Following a meeting with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei offered a rare assessment of the Vienna talks on the nuclear deal, and being unusually upbeat.
Khamenei said the talks are “going ahead properly,” despite US officials repeatedly saying that a deal may not result from all the discussions. Iranian Foreign Ministry officials have conceded that a deal might not happen as well.
Khamenei appeared to acknowledge that possibility as well, saying he does not want the negotiators disrupted by such statements, and that he doesn’t believe that the future of Iran should depend on this single deal.
Since no one can control the outcome of these talks, that’s a nice thought, but Iran is in economic trouble as it is, and a failure to get sanctions relief out of these talks will definitely have long-term ramifications on Iran.
Khamenei’s calls to continue to advance the negotiations are still impactful, and virtually preclude hardliner factions opposed to the deal from trying to undermine the talks, since the ayatollah is giving them de facto endorsement.
If Iran can sell its oil and trade with No US dollar or on an exchange basis which it already does, then the nuclear deal would be something mute…!
Beginning with the overthrow of president Mossadegh in 1953 our policies vs. Iran have been a string of disastrous consequences. Notice that the disasters began under President Eisenhower who is frequently quoted as one of our greatest presidents. So that is what our great presidents do? Violently overthrow a government on behalf of a British petroleum company? Start the war in Vietnam?
Our next great president will be our first great president.
Do you think that you could have done better than the best of them?
I could have sucked less.
Right. The entire political class is just fronting for the real power. Today it’s K St.. In the 50’s the power elite consisted of ivy league old rich policy elite and big corporate guidance. With the exception of JFK, the POTUS could not be less significant.
No, he did NOT say the negotiations should not be disrupted. What he said was (from the article):
Clearly what he meant was that work on planning for the country should not be disrupted by the negotiations. That’s entire different.
He also said this: