Forums

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Dear Ayatollahs Khamenei and Cotton,

It is good to see the two of you becoming pen pals. I think dialogue can be an important way to Peace. I know, however, that there can be some problems with understanding multi-cultural exchanges, so I thought it might be helpful to explain a few things.

First, many of these exchanges have taken place in English, and I know there are a number of American-educated PhDs advising Iran so it has a good sense of what is going on, but it appears that many Republicans in the Senate have trouble understanding precisely what these negotiations are over.

For example, the Republicans talk about the Iranian "nuclear weapons program", even though Iran has repeatedly indicated that they do not have an actual weapons program but instead have a nuclear power program. Moreover, their nuclear facilities are the second-most inspected in the world (behind Japan), and the inspectors have consistently acknowledged that we have no evidence of a nuclear weapons program. Instead, we are negotiating over whether they have "capacity", in the form of refined, weapons grade material and delivery mechanisms. This is why knowledgeable people, and even people like Netanyahu, talk about what the time to a weapon would be once inspections cease. No knowledgeable person is disputing the ability of an agreement with Iran to ensure they do not have nuclear weapons while the agreement is in place - the dispute is over how much time there might be to a weapon once the agreement terminates.

Of course, an offer from the US Senate to terminate any agreement two years after we enter it must be very encouraging to Iran in this context. The Senate is suggesting Iran might be able to get what it wants today, and then have the Senate or the next President free them from the obligations they agree to in exchange.

The Republicans also seem to believe the topics under discussion are under their jurisdiction. They may not have realized that these are the "5+1" talks, not bilateral negotiations (I know, bilateral is a big long English word - it means talks between just us and Iran). Iran doesn't really need the US to end its sanctions, which have been passed into law, as long as they get the UN off their back. Once China, Russia, India and the EU are all buying their oil, and once they get back their SWIFT codes so they can move money around internationally, they'll be happy. I don't know whether the problem is that Tom Cotton can't read the papers here, or doesn't open emails from the state department unless they come from Hillary's personal account, or whether he just doesn't want to acknowledge that the UN is what Iran cares about instead of the machinations of a bunch of sons of the Confederacy, but I think it's important that someone translate into whatever language the Tea Party has adopted that his new pen pal really doesn't care much about what he says unless it gives his friend leverage over the people Iran really cares about, which are John Kerry and his band.

I hope this letter enriches everyone's understanding of the 5+1 negotiations and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress and the Iranians take a little time out to rub Senate-produced bullshit in America's face.

[Add signature lines for GGG and all of his socks - anyone else want to sign on?]