News

There
seems to have been a little progress during the two days of meetings in
Geneva, but where's the emphasis? How "little" and how much "progress"?

The
emphasis has to be on "little." In many ways, it appears that the two
sides are even further apart than in October 2009 when they last met.
There's no concrete plan on the table. In October 2009, there was a deal
which would have given something Iran had wanted -- higher enriched
uranium for its medical reactor in Tehran -- in exchange for suspending
enrichment, the kind of thing the United States and other members of the
Security Council wanted to see. The administration set very low
expectations for this round, and I suspect the outcome is even lower
than it expected.

I gather that the Iranians kept insisting
there's no point talking about their enrichment program unless the
United States and the other powers lift the economic sanctions, right?

The
Iranian negotiator has already said that at the meeting in January in
Istanbul, Iran will not discuss its uranium enrichment program. That
pulls the rug out from underneath the efforts even before they begin.

Then why are the Iranians agreeing to these talks?

There
are a variety of possible motives. It could be that by having talks,
they appear to be addressing international concerns. They don't want to >>>