patrick.net

Has the countdown to the collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran begun? Or can the theocratic regime reform and survive? Iranians from all walks of life are raising such fundamental questions with intensity these days, in the belief that an overhaul of the ruling system is inevitable in the not-too-distant future. “We have reached a dead-end,” says one businessman. “The problem is that if the Islamic Republic reforms itself, nothing would remain of it. And if it refuses to reform itself, it would die.”

In my two decades of reporting on Iran for the Financial Times, I cannot recall such high a level of anxiety and disappointment among the business community, politicians, artists and ordinary people; all are concerned that reform in any field, from economic and social issues to domestic and foreign policy, might never happen. Public perception is even gloomier than the reality: “It is not only me [who is] completely hopeless. All my customers are down and depressed,” says Sheida, a young woman who works in a beauty salon. “We are doomed in this country.”
https://www.ft.com/content/76180c9e-4880-11e8-8ee8-cae73aab7ccb

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

Funny, the same nay-sayers over North Korea are transferring the same Nay Say Talking points to Iran now.

Careful there: nothing has been achieved in NK. For all we know, KJU is leading Trump on a wild goose chase while dividing him from SK.

Heraclitusstudent says

Careful there: nothing has been achieved in NK. For all we know, KJU is leading Trump on a wild goose chase while dividing him from SK.

Not at all. The intent to proceed with both denuclearization and a formal end to the Korean War has already been signed, the Media is simply pooh-poohing it. The South Koreans are elated and both President Moon and the Foreign Minister have lavished praise on Trump. Pompeo is on his way back to North Korea right now.

Nothing close to this has ever been achieved in 68 years. The goal is incremental disarmament, and the sanctions will disappear in stages. The opposite of Obama tactics, where the goodies are delivered up front but the enforcement dies away quickly.

socal2 says

Ah - kicking the can down the road while allowing Iran to become dominant in the Region along with Russia? That is some great time buying right there!

Yes, keeping Iran nuclear weapon free until a Western Government takes over.

socal2 says

Probably similar to what he just achieved with North Korea using a combination of credible threats and carrots and ultimately getting them to come to the negotiation table for talks.

lol--so his endgame is what Obama already accomplished then?

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

Few in Iran blames the USA, they blame the Mullahs. The Mullahs can't even make payments to their rural based militias because they spent it all in Syria, Yemen, Gaza, and Lebanon. People in Iran no longer buy the Mullah's attempts at distraction, and believe they are the obstacle to structural reform.

You mean few in Iran used to blame the USA. After Trump's moves, I imagine that opinion has changed. They respected Obama--I doubt the same is true of Trump.

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

The goal is incremental disarmament, and the sanctions will disappear in stages. The opposite of Obama tactics, where the goodies are delivered up front but the enforcement dies away quickly.

Even if they were ready to remove nuclear weapons, you are talking of delivering goodies just to go back to the original standoff that existed for the past 68 yrs proving they were right to develop these weapons.
And who knows maybe next leader will decide to start a nuclear weapons once again.
Or maybe the next president will be a new Obama. i.e they have time. Trump doesn't.

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

That sounds like our former North Korea policy.

You mean except for the part about securing a deal to keep Iran nuclear weapon free?

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

Maybe a realist foreign policy is better than the previous policies.

lol--you guys are hilarious You all panned Obama for talking with Iran and negotiating a deal. Now Trump is a God for copying that strategy with N. Korea.

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

Has the countdown to the collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran begun? Or can the theocratic regime reform and survive?

We have a great record at regime change, and especially forcing those with sanctions. Cuba? Venezuela? Iraq? Russia?

LeonDurham says

lol--you guys are hilarious You all panned Obama for talking with Iran and negotiating a deal. Now Trump is a God for copying that strategy with N. Korea.

Oh? Trump is sending pallets of Cash to North Korea?

The plan is already outlined - as milestones are hit, sanctions are removed. The exact OPPOSITE of Obama, which should have been total inspection, and for every year of 100% certified no nukes, some sanctions disappeared and some frozen money was returned. Obama's deal was all front-loaded.

Trumps performance is far more impressive, he's moving towards getting a country that already has nukes to denuclearize AND stop both that and ballistic testing as a sign of good faith; Obama traded away everything for an anemic inspection regime that was just proven inadequate, and NO restrictions on ballistic missile dev, giving the money and sanction relief up front.

Heraclitusstudent says

We have a great record at regime change, and especially forcing those with sanctions. Cuba? Venezuela? Iraq? Russia?

3 of those 4 trade with the rest of the world, so US only sanctions won't work well. 1 of them was hardly sanctioned as the Europeans and Arabs undermined everything and Clinton didn't want to risk all his neoliberal treaties in enforcing them.

The difference with Iran is that in 180 days, anybody who doesn't sanction Iran won't be allowed to sell in the US.

The Trump cheerleaders are very optimistic. It feels like we are 20 minutes into the Trump/NK movie, and the Trump/Iran movie just started. You guys are all claiming victory before the opening credits fade away. I'm not rooting for failure, but I just cannot muster the confidence in Supreme leader.
All I see is more evidence of a bought off corrupt guy who is faking it 'til he makes it, so the best hope is that the world just waits him out and he doesn't fuck things up permanently.

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

The difference with Iran is that in 180 days, anybody who doesn't sanction Iran won't be allowed to sell in the US.

Why should we do business with those who help our enemies?

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

The Trump cheerleaders are very optimistic. It feels like we are 20 minutes into the Trump/NK movie, and the Trump/Iran movie just started. You guys are all claiming victory before the opening credits fade away. I'm not rooting for failure, but I just cannot muster the confidence in Supreme leader.

Aphroman says

Is the timing merely coincidence, that as the first day of midterm primaries, the Republicans are back to their old tricks?

Heh.

Trump wasn't given the Nobel Peace Prize upon ascending to the Presidency.

socal2 says

They have a long way to go, but you have to be blind to discount these recent reforms:

- Allowing women to drive
- Allowing women to attend sporting events
- Allowing movie theaters
- Privatizing Aramco
- Negotiating with the Vatican to open up churches in Saudi Arabia
- Forging warmer ties to Israel

Yes its a very low bar, but that is par for the course for whack job theocracies like Iran and Saudi Arabia.

I'm sorry, which of these things dials back the KSA sponsored world wide army of radical islamists sworn to terrorize the western societies. I'm not seeing it some how.

KSA is just bowing to the demographic reality that most of the country is very young and not willing to live under the current repressive regime without trouble. Loosening up some pretty meaningless restrictions is a very easy way to avoid having to put out a lot of time, money, and effort to enforce them.

bob2356 says

So starving 7 million people to death in Yemen is called moderate islam.

How many times did Obama bomb Yemen?

35 times in 2016

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-president-barack-obama-bomb-map-drone-wars-strikes-20000-pakistan-middle-east-afghanistan-a7534851.html

And Libya was such a great idea, it only had to be bombed 496 times... in 2016 alone. That's 5 years after the Regime Change there.

Attaboy, Nobel Peace Prize Winner!

bob2356 says

I'm sorry, which of these things dials back the KSA sponsored world wide army of radical islamists sworn to terrorize the western societies. I'm not seeing it some how.

KSA is just bowing to the demographic reality that most of the country is very young and not willing to live under the current repressive regime without trouble. Loosening up some pretty meaningless restrictions is a very easy way to avoid having to put out a lot of time, money, and effort to enforce them.

The most immediate threat is Iran. The Saudis aren't developing nukes.

LeonDurham says

You mean few in Iran used to blame the USA. After Trump's moves, I imagine that opinion has changed. They respected Obama--I doubt the same is true of Trump.

Pfft. Iran tested ballistic missiles just weeks after signing the Iran Deal, starting in October 2015. Not only bad faith, but in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1929. Crickets from Ben Rhodes the Creative Writing expert on Foreign Policy.

In March 2016, Iran tested several ballistic missiles, one of which was written: "Wipe Israel off the face of the Earth". Not the map of the Earth, not off the map, just The Earth. However much apologists for Islamism try to soften the sentiment. The word "Map" is not mentioned.
http://www.farsnews.com/news/13941219000316/پیام-موشکی-سپاه-به-زبان-عبری-مخابره-شد-ישראל-צריכה-להימחק-מעל-تصویر



Ballistic Missiles, especially early generation ones like the Iranians are developing, just aren't that accurate enough to target military formations or even reliably damage military installations. Their only usefulness would be as carriers of WMDs.

Gee, we lost "respect" with Iran under Trump. We never had it with Obama. How ever will the USA carry on?

LeonDurham says

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

Few in Iran blames the USA, they blame the Mullahs. The Mullahs can't even make payments to their rural based militias because they spent it all in Syria, Yemen, Gaza, and Lebanon. People in Iran no longer buy the Mullah's attempts at distraction, and believe they are the obstacle to structural reform.

