05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
05-04-2018 02:59:17 PM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

What Happened in Geneva? What Does It Mean?

However you explain it, I think the key to understanding lies in the 3-page document Ashton gave the Iranians (if it indeed exists), and whether the Western group approved it all.

Meanwhile, since all these negotiators are going back to Switzerland in ten days, it behooves us to look carefully at the three matters to which the French are said to object:

--The heavy-water reactor at Arak.  If the Iranians can continue work on it, it's hard to be enthusiastic, since that reactor provides Tehran with the potential to construct a plutonium bomb;

--Language that states Iran has a "right" to enrich uranium.  The whole point of any deal with Iran is to prevent the mullahs from amassing enough enriched uranium to quickly assemble an atomic bomb, or warhead;

--The disposition of Iran's "known" stockpile of enriched uranium.  If they can keep it, that makes it much harder for the West to have any confidence that we've made significant progress in preventing Iran going nuclear.

But whatever the answers to all these questions, one thing is luminously clear:  the Obama administration certainly misspoke when it whispered to journalists that the deal was done, and that Kerry was just showing up to get his fair share of the champagne.  As usual, too much (misleading) talk from Obama & Co, and too much amateurism in doing the real deal.

Reminds me of Obamacare, somehow.