"High stakes time in Iran talks" is an op-ed which featured today in the USA Today.
"The countries have made more progress than most expected. But still to come are the most contentious issues: gaining access to and neutralizing Iran's most sensitive nuclear capabilities, dealing with Iranian president Hassan Rouhani's political environment and handling the U.S.'s skeptical and nervous diplomatic partners in the region. And this time, there's a deadline: Negotiators want to finalize an agreement before July 20 (which will be six months since the talks began). The stakes could not be higher. A successful deal would mean Iran gives up any capability to build a nuclear weapon. That outcome could help ease rancorous relations between Tehran and Washington. Failure would mean the U.S. and Iran's bitterest rivals in the region remain on edge, afraid that Iran could still quickly achieve nuclear weapons status. A Middle East rife with suspicion and instability would be left even closer to boiling over," the article reads.
However, the author believes that even if the agreement is reached "that still won't resolve all the U.S.'s concerns about Iran. The talks aren't even touching on Iran's strong support for the Assad regime in Syria, its condemnation of Israel, or its use of terrorism. Recall that Iranian backed operatives tried to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington as recently as 2011."
"Iran isn’t complying with the interim deal" is another op-ed run today by the Washington Post.
The article starts by claiming that Iran fails to comply with all its obligations given to the West. The author goes on to state that "This is why the West must insist Iran ship out its nuclear centrifuges and stockpiles, dismantle the heavy water plant at Arak, destroy warheads and give up the notion of a 'right to enrich.' We can assume that whatever is left in the country (e.g. centrifuges, stockpiles) will be used for nefarious purposes."
"With news of Iran’s refusal to cooperate and President Obama’s former Iran adviser sounding the alarm, Congress should be prepared to act no later than July 20, when the interim deal expires. Iran hasn’t ceased its terrorism, hasn’t come clean on its nuclear weapons program and hasn’t permanently dismantled anything. It’s time to return to sanctions and provide whatever assistance Israel may need to act," the author of the article urges.
An article headlined "Iran, major powers begin two-month sprint toward nuclear deal" which appeared today in the Los Angeles Times offers a much more positive outlook on the negotiations. "various diplomats say the group is edging toward compromises on some key issues, including the monitoring of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure; the treatment of the disputed Arak heavy water research reactor; the deeply buried Fordow uranium enrichment site; and the expected duration of the deal," the article reads.
