The (Ex) Washington Realist

Some of my colleagues think I am underestimated the breakthrough that occurred in Geneva in the Iran talks. I acknowledge that Iran has made a seemingly major concession--sending uranium outside the country to be enriched--essentially a version of the Scowcroft plan proposed a few years back--and this could be the start toward ending the crisis. Where the deal easily could be hung up: Iran agrees to ship out the uranium but wants to keep all of its existing infrastructure with no dismantling as a hedge.

Why, if I have been stressing Russia's reluctance to sanction Iran, would they be instrumental in getting this deal through by being one of the parties involved in supplying Iran with the fuel? Well, to the extent that this "temporary" settlement only delays rather than resolves the Iran issue, then much of the status quo which benefits Russia stays in place--and Russia reaps benefits in Europe for its constructive role.

I assume that the U.S. perspective is one of eventual timing--delay works in our favor if we expect that time is against the current regime.

Just my thoughts--