
Iran Nuclear Deal Reached - Expeditus419
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-deal-is-reached-after-long-negotiations.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=span-ab-top-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
======
acjohnson55
I think the future of the Middle East is a tense balance between Saudi and
Iranian poles, with both countries being normalized in the international
community. The USA can't bring either country to heel, but it can hopefully
prevent the stalemate from being nuclear along Sunni-Shia lines. But what's
also changed is that the US needs a normalized partner in Iran to fully
isolate ISIS, the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other far worse actors. I think we can
also be encouraged by the demographics in Iran, which are moving younger and
more liberal. I'm cautiously optimistic.

~~~
skylan_q
Iran is a country much more aligned with the US in many more ways than Saudi
Arabia is. It's really a "natural ally" for the US in the middle east.

~~~
bsaul
Out or curiosity, why does the (religious) iranian regime keeps calling USA
"the great devil" then ?

Ps :reading some answers, i know about the history of conflicts between usa
and iran. I was just pointing the fact that calling Iran a "natural ally" is a
bit of a stretch.

~~~
0xFFC
Iranian here , and I am commenting from Iran.Iranian people maybe most pro usa
people in middle east. and about government, they just need keep people busy
because of they systematic corruption. Thats all. 10 years before , Ali
Khamneai said following : "anyone who says we should communicate with USA is
or idiot or our enemy/traitor".

and guess what ? today , FM Zarif have record in our history for maximum time
negotiation with a USA FM.

Thats about it , they just want money , they don't care about Israel or
otherwhere a little bit , they don't care about people either , they just care
about themselves. Look at the whole picture . When there was serious threat
about Iran regime existence , they negotiate , and they accept what they
called 10 years ago a traitor would do.

They just love money.And they only weapon they have for keeping people in iran
busy and afraid of any kind of protest, is "imaginary" enemy.That's all.

I cannot find the exact link . But I read a DoD Analysis about Iran , and the
first paragraph they mentioned was this : "Iran regime only care about
himself" (meaning of the first paragraph) .

As Iranian I can assure you , They don't even care even about
Israel/Palestine.They just need imaginary enemy keeping people in scared
position.

p.s. sorry for my broken English.

p.s-2: Yes I know and accept this is so simplistic, we have all kind of
majority in our society , but If you see the level of corruption in our
economy , You will understand nothing can stand against money.Not even supreme
leader.At the end at least in my view (I served in high-level military base in
my mandatory military service_sadly was two year waste of my life), at the
very end alls boils down to money and keeping regime safe. They interfere in
Lebanon , Just because they want to propagate , NOT BECAUSE OF ISLAM OR
ANYTHING ELSE , they just feel safer if they have more poppet.

~~~
anigbrowl
I thought it was very interesting recently when FM Zarif, who seems very wise
and pragmatic, discussed the nuclear negotiations as a form of diplomatic
_jihad_ , presumably to reassure the religious/political factions that that
government had not gone 'soft'. As other people said, we have similar factions
here in the USA.

I am curious, is awareness of Persian history a regular part of Iranian
cultural life? I mean in day-to-day conversation, not just in school or a
museum. Anti-Iranian people in the USA often denounce the country because it
is an Islamic republic, but every Iranian person I've ever meet seems very
proud of their Persian heritage and history, parallel to their religious
heritage.

