I don't believe these are real demands by Iran:
Among the biggest sticking points this week has been Iran's insistence that a United Nations Security Council arms embargo and ban on its ballistic missile program dating from 2006 be lifted immediately if an agreement is reached.
I've mentioned before that I fear Iran will be hard line on issues that don't matter so that when they finally relent the Obama administration will think it actually won something.
Look at the two items. Does Iran really need relief on ballistic missiles or arms sales?
North Korea appears to be Iran's subcontractor for missiles. A concession here is meaningless.
What about conventional weapons?
One, Iran seems to believe it needs nukes to deter an American attack.
Does Iran really believe it could match us? If they did, they'd have caved on nukes to focus on conventional arms a long time ago.
As for domestic and regional image, Iran regularly announces mythical wonder weapons developed by their industry.
So Iran could make a faux "cave" on these issues to get the prize of a deal.
Kerry might actually believe he stood firm and forced the mullahs to back down!
I remain dismayed that all the "smart" diplomacy seems to be practiced against us.
But that's what you get with the least effective Secretary of State in modern history.
UPDATE: I see we have peace for our time:
Negotiators at the Iran nuclear talks are expected to reach a provisional agreement Sunday on a historic deal that would curb the country's atomic program in return for sanctions relief, diplomats told The Associated Press.
I assume Israel will start thinking about attack timing.
Or perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic that Kerry could screw up even a wet dream.
UPDATE: Oh, and I forgot the obvious front man--Assad of Syria--who can buy weapons formally and send them to Iran. Iraq might do the same if we oddly look the other way while Iran's influence rises in Baghdad.
