U.S. Officials Say Iran Has Agreed to Nuclear Talks

[DonViejo]

Source: NYT

Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Saturday, October 20, 2012 -- 5:27 PM EDT
-----

U.S. Officials Say Iran Has Agreed to Nuclear Talks

The United States and Iran have agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.

In an exclusive report in Sunday’s New York Times, Helene Cooper and Mark Landler, citing Obama administration officials, write that Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election so that they know which American president they would be dealing with.

News of the agreement comes at a critical moment in the presidential contest. It has the potential to help President Obama make a case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the effort to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but it could pose a risk if Iran is seen as using the prospect of the direct talks to buy time. It is also far from clear that Mr. Obama’s opponent, Mitt Romney, would go through with the negotiation should he win election.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/world/iran-said-ready-to-talk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?emc=na

[bemildred]

1. Interesting.

This is going to freak some people out, I predict.

[longship]

2. Mitt will undoubtedly try to twist this on Monday.

Watch that happen. Obama will be ready.

And kudos to Secretary Clinton!

[Faygo Kid]

17. He won't wait until Monday, he will twist it tonight.

And on the Sunday talk shows, through surrogates, of course.

He only appears on Fox News, as you know.

[LeftofObama]

3. OK, someone talk me down!

Won't Robme and the repukes use this as a, "See, they're already afraid of a Robme presidency so now they're willing to negotiate" meme ala Reagan in 1980? With a complicit corporate media couldn't this be used against President Obama?

I really hope the Obama team is on top of this and they control the message in the media.

[Cha]

4. Wow.. I didn't think that AT ALL..

This is Good News for our Country..meaning Pres Obama and those who support him.

The President can use this against neoCon assholes.. romney being one of the biggest lying Cons in existance.

[bemildred]

6. They are going to make something up no matter what we do. nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. I saw this as a huge win for SOS Clinton.

And As such Obama. It's not as if they were willing to talk under Bush/Cheney. Who were as likely to go to war there as Romney/Ryan.

This is a sign diplomacy and sanctions do work. You don't have to kill millions of people and spend trillions of dollars bankrupting out country.

That's just me though.

[Enrique]

13. good point

they may very well spin it that way. But my reaction willl be instead of .

It will be like when he said "I'll take a lot of credit" for the auto bailout.

[Cha]

5. Who wants a f****** war on Iran beside romney and the neoCons?

Thanks for this news, DonViejo.

[msanthrope]

8. A great victory for SOS Clinton and President Obama. nt

[JDPriestly]

9. I figured this would happen.

Fact is that either Obama or Romney would take military action (possibly short of war for Obama) if these talks are unsuccessful. Iran would be wise to proceed honestly and in good faith. We are still a great military power. And Iran's allies are, each of them, distracted by internal problems. If the US is to handle the issue of a threat of Iranian nuclear power, the US will do it very soon.

That is my opinion in this situation. No matter who is the president after the election, the Iranians have very little time to open up their nuclear industry to inspection -- completely open it. And to agree to no nuclear weapons.

There are already too many nuclear weapons in the world and in the Middle East. It won't help for Iran to balk and try to get them too. We all need to cut back on nuclear weapons, not add more.

[Volaris]

35. Agreed, and at some point, some President is just going to have the stones to say "Screw it"...

and Lead by Example, and just UN-deploy our entire Nuclear aresenal. Maybe not completly abolish it, but take "The Football" off line at least, so that a person can't have a bad day, and just up and kill a billion people.

[FailureToCommunicate]

10. So detente and sanctions may have succeeded over saber rattling?

Notch one for Obama, Gary Samore, Clinton, and the IAEA

Especially sweet on the 50th anniversary of another time of nuclear brinksmanship.

[John2]

11. I disagree

The article claims they have been secretly talking. Romney claims the President wasn't doing anything. The question is, did Netanyahu know the U.S. was talking to the Iranians secretly? I think it might be an indication of Diplomacy winning over saber rattling.

[Frustratedlady]

12. But....but, you can't negotiate with Iran...Obama only knows how to talk...

Isn't that what they accused Obama of last election?

Gotta handle them with nuclear strikes...can't TALK to them. Negotiate? Who ever heard of negotiating with Iran?

Good show, Hillary and Obama!!!!

[bemildred]

14. "The United States and Iran have agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations"

Note the "first time". Iran has wanted to do this as long as I can remember.
This is the result of an initiative by the Obama administration.

[shaayecanaan]

32. Well spotted

Technically, any official contact between Iran and the US is illegal (on the American side) - so everything goes through the Swiss for the time being. I think the Iranians were wanting this for a long time.

Political wisdom states that the American public will tolerate a failed war but not failed diplomacy, since wars are manly and are good for making politicians look statesmanlike, whatever the occasion, whereas diplomacy is the preserve of pantywaists and mummy's boys.

I suppose the problem for Obama is that he might actually have to come up with a proposal for the Iranians, which he has studiously avoided so far.

