Iranian Sanctions Stall

++Yesterday both the Senate and the House shelved new economic sanctions against Iran until June. The sanctions bill was heading to 60-vote mark when President Obama turned on a full court press. Various media outlets and even some Democrats protested to the tough words used by the White House that the bill was a vote for war.

++The most interesting development was the emergence of a discussion about AIPAC's role in lobbying for the bill and the active role Senators played in trying to get Jewish communities to lobby for the bill. The Republicans actually believed that if they could voice a vote and a subsequent Obama veto that this would show once and for all that the Democrats really don't support Israel, while they do.

++Dianne Feinstein took the bull by the horns and said that it was not Israel's role to tell the United States with whom to go to war. Tikkun, the liberal Jewish journal,remarked how peculiar it was in this case that American Jewish politicians are openly discussing Israel's lobbying efforts since AIPAC has always tried to be behind the scenes in their attempts to maintain influence. Tikkun also mentioned that it was an almost freak accident to see John Stewart lash out at this new effort.

++While proponents of the new sanctions bill argue it is assurance and strengthens Obama's hand in negotiations, it does nothing of the sort. Almost all observers agree it would kill the Iran deal in its tracks. But what is most interesting out the deal is that it pre-approves Israel attacking Iran, promising American military material, and American military support for such an effort. It is very unusual that the United States would openly favor another country invading another and declaring that such invasion would be in Israel's national interest as if we can determine these things. There is no rationale for America militarily supporting their venture. 

++Let's walk back a bit to the Syrian moment when President Obama asked permission from Congress for a military strike against Syria's chemical weapons. AIPAC whipped that vote and it never made it to any majority before Russia and the United States made an agreement for the withdrawal of al chemical weapons from Syria. Here a country had WMDs and used them but we did not take military action. In Iraq,they didn't have WMD but we invaded, claiming they did, and now we would invade Iran who has yet developed nuclear arms. So I guess we feel safer invading place who have no such capability. 

++It's rather mind-boogling. I'm tempted to work out the scenarios if the Iran deal collapsed because of our actions and what the international reaction would be if Israel and the United States took action, leaving the P5+1 group high and dry. The coalition that was assembled by President Obama to create a strict sanction regime would collapse as well as any goodwill to any such efforts by the United States in the future. It would be an utter disaster and Israel would be even more isolated. I really can't understand AIPAC's reasoning on this effort. It's insane.

++Monday starts Iran's reduction of its enriched uranium,its dismantling of some of its facilities and its suspension of further enrichment. In return the P5+1 will slowly release the Iranian government's funds which are held in escrow. 

++Today's New York Times printed an article about how old business partners are interested in returning to Iran. However,the Iranian business community is saying there is only interest and no deals. Bibi Netanyahu claims in the article that this shows that the sanctions regime will erode swiftly and will never ever be able to be restored.

++The real question is whether a full deal will be reached before June. Apparently,the recent additional sanctions bill was timed as an event for the March AIPAC convention in D.C.