You mean few in Iran used to blame the USA. After Trump's moves, I imagine that opinion has changed. They respected Obama--I doubt the same is true of Trump.

We don't want their respect. We want them to permanently eliminate their nuclear program.
It's that simple.

"Oh the Europeans are so much more moral and wise."

Bullshit. A few months ago, France began offering Loans in Euros to Iran. Then this happened:


The Europeans, especially the French, love trading with rogue regimes. Remember the Oil-for-Food/Medicine baloney? Total SA and Royal Dutch Petroleum were already negotiating for oil rights weeks before the JCPOA was finalized.

Finally:

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is expected to return from North Korea with three American detainees from his second visit to Pyongyang in less than six weeks to discuss a looming summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and US President Donald Trump.

An official at the presidential Blue House said that the three US detainees were expected to be brought with Mr Pompeo, who arrived in Pyongyang on Wednesday morning to work out details for the upcoming summit. Mr Trump has said the two countries had agreed on a date and location for the summit although he did not provide details. 

https://www.ft.com/content/7f64d962-532f-11e8-b3ee-41e0209208ec

If this happens, further confirmation of North Korean good faith and fruitful negotiations.

Strategist says

We want them to permanently eliminate their nuclear program.
It's that simple.

Nothing's permanent, and we are unlikely to achieve success by starving Iranians. They will likely blame the US, and that will make it advantageous for their leaders to wage rhetorical war with the US and develop weapons. You think old bone spurs is going to put his military where his mouth is and force the issue? You think he's going to get our allies to pull their weight and pay for those services?
But it's Trump's shitshow now, and he's intent on going with his gut.

In other words, same old same old, 39 years running...

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

They will likely blame the US, and that will make it advantageous for their leaders to wage rhetorical war with the US and develop weapons.

Thats exactly how obama got his deal done...

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Nothing's permanent, and we are unlikely to achieve success by starving Iranians.

At his core trump is a used car salesman. Lying comes naturally and frequently to induce the buyer into seeing things trumps way. ( buy the car ).
The danger here is he may corner himself into so many lies that he may bomb to save face come decision time.
Managing the dotardic swamp bomb can get a little dicey. He was inserted into the game to shake up the bag, with the hopes that his caddies would keep him in check regarding ELE type decisions...

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

You think old bone spurs is going to put his military where his mouth is and force the issue?

Given the proper weapons, israel can be taken out completely in a relatively short period of time strictly due to their limited land mass.
That is why they are so fanatical about their neighbors obtaining nuclear weaponry. It would not take many nukes to level the place.

Feux Follets says

Will Israel fight our war for us if we pay them enough ?

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Strategist says

We want them to permanently eliminate their nuclear program.
It's that simple.

Nothing's permanent, and we are unlikely to achieve success by starving Iranians. They will likely blame the US, and that will make it advantageous for their leaders to wage rhetorical war with the US and develop weapons.

So we have two options:
1. Prevent them from building nukes.
2.Tolerate us getting blamed, engage in a rhetorical war, and tolerate them developing conventional weapons.

Option 2 is clearly the better alternative.

Three Released US Hostages on their way back from North Korea

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/09/trump-secretary-of-state-pompeo-heading-back-from-north-korea-with-3-released-prisoners.html

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that three American prisoners released from North Korea were headed home.
It is a sign of potential good will ahead of Trump's planned meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Trump said he would greet the three men when they arrive at Andrews Air Force Base in the early hours of the morning.

Also not an accident:

Saudi Arabia shoots down Houthi-sent missiles
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-security/saudi-arabia-says-it-intercepts-houthi-missiles-over-riyadh-idUSKBN1IA100

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that three American prisoners released from North Korea were headed home.
It is a sign of potential good will ahead of Trump's planned meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Trump said he would greet the three men when they arrive at Andrews Air Force Base in the early hours of the morning.

What a difference a year makes. We went from Obama kissing up to Kim, and now Kim kissing up to Trump.

At first I thought that Trump was acting on Iran as a prelude to NK to make sure that Kim knows that his 'deal' (if their is one) will not be as favorable as the Iran deal. That seemed obvious enough.
The anouncement was made out of nowhere on the day that Cohen was caught receiving more than four million bucks in an apparent pay to play scheme. In the early part of Trump's presidency, the company he started to pay off Stormy also took in $500K from a Russian oligarch connected company, the CEO of Novartis (the day after he met Trump), and various other people looking to buy influence with Trump. They didn't even bother with a charity. Just fired up 'essential consultants' and routed payments through Trump's lawyer and business partner.

Yeah, Trump was railing against the Iran Deal and promising action on North Korea at his 2016 Campaign Rallies.

Imagine, a President keeping his promises.

Where's that single payer option?

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Nothing's permanent, and we are unlikely to achieve success by starving Iranians.

This doesn't make much sense. We were successful in starving the horrible evil nazi racist South Africans into giving up their nukes, why won't we be successful with the great, smart, chess-playing, cuddly Iranians?

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

This doesn't make much sense. We were successful in starving the horrible evil nazi racist South Africans into giving up their nukes, why won't we be successful with the great, smart, chess-playing, cuddly Iranians?

LOL.

I just got redpilled on Nelson Mandela. I thought he was imprisoned for organizing an anti-apartheid labor strike or something. He was assassinating rivals and 'informers' for the Communists, most of whom were Black! I literally grew up and reached middle age thinking he was in prison for a peaceful protest or some shit. Just goes to show the power of the Media Narrative.

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

This doesn't make much sense. We were successful in persuading the horrible evil nazi racist South Africans to give up their nukes, why won't be successful with the great, smart, chess-playing, cuddly Iranians?

Does SA seem similar to Iran to you?
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/north-korea-south-africa/539265/

SA gave up their nukes, because the perceived threat (Soviet Union) collapsed. If you want to follow that model, you could make the US collapse, and then let Russia convince Iran and NK to give up nukes. Or, you could just get D Trump to threaten Iran and NK with hell-fire the likes that no one's seen before. He's very scary, and that might work (j/k).

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Does SA seem similar to Iran to you?

No, they turned out much less evil. In fact, I would be perfectly OK with them keeping the bomb. Iran, on the other hand, doesn't even hide the intentions to destroy another country.

The "sanctions, boycotts and divestments don't work" crowd pissing against the wind. These things work when cranked to a proper degree. The best evidence is the nuclear-free, apartheid-free SA. And yes, the dead USSR.

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

SA gave up their nukes, because the perceived threat (Soviet Union) collapsed.

The man himself doesn't list the collapse of USSR as the main reason, only as one of the three:

Friedman: You’ve mentioned a few different motivations: One, your own feelings; two, the security environment changing; and three, the desire to end South Africa’s international isolation and make the transition from apartheid. Is there a way to rank those?

De Klerk: It was a combination of everything, but I can add to that that I wanted to end the isolation even before we finalized agreements through the constitutional negotiations.

The big part in USSR's collapse, BTW, were sanctions imposed on the Soviet fucks by Ronald Reagan. Despite the whining of French and Germans who wanted to continue trading with the regime. It's a fucking Deja Vu all over again.

De Klerk listed Russia's operations in Africa as the main reason for building the bomb. Ergo, without that event, it probably wouldn't have been given up, even if De Klerk wanted to.

Sanctions didn't work with NK. They have a bomb now. They are not going to give it up. They are coming to the negotiating Table with a big stick to defend themselves.

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

The big part in USSR's collapse, BTW, were sanctions imposed on the Soviet fucks by Ronald Reagan

I thought it was because communism sucks and capitalism is great. In all seriousness, I'm not against sanctions. I just think that they are only useful if a carrot or stick choice is presented, and the carrot option is better than the stick. The only Carrot we have heard about D Trump using is the one he dips in playmates and porn stars (in exchange for fat cash of course). If the stick is better (for the leaders) than the carrot, then you get NK.

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

De Klerk listed Russia's operations in Africa as the main reason for building the bomb. Ergo, without that event, it probably wouldn't have been given up, even if De Klerk wanted to.

He said it was a mix of USSR being gone and the international pressure applied to SA. The quote is quite clear and leaves nothing to imagination.

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

I thought it was because communism sucks and capitalism is great. In all seriousness, I'm not against sanctions. I just think that they are only useful if a carrot or stick choice is presented, and the carrot option is better than the stick. The only Carrot we have heard about D Trump using is the one he dips in playmates and porn stars (in exchange for fat cash of course). If the stick is better (for the leaders) than the carrot, then you get NK.

The carrot option is better, but when it does not work you resort to the stick. We kept presenting carrot after carrot to no avail. Trump picks up the stick and we start getting immediate results from NK.

Goodbye, Frederica Mog! The EU "Foreign Minister" and Big League Iran Deal defender will not seek another term.

https://twitter.com/HeshmatAlavi/status/1036706015914405890

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Goodbye, Frederica Mog! The EU "Foreign Minister" and Big League Iran Deal defender will not seek another term.

Geert Wilders should get that post.