[bemildred]

33. Reminds me a bit of the N. Korea situation.

I remember them asking for 1-on-1 back in the Bush II administration, and us insisting on 6-party talks or something like that.

But Iran has wanted to make up for a long time, and we actually have a lot of common interests (besides oil), and there is some really serious shit going down in the Middle East that Iran could be a big help with. But as things stand, we have no leverage (Bush fixed that GOOD, Iraq is now Iran's buddy.)

But it's a big change, if true. And it will piss off the Saudis and Israelis (or Bibi at least), among others.

I don't know if I believe it or not, yet I think something is going on, I don't think it was trotted out and then promptly denied in tandem by accident. But I doubt it's about electoral politics.

Edit: But then again, the more I think about it, it might be, but I don't think I want to get into that yet.

[Turbineguy]

15. That's going to piss off the repubs

they were probably already borrowing money for the war!

[mojo2012]

16. Would be so outstanding if....

Since it has been stated by Romney's own campaign that Romney doesn't even read the briefings everyday, it would be grand if Romney pops off in the debate with something stupid about Iran and doesn't even know that Iran has agreed to the talks...that would be a good time for President Obama to ask Romney what his foreign policy plan is...like do you want to start a knee-jerk war even when Iran has agreed to have nuclear talks????

[Blue Idaho]

18. "Tell me again how sanctions can't possibly work Mr. Rmoney?"

Bishop Willard must be shitting bricks - once again the President's foreign policy scores a win!

[AtheistCrusader]

19. Poor Romney.

[sweettater]

20. Perhaps Iran

is thinking ahead hoping this will help President Obama's chances in the election. They sure as heck don't want romney in as they know what is down the pike.

[OldHippieChick]

21. Will the Repukes spin this

and say that Imanutjob (sorry, Leno made me do it) is rooting for Obama? This can't be happening on the eve of the foreign policy debate can it? Housing prices rebounding, gas prices going down, unemployment lowering - it's a left-wing conspiracy I tell you! LOL! How many "facts" will they choose to ignore this week eh?

[Purveyor]

22. Has the whack job from israel, netan-f'n-yahoo checked in yet to tell us 'this is yet again a

delaying tactic'?

[Purveyor]

23. Breaking News: White House says "not true" that United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one...

Breaking News: White House Says "Not True" That United States And Iran Have Agreed To One-On-One Talks Or Any Meeting After U.S. Presidential Election

Guess he got the call from tel aviv. That didn't take long now did it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/20/us-lebanon-explosion-iran-idUSBRE89J04Y20121020

This is currently a BN banner on top of the Reuters page without a follow up story.

[rtracey]

24. Nay sayers

What is up with the nay saying....give me a break, are you for this President or not...If this news is true this fantastic news, for both President Obama, The US, and the world. Why?, because. 1. This shows that sanctions and diplomacy can work. 2. It shows how affective the Obama administration is on foreign affairs...remember, Romney wanted possible military action....more dead soldiers, 3. This gives Isreal a reprieve from needing to attack. And 4. Now there can be inspections and new rules placed so we can actually see what Iran has....remember Iraqs and Saddam Husseins large cache of weapons of mass destruction.....ummmm not there, so perhaps Iran is bullshitting too.

Quit the bickering, this news (again if correct) may have just WON this election

[Mr.Turnip]

25. This is something that SHOULD BE a big victory for the pres.

But yet sadly I think will be spun by the media as "CRADLING THE ISLAMIST" or something.

[AntiFascist]

26. This should be a positive development for Obama...

I can never understand why he doesn't stress that the Bush Admin's warmongering is the primary reason for the Federal deficit being so huge.

[bucolic_frolic]

27. Mitt will say

"I will not negotiate with Muslims in Tehran!"

Pander to the right, in other words.

I hope Monday's debate goes well enough.

Wonder how many heart attacks are induced by these close elections?

[skiptaylor]

28. October Surprise?

Is this the October surprise people have been expecting?

[hrmjustin]

29. Welcome to DU, and I do not think anything will come of this.

[glacierbay]

30. Nope

WH officials are already denying any agreement to one on one talks with Iran.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. Kick (nt)

[Trillo]

34. This report asserts an agreement to talk

Another one sourced at politico claims White House says there's no agreement.

Yet another from Reuters says Iran has not agreed to anything.

That pretty much covers all possibilities, no? We might as well read fiction about fairies and fairy dust. If nothing else, it's much more enjoyable.

[JudyM]

36. October surprise perfect timing for the debate tonight!! nt

[ronnie624]

37. Lots of opinion and framing, based on the standard biased narrative;

Iran is a "nuclear threat"; the US has a moral imperative to dictate to Iran and make arbitrary interpretations of the NPT; the Iranian people's problems with the US began with the hostage crisis, instead of decades earlier, when the US and UK destroyed Iranian democracy; blah blah blah.