Iran Nuclear Talks: Framework for Final Deal Reached

[politicus]

Noticeable fact: Obama informed King Salman before Nethanyahu after the deal was struck.

A few comments to the deal:

Analyst Mustafa Alani from the Saudi Gulf Research Center says King Salman has already taken the agreement into account with a more aggressive foreign policy.

"The intervention in Yemen is the clear example, it is intended to send a clear signal to Tehran and Washington that the region (Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states) will counter Iran's expansionist policy. We see a new course where Saudi interests are prioritized over the United States recommendations and Security Council resolutions"

Commentator Talal Alharbi in the Saudi newspaper Arab News:

"Iran's slogans about 'revolution', 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel' are now 'Death to Arabs', as the Arab states, not Israel, are the victims of Iranian policy."

Egyptian observers think the agreement will lead to a nuclear arms race in the region. The Egyptians have for years argued for a nuclear-free Middle East (= getting rid of Israel's stockpile of c. 200 nuclear warheads, but also addressing Iranian ambitions on nuclear weapons)

Director of the Al Ahram think tank in Cairo Abdel Monem Said Aly:

"If the Arab leaders believe that a nuclear deal with Iran open for a possible production of nuclear weapons, the thinking will be: Why don't we have the same status"

[politicus]

Noticeable fact: Obama informed King Salman before Nethanyahu after the deal was struck.

A few comments to the deal:
[...]

I read similar stuff. One important thing is that in the broad rivalry Iran/Shia vs Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Sunni states, the US were clearly considered to be on the Sunni side. Saudis are worried that Washington may become more neutral (good thing imo), and the Sunni intervention in Yemen is a demonstration of assertiveness directed to Iran.

That is stating the obvious.

[politicus]

Well, it may not be a bad idea to state some basic facts, so looking at the Sunni-side:

- Led by Saudi Arabia the Sunni Arabs states decided to intervene (in Yemen and elsewhere where it might be necessarry) in an attempt to halt the Iranian offensive in the Arab world. To do this the Arab League's 22 members have agreed to establish a force of 40,000 to be deployed at critical points, but no consensus on whether it should be voluntary or conscript, or who should decide what. So far has concentrated on efforts to fight the pro-Iranian Houthis in Yemen. Egyptian aircraft have bombed/Saudi gunboats have fired upon Houthi forces from the sea.

- The Sunni alliance has failed to agree on intervening in the Libyan civil war. Egypt and UAE supports one side/Turkey and Qatar supports another.

- As part of the increasing Sunni Muslim brotherhood Erdogan visited Riyadh. Relationship between the two powers have been bad because Erdogan supports the Muslim bros# in Egypt, while the Saudis support military dictator el-Sissi and consider the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists.

On that occasion Saudi foreign minister, Saud ibn Feisal said that Muslim brothers was "no longer a problem". Erdogan seems to have caved in and everybody loves al-Sissi (at least officially).

- Fears of Iran and disenchantment with the Iranian-American rapprochement is the miracle that has brought Sunni countries together.

- Conflict with Israel takes a backseat. Even reports that Saudi Arabia is considering selling oil to Israel.

[politicus]

The US should respond by taking a stand against this unilateral Sunni aggression. Sadly, they won't.

In the big picture Iran is on the offensive and the Sunnis are defending.

Iran and allies have the upper hand in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

[politicus]

The US should respond by taking a stand against this unilateral Sunni aggression. Sadly, they won't.

In the big picture Iran is on the offensive and the Sunnis are defending.

Iran and allies have the upper hand in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

Not really, when you factor in ISIS (for which Saudi Arabia & friends have been remarkably foot-draggy in combating).

ISIS is a meance, but their power is exaggerated in the media. The Assad regime and the Iraqi government clearly have the upper hand in the civil wars in their countries.

[politicus]

The US should respond by taking a stand against this unilateral Sunni aggression. Sadly, they won't.

In the big picture Iran is on the offensive and the Sunnis are defending.

Iran and allies have the upper hand in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

Not really, when you factor in ISIS (for which Saudi Arabia & friends have been remarkably foot-draggy in combating).

Interesting thing is that many wealthy Saudi individuals are pomping a s**tload of money into the ISIS and the government is very slow to do anything about this, to put things mildly.

That goes for rich Quataris as well and probably also other Gulf States. But Saudi-Arabia et al turning a blind eye to rich individuals supporting Sunni fanatics doing horrible things to infidels/heretics is of course nothing new.