I'm European (living in the USA) and Iran seems culturally much closer to
Europe/USA than a country like Saudi Arabia. It seems like religion is very
strict in Saudia Arabia because it is the only thing that holds the country
together, whereas Iranian people had a strong national identity before Islam
existed. Is this accurate?

~~~
0xFFC
Traditional Iranian ceremonies always was a great part of our society (at
least as far as I can remember , and note that these ceremonies are not
approved by Islam most of the time but people kept doing them after
revolution).But nationalism became regular part in recent years.I don't think
it is dominant part , as far as I see it is important part.

I should mention in recent years Iran became so much wired country in cultural
sense. at one side of spectrum we have people who hate religion, at the other
side we have people just like Al-Qaeda , but Shia version which are so small
in compare the other part , but they have secret regime support)

But despite of regime multi-billion $ media funding and propaganda most people
does believe in _secularism_. and this is the most serious (by far) dead end
for this regime will counter in next 20 years.most of people in Iran knows
that, regime needs an imaginary enemy. who is better than US, the supporter of
Israel (which they believe is root of all evils).by bombing them you just gave
them a reason to deceive more people.Give them internet,twitter, porn ,
facebook,gay tv shows, game of throne, friends tv shows and etc and you will
see collapse of regime much much sooner than you can even imagine)

The distance young generation have with religion is far far than most of
people outside of Iran can imagine.Despite of 5-6% of hardliners and 25-35%
people who make living inside/because of government,in recent years most of
people became or atheist or with some kind of their own religion. Majority of
young people proud about pre-Islamic history.(personally I don't know about
that area and I don't have opinion)

By their "own religion" I mean secular religion, They believe in separation of
religion and government at same time they believe on Islam.(some kind of old
fashion Shia, before khomeini). At the other hand , we are having (or
generating) serious hard liner in other side. People who hates religious,
people who hate Islam.(you can search about Shahin Najafi , A singer who
sentenced to death by Mullahs like Salman Rushdie)

In Iran despite of west media propaganda you can have every Idea you want in
private and most of the time government will not hurt you if you pretend you
are normal person in their definition.(You can be an alcoholic , You can be
gay) _BUT_ the serious issue here is ,the cost of doing anything other than
regime says in PUBLIC is so so so high (most of the time death), and because
of that people are afraid of make public their own identity. Just look at the
page "My Stealthy Freedom" in facebook.Just imagine the level of government
aggressiveness.Taking picture without scarf becomes heroic act here(just
imagine , ridiculous thing like this is punishable).Because of this regime.
But about saudi arabia , I can assure you Iranian people are far far secular
than people at countries like saudi arabia.I can even claim they are secular
than Turkye people. Last friday was a demonstration about Israel.The city I
live in with population of 2 Million.They only managed to bring ~50,000.Thats
all.This is serious defeat for this regime.Because this demonstration is so
important for them (all ideology of regime hinges on resistance against US and
Israel and for demonstration for showing this , only 1/40 come with all the
money the spent).Every Military person have to participate,most of people
works for non-military part of regime should too.But that's all , 50 thousands
for 2M city.(the important fact here is everybody who believe in regime
politic will come to these demonstration , because these are so important for
them)

The main problem here is in Iran we have a people-government spectrum , and
they both are at other side. One is really aggressive and religious and the
other side we have majority people with believe in freedom-secularism. The
majority of ordinary and non-educated in people do not believe in religious-
regime.

~~~
tome
> The city I live in with population of 2 Million.They only managed to bring
> ~50,000

That's 2.5%. By contrast the biggest protest in British history (against the
2003 invasion of Iraq) was around 1m people, just shy of 2% of the country.
I'm afraid I can't see Al Quds days as indicative of anything other than rabid
and endemic anti-Israel, anti-American and anti-Western sentiment.

~~~
pstuart
But how many of those 50,000 were paid or "persuaded" to participate?

~~~
0xFFC
Thats is fair question.Does not all of 50,000 get paid. some of them get. some
of them really deceived and believe US is evil.(that's one of main point of my
main comment,which by bombing we give them a real reason , Obama policy was
effective ,I can see in my real life , Obama was far effective than any other
US president could have done)

For that 50,000 you (as west) should show the true nature of Iran's regime
without giving them real reason (what Obama have exactly done in recent
years). And remember this point , If someone get paid by regime , he have
family and close friend.by a simple math you can estimate number of paid
people.(maybe 5000-10000)which is reasonable amount.

UPDATE : We are taking this wrong way , this is not about number , this is
about money & corruption , and what's going on under the hood. I can assure
you majority of participant just want regime money.They don't care about
Israel and US.most of them don't care about Iran either.They just want money.

But yes . We all should admit , Iran have Shia version of Al Qaida.(mostly
government keeping them in silence, but they are major threat and resistance
against reform)

At the end : the only solution for Iran (at least from my point of view) is
the following support "civil society" and make people stronger , Iranian
himself can handle these small fraction.Facilitate Iranian and world
communication.People in Iran really have wish to integrate to world economy.

~~~
tome
Your reports are very encouraging and give me some hope that this deal won't
turn out as badly as the one with North Korea.

------
mavdi
Sceptical Iranian here. There are groups that profit from an ongoing tension
and conflict on both sides. This time around it seems they have lost the hand,
but we would be a fool to think that this agreement settles things for good.

This has always been and will always be a fluid situation. I think the work
has just begun now, let's hope the sane people inc charge on both sides will
keep things positive. Otherwise it only takes one delayed inspection permit,
or an angry military general to take things back right to the start.

~~~
roymurdock
I'm interested to hear what the general young Iranian sentiment is towards the
Iranian government, the US government, and the agreement.

I worked in Afghanistan at a telecom provider last summer. A lot of my
coworkers were young 20-somethings whose parents had fled Afghanistan when the
Taliban came to power from 1996-2001. The majority of them had been raised in
Iran; the minority, in Pakistan.

The ones who had been raised in Iran were happy for the most part to have been
able to return to Afghanistan. They told me stories of a paradoxical society
that was quite forward-thinking while at the same time, extremely
authoritarian and oppressive, especially with regards to youth education and
expression. I kind of started to equate Iran with Singapore in my mind.

Could you shed any light on this perspective?

~~~
jajool
majority of young people are happy! to tell you the troth sanctions were a
real pain for us, imagine every time i use internet and i forget to connect
VPN i get the "Unavailable in your country message" while visiting Unity or
Google Code websites. but on the other hand there are some who are not that
happy they think with this agreement we have lost decades of effort toward
peacefull nuclear energy.

there is one thing for sure nobody in iran wants a nuclear weapon.

~~~
FeepingCreature
Speaking as somebody with no interest in the region, if I was an Iranian I'd
want a nuclear weapon. Nobody invades a nuclear power. Nuclear powers get
propped up instead of sabotaged.

~~~
dimino
It's too late for that now, though. The 5 nations that have them are the only
five that will have them, if the 5 nations that have them have anything to say
about it (and they do).

~~~
girmad
The number is closer to 9.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_we...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons)

~~~
dimino
Good call, I was _completely_ wrong in what I thought the state of nuclear
weapons proliferation was.

~~~
jerf
And it's generally understood that some other countries are only "non-nuclear"
because the question hasn't come up yet. Does anyone doubt that Japan could
have a nuke in three months or less if it really wanted to? Or Canada?

------
m4r71n
I'm in the middle of reading "Countdown to Zero Day", the book about Stuxnet.
It contains a very good summary of how Iran started enriching Uranium, where
they acquired the technology to build the centrifuges, and how most countries
that signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons attempted
to reason with Iran to stop enriching Uranium.

I highly recommend it for anyone interested in this topic. And of course the
detailed analysis of Stuxnet is great as well.

------
DiabloD3
If you had told me that would be today's headline at any point over the past
decade, I'm not sure I would have believed you.

If this works out, the President has another thing to add to his list of
"things no President before me achieved".

~~~
briandear
Have you read the Iran deal? The Iranians were happy about it, this it likely
wasn't a good deal for the rest of us. The Iranians can't be trusted. If Obama
cares about Iran, he would have supported their Green Revolution; instead
those protestors were executed, tortured or imprisioned. Yet, strangely, Obama
supported the Egyptian coup. Honestly, Obama doesn't know what he's doing when
it comes to foreign policy. He sort of waddles along weakening the U.S.
position whenever possible.

~~~
toyg
_> The Iranians can't be trusted._

National stereotypes, pillars of pragmatic diplomacy ever since 2000 BC and
the clear mark of logical thinkers the world over.

 _> If Obama cares about Iran, he would have supported their Green Revolution_

How do you know he didn't? Because he didn't send in bombers to "support
demonstrations"?

 _> Yet, strangely, Obama supported the Egyptian coup_

... when the alternative would have been much more Iran-friendly; yeah, how
strange, right? Honestly, how do you make these random mental associations?

 _> He sort of waddles along weakening the U.S. position whenever possible._

A comprehensive Iran-US 'peace deal' (or even a strategic partnership going
forward) would immensely strengthen US standing around the world, dramatically
reducing tensions in the Middle East and providing a balance to the uncritical
reliance on Saudi Arabia and Turkey that so much pain has brought since the
'90s (from Al Qaeda to IS). So uhm, there is that.

But yeah, I agree that it weakens fearmongers' positions, both in US, Israel
and Iran.

~~~
mason240
>> The Iranians can't be trusted.

>National stereotypes, pillars of pragmatic diplomacy ever since 2000 BC and
the clear mark of logical thinkers the world over.

The OP clearly means the theocratic regime, not the Iranian people themselves.

~~~
toyg
Large parts of that theocratic regime are elected.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
... after controlling who can run for office.

If you let me select both the Republican and Democratic candidates, I'll
happily let the people vote however they want.

~~~
toyg
That's exactly how large donors think in the US.

------
at-fates-hands
Not sure how this benefits the US at all. Iran reaps billions in frozen assets
and the end to their oil embargo. Plus, the US caved on giving the Iranians a
14 day windows to prep for UN inspections which is more than enough time to
cover up their non-compliance.

This is a huge win for the Iranians, not sure what we get out of it besides a
shaky ally in the region who's never backed us up and essentially undermined
everything we've attempted to do in the region.

~~~
ohitsdom
As others have said, the US will get support in fighting ISIS. Also this will
go a long way in building up relations with Iran in the hopes of one day
counting them as a reliable ally.

------
bsaul
Am i the only one amazed at the fact that we actually had to wait for iranians
to accept to stop going toward nuclear weapons ?

I mean, why did EU and US insist so much on wanting a deal ? It seemed to be
that one side has all the leverage in the negociation and the other has none.
We could have simply waited for the iranian regime to get so weakened that
they'd simply surrender and accept every measure.

So I don't understand what's the counterpart that the US and EU wanted from
Iran, that could get Iran get leverage in the negociations. Anyone ?

~~~
Expeditus419
A prolonged weakened economy doesn't necessarily prevent a country from
developing a nuclear weapons program. Take a look at North Korea.

~~~
bsaul
North korea is what scares me, because the path seems exactly similar to
iran's one. Half-baked embargo , fear of sending soldier or bombing nuclear
infrstructures, followed by half-backed agreements, leading to a country lead
by insane dictator with nuclear bombs.

Only north korea had china to protect it, whereas iran has (to my knowledge)
nobody wanting to risk anything for it.

------
thescrewdriver
Let's hope this works out better than the North Korean nuclear deal.

~~~
acjohnson55
Fortunately, I think Iran is the more tractable of the two nations, at least
until the North Korean regime collapses.

------
dbcooper
Some possible reasons to be sceptical:

[http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/opinion/the-iran-
deals-...](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/opinion/the-iran-deals-fatal-
flaw.html?_r=1)

~~~
dbcooper
There's a back-and-forth on that opinion piece, here [1] and here [2].

[1] [http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/iran-op-eds-
fatal-f...](http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/iran-op-eds-fatal-flaw)

[2] [http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/misleading-spin-
cen...](http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/misleading-spin-centrifuges)

~~~
dbcooper
On the key point of low enriched Uranium, here's the text from the agreement:

> During the 15 year period, and as Iran gradually moves to meet international
> qualification standards for nuclear fuel produced in Iran, it will keep its
> uranium stockpile under 300 kg of up to 3.67% enriched uranium hexafluoride
> (UF6) or the equivalent in other chemical forms. The excess quantities are
> to be sold based on international prices and delivered to the international
> buyer in return for natural uranium delivered to Iran, or are to be down-
> blended to natural uranium level. Enriched uranium in fabricated fuel
> assemblies from Russia or other sources for use in Iran's nuclear reactors
> will not be counted against the above stated 300 kg UF6 stockpile, if the
> criteria set out in Annex I are met with regard to other sources. The Joint
> Commission will support assistance to Iran, including through IAEA technical
> cooperation as appropriate, in meeting international qualification standards
> for nuclear fuel produced in Iran. All remaining uranium oxide enriched to
> between 5% and 20% will be fabricated into fuel for the Tehran Research
> Reactor (TRR). Any additional fuel needed for the TRR will be made available
> to Iran at international market prices.

~~~
dbcooper
That would seem to add 2 months to the breakout time. i.e. It would be 5 to 6
months based on Kuperman's reckoning (as opposed to Obama's claimed 12
months). Whether they can divert or reconstitute some of the 20% material
during or after fuel conversion is unclear. Some scenarios are discussed here:

[http://www.isisnucleariran.org/assets/pdf/LEU_20_percent_upd...](http://www.isisnucleariran.org/assets/pdf/LEU_20_percent_update_May_4_2015_Final.pdf)

------
hodwik
Iran agreed to provide "Managed access". Iraq inspections all over again.

~~~
EliRivers
If there's one thing we learned from the invasion of Iraq, it's that access
for inspections doesn't matter. Iraq complied, the UN reports all indicated
that there were no WMDs, the people who wanted to invade just made up some
nonsense bullshit anyway.

Hans Blix, Jan 2003: "...access has been provided to all sites we have wanted
to inspect... cooperated rather well".

Iran just watched a neighbour get invaded and seriously screwed over for
basically no reason. Access for inspections is irrelevant.

~~~
hodwik
Access most certainly matters, we wouldn't have made that mistake with Iraq
had we had reliable access.

If you recall, one of the "smoking guns" that the administration used to move
into Iraq were intercepted phone conversations between Iraqi Republican Guard
members.

Those conversations mentioned "hiding" something before the inspectors got to
a site. Since Iraq (like Iran) was allowed a few days before any visit, it was
believed at the time that they were shifting materials whenever the inspectors
came. I recall even liberal media organizations poking fun at the inspectors
-- about how they were playing a game of chase with the Iraqis.

Remember this graphic, much shown in the media?
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Powell_U...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Powell_UN_Iraq_presentation%2C_alleged_Mobile_Production_Facilities.jpg)

Had no such rule been in place, they could have moved that day to inspect the
site, and would have realized there was nothing to be found.

Hans Blix also said, in December 2012, (from wikipedia:) that the Iraqi
weapons declaration filed on December 7 "is essentially a reorganized version"
of information Iraq provided UNSCOM in 1997, and that it "is not enough to
create confidence" that Iraq has abandoned its WMD efforts. So the US was not
alone in that position.

and

Hans Blix states that Iraq still has not made a "fundamental decision" to
disarm, despite recent signs of increased cooperation. Specifically, Iraq has
refused to destroy its al-Samoud 2 long range missiles. (These are not a WMD,
and Iraq is permitted "battlefield" missiles. However, Iraq's missiles were
limited by UN instruction to a diameter of 600mm, and the Al-Samoud II has a
diameter of 760mm). These missiles are deployed and mobile. Also, an R-400
aerial bomb was found that could possibly contain biological agents. Given
this find, the UN Inspectors have requested access to the Al-Aziziyah weapons
range to verify that all 155 R-400 bombs can be accounted for and proven
destroyed. Blix also expresses skepticism over Iraq's claims to have destroyed
its stockpiles of anthrax and VX nerve agent in Time magazine. Blix said he
found it "a bit odd" that Iraq, with "one of the best-organized regimes in the
Arab world," would claim to have no records of the destruction of these
illegal substances. "I don't see that they have acquired any credibility,"
Blix said

~~~
user_0001
Not forgetting the US uncessingly trying to undermine the weapon inspections
to their own end, according to Blix [1]

Before Blix was sent in, again the cover of "International" weapons inspection
(note, not US inspections) were subverted by the US spying and constant
attempts to discredit the results if they were wrong (wrong as in not the US
version of events) [2]

[1]
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2966639.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2966639.stm)
[2] [http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/07/world/us-spied-on-iraq-
und...](http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/07/world/us-spied-on-iraq-under-un-
cover-officials-now-say.html)

~~~
hodwik
[1] Blix didn't say the US "uncessingly" tried to undermine the inspectors. He
said that he believed there had been a single leak from someone in the US
Government about Blix's failure to report two weapons, and was unable to say
who did it -- "Also disturbing, he said, was the question of who was
responsible for the falsification."

[2] Spy agencies spy. That is to be expected.

------
Myrmornis
I'm pleased to hear this news and I think it's a good thing. However I do
think that if Iran and the USA are re-establishing relations then the USA
should apologize for killing 290 civilians by shooting down a passenger jet. I
don't think I can really think highly of a country that could do such a thing
without apologizing.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655)

------
alexnewman
Hooray!

------
user_0001
>(besides Israel, obviously) Out of interest, why obviously? The unfaltering
support given to Israel seems strange (to most outside of the US who I have
spoken to).

Israel has it's religious fundamentalists (just like the rest of the region).

Is militarily aggressive, disregards civilian life, commits war crimes,
disregards international law and opinion (with impunity due to the US and
their veto - and forcing other countries to at least abstain from votes), has
actual developed the nuclear bomb, is destabilising to the region, discusses
attacking their neighbours (sorry not attacking - pre-emptive...

Yet this is never questioned, nor discussed from what I can tell. They are
"the good guys" so the rules are different for them.

~~~
maratd
> The unfaltering support given to Israel seems strange

There's nothing strange about it. Yes, it is militarily aggressive and has to
be considering the neighborhood.

The support given is purely selfish as Israel is the only nation in the region
which mirrors the values the US wishes to promote in the region, provides
military support when needed, and a plethora of other various benefits which
none of the other players in the region are able to provide.

As far as the "strangeness" is concerned, with rampant antisemitism in Europe,
I supposed it would look strange when that hobby isn't shared elsewhere?

~~~
Systemic33
> with rampant antisemitism in Europe

Because Israel isn't escalating this at all with the palestine conflict...

Netanyahu is a warmongerer that keeps the conflict alive, because it serves
his interests, in increasing antisemitism, resulting in jews feeling
increasingly threatened, and starts to consider relocation to Israel,
increasing support for Netanyahu.

~~~
mark_l_watson
To be fair, this is not all the Israel government's fault.

USA defense contractors make a ton of money, that originates with the U.S. tax
payer, by selling weapon systems to Israel. Powerful economic interests in the
USA want the unfortunate situation in that area to continue. There is a lot of
money to be made in war, unfortunately.

------
curiousjorge
but why is oil going up? I thought that this news would push down the prices
further due to additional Iran oil adding million barrells a day.

------
nir
In This Thread: Opinions differing from the majority groupthink downmodded or
flagged. HN is now officially worse than Reddit.

------
jarnix
I thought I was on "Hacker News", why is this post on the front page?

~~~
colinbartlett
This is rehashed often. It's "news that hackers would find interesting" not
"news about computers".

If an article does not gratify your intellectual curiosity, I suggest just
ignoring it.

~~~
jarnix
Lol, that looks like an automated response from a bot.

Moderation could add value to the community by removing these posts.

