Iraqi officials have expressed major concern about being sucked into a US-Iran War, and so it is unsurprising that new reports of the two nations having held some secret talks put the location of the meeting in northern Iraq.
Details are scant. The two delegations reportedly met in a hotel in Irbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan. The Iranian delegation was led by Hassan Khomenei, the grandson of the former supreme leader, along with the nation’s special envoy to Iraq and two officials from the Revolutionary Guard Corps. There was no word on which US officials were present.
Nor indeed was there any word from either side on the results of these talks. Iran had rejected the idea of talking with the US just a week prior unless the US lifted sanctions on them, while US calls for talks are all hinged on implications that Iran was ready to make concessions.
Instead it seems their diplomatic hardball with one another was more likely overcome by Iraq, a nation they both want good relations with, and which has grown increasingly impatient with the two nations’ acrimony so often threatening to bring war to Iraqi soil.
If the invasion of Iraq by the US was a crime and we are holding people for decades for resisting US occupation, what do call that ? That’s even worse then a crime. Indefinite incarceration is worse then torture, and when is this sadistic nation we live in going to come to grips with our own ungodliness. I’m referring to Guantanamo.
National interests don’t fit neatly into political or religious boxes. Predominantly Shia Iraq knows a US-Iran war will spill blood on its soil. Loyalty is ultimately determined by interest: interest ultimately determines war or peace.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Finally, some hopeful news that the US has some capacity to set aside its dogma and talk enough to understand the other’s red lines and perhaps avoid an accidental war at least.
It is good news and Trump must have approved it.. but notice Washington never informed us..
Trump himself never tweeted about it, either. You’d think this is something he’d be proud of.
But did it really happen?
I wouldn’t be so optimistic about that. We’re not that great at doing the rational thing.
This is the diplomatic equivalent of a playground bully who has been stood up to by a little tough guy, and rather than be seen by his minions trying to mend fences the bully does it on the sly after school when he won’t be seen. I suspect Iran will not give ground, but following diplomatic protocol they attend.
I’ve often thought that the school yard bully getting punched by the skinny little kid was the perfect analogy for 9/11.
So if Iran sells a tanker ship load to China ? What can the US do about it ? Blow up or ram the Ship ? The United States would not do that , it would bad for the envirement . I can’t think of a single way we could stop this sale without committing a crime .
There was that little piracy just recently that answers your question. Committing crimes has never been an issue.
The US can seize any ship on the high seas any time it wants. No ship captain is going to argue with a US destroyer. And any that refuses to stop moving is simply going to be boarded by SEALs. Of course, it’s a crime to do this, but the US is a criminal state, as is Israel.
Committing a crime is no problem. The US and Israel do it constantly, brazenly.
However, committing a crime against someone who can respond is another matter.
So, can China respond? Yes.
Will it grow more able to respond? Yes.
Does the US actually want the Chinese response as part of separating from and confronting China? Probably. But it is extremely dangerous, and the bullies are also cowards.
I’am hoping Trump is a little different than last few establishment presidents of both political parties . I so far have not noticed much difference by what Trump says . But so far by what Trump accomplishes difference may be showing up
The Delegation meeting was unsuccessful. That’s why they used plan K.
My guess is that this was a “pre-meeting” intended to sound out whether any official diplomatic meeting was possible. The meetings participants will go back and tell their respective governments whether there is any point in further negotiations.
In the end, it’s another irrelevancy as the neocons around Trump are not interested in diplomacy. Given that Secretary of State Pompeo is a Christian Zionist, I think we can forget about the State Department pushing for honest diplomacy. So these talks are going to go nowhere, even if Trump decides he wants to replay his North Korea efforts. And again, the neocons or the CIA or Israel can foment an incident that derails any talks anyway.
More proof that the EU is kowtowing to the US over Iran. As reported on this site elsewhere:
Europeans call for urgent meeting of Iran nuclear deal parties
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-iran-nuclear-eu/europeans-call-for-urgent-meeting-of-iran-nuclear-deal-parties-idUKKCN1U412O
Note the wording of this article and the statements by the EU ministers. The entire gist is that “Iran is in breach” of its obligations under the JCPOA, and that the goal of convening the Joint Commission is to address *those* “breaches”, not the underlying issue of Iran’s formal complaint to the EU.
This is also why the EU has not convened the Joint Commission yet, as the article states – they don’t want to address Iran’s complaint, only the alleged “breaches”.
The EU ministers refer to Iran’s steps as “compliance issues” which is a softer term than “breaches”, but Reuters refers to Iran’s steps as “breaches.” The EU ministers must know that everything Iran has done is *permitted* under the dispute resolution process. But since the Joint Commission has not been convened, the EU can argue that Iran is out of compliance until it has been convened. Then they’ve made sure the Commission has not been convened, but only until Iran is “out of compliance” and the only issue to be discussed is Iran’s “non-compliance.”
You see the mechanism here? The EU is fully on board with a war with Iran which would result from Iran withdrawing from the JCPOA – as long as they aren’t *blamed* for it.
This is essentially the same mechanism that was used back in the early 2000’s to get Iran’s “non-compliance” technical issue over its declaration of its nuclear facilities from the IAEA into the UNSC, resulting in UN sanctions over its alleged “violation of the NPT.” Which then became the Bush and Obama’s casus belli for arguing for war with Iran.
You claim a technical violation or dispute over the rules, then instead of dealing with it under the specified resolution process, you undermine that process, claim the party is “in breach”, then wash your hands of it by referring it to another authority, and then the US uses the issue as a propaganda ploy to justify more aggressive actions.
Trust me. The JCPOA is dead as a door nail. The EU and the US will make sure of it. Iran will have no choice but to withdraw from it. And then the drive for war will escalate even higher because “Iran broke the deal.”
And not one percent of the US electorate will comprehend what actually happened.
There no need to specify sources, right?