until seeing a final deal before taking any action," said James Acton, co-director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

"However, it may be hard to persuade Congress that a deal is just around the corner," Acton said.

Broadly, a potential agreement would ease economic sanctions against Tehran agrees to limit its uranium enrichment to a level that would make it unable to build nuclear weapons. It would have to provide international inspectors with full and verifiable access to Iran's nuclear facilities.

The U.N. nuclear agency said this past week that it has been unable to investigate whether Tehran worked on nuclear weapons in the past. The U.S. and other world powers have said there will be no deal until that agency is satisfied with its inquiry.

Iranian officials appear guardedly optimistic about reaching an agreement by the end of November, but insist on a quick lifting of the sanctions.

Iran agreed to freeze its uranium enrichment during the negotiations and reduce its stockpile of weapons-grade nuclear

"Sanctions have never contributed to the resolution of this issue," Zarif told reporters as he headed to Muscat. "They must be removed. They have not produced any positive results."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to US-Iran nuclear talks to extend to second day
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2014/1109/US-Iran-nuclear-talks-to-extend-to-second-day
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe