The Latest from Iran (3 October): Debating Mousavi's Strategy

NEW Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama’s Balance Wobbles
Iran Video: Football & “Ya Hossein! Mir Hossein!”
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks
The Latest from Iran (2 October): Back to the Homefront

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis



2100 GMT: Just Back Away Slowly. Now this from the Iranian Government:

Atomic Energy Organization of Iran spokesman Ali Shirzadian said on Saturday that International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei’s two-day trip to Iran had previously been planned and is not linked to last Thursday’s talks between Iran and the 5+1 group.

2000 GMT: Rumour of the Day. No, it's not the one about Ahmadinejad being part-Jewish: the Daily Telegraph's "astonishing secret" is eight months old. Mehdi Khazali, the son of the late Ayatollah Khazali, posted the allegation eight months ago.

No, the more important loud whisper is that Major-General Hassan Firouzabadi, the head of Iran's armed forces, is being removed from his post. We held off reporting this, as there was no supporting evidence, but now his office has felt the story was serious enough to issue a denial.

1945 GMT: Mehdi Mirdamadi, the son of Mohsen Mirdamadi, the Secretary-General of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been released after 17 days in detention.

1635 GMT: Amidst all the confusion over the claimed drafts of National Unity Plans (see 1040 GMT), Pedestrian offers a thoughtful and pointed analysis. There are two drafts, one which would have be inclusive of opposition figures such as Mousavi and Karroubi and one put about by hard-liners who want to steal the limelight and quash an inclusive arrangement:

Now, the other side doesn’t want to be left behind and is trying to release a plan of their own. They don’t want the Mousavi camp to be the group to come up with “the” national unity plan. Which is just funny, since Mousavi and Rafsanjani after him were the ones who have been talking about a plan for months. RajaNews and FarsNews sound like a kid who suddenly decides to steal his classmate’s homework.

Sure, they could have waited for Mousavi’s and ignored it, but they know that it will be read by a whole lot of people, “national unity” is of utmost importance right now, and as much as they can yell and holler that nothing has happened, they know the cords it will strike and they want theirs to be front page news.

1616 GMT: Spinning Out the Game. First, it was the denial by Saeed Jalili's spokesman that Iran had agreed to "third-party enrichment". Now a member of the Iranian delegation from the Geneva talks says not only that no agreement was made on delivery of uranium to a country such as Russia but also that there was no deal on inspection of the second enrichment plant near Qom in the next two weeks: "In the Thursday talks, Iran elaborated on its package of proposals and how to implement them… and it was agreed that negotiations should continue on Iran’s package of proposals and the common points in this package and the package drawn up by the other side, and there was no other agreement.”

1610 GMT: International Atomic Energy Agency Mohammad El Baradei has arrived in Tehran to discuss arrangements for the inspection of Iran's second uranium enrichment facility.

1435 GMT: MediaCheck (EA v. CNN, Round 78) . Enduring America ($0/story), 2 October, 0700 GMT: "Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks".

CNN ($199/story), 3 October, 1320 GMT: "Iran is Winner in Nuclear Talks, At Least for Now"

1420 GMT: The reformist leader Saeed Hajjarian, detained for 100 days until he was bailed this week, has told the youth section of the Islamic Iran Participation Front of his stay in prison. He was totally cut off from the outside world and was unaware of events. He was held in solitary confinement in Evin Prison for a month and, after his transfer to another location, was only in contact with interrogators.

Hajjarian claimed that interrogators told him of many people killed in fighting and a big gap has been created between the authorities and the Iranian people, all due to his theories of reform. He added that he could hear people chanting “God is Great” outside Evin Prison, boosting his spirits.

1410 GMT: All 15 members of the Daftar-Tahkim-Vahdat (Unity Consolidation Bureau) reformist student group who were arrested on Friday morning have been released. One of the members told Deutsche Welle that these blind arrests are signs that the authorities are confused on how to deal with the protests.

1400 GMT: Press TV is now headlining the denial of the spokesman for Iran's National Security Council that Tehran "reached a deal with world powers to ship its enriched uranium abroad for further processing". The Secretary of the NSC, Saeed Jalili, is Iran's lead negotiator on the nuclear issue.

1200 GMT: Sir, It Was Not Me. Saeed Jalili, Iran's lead negotiator at the Geneva talks, has denied the widespread report that he and his US counterpart, William Burns, had a 30-minute 1-on-1 discussion during lunch. They "might have exchanged a few words during the lunch break with other delegations present". (See also our separate analysis.)

1050 GMT: Reports that some of the 15 or more student activists of Daftar-Takhim-Vadat, detained yesterday, have been released.

1040 GMT: The Plan (and A Breakthrough)? After 48 hours of quiet, some movement on the purported National Unity Plan.

Parleman News reports that the "Iran Conciliation Plan" is close to a final draft. Provisions include a release of post-election detainees, a change in the "attitude" of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, allowing both sides 2 voice their views, and an end to the "security atmosphere".

Mediators for the plan are named as Hassan Khomeini (Imam Khomeini's grandson), Hashemi Rafsanjani, Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani, Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli, and a few other prominent senior clerics.

Mediators have approached Mir Hossein Mousavi in the past weeks. He has indicated that he approves the grand design and is discussing minor changes. And here's the big shift: for the first time since drafts of a plan surfaced, it is reported that Mehdi Karroubi is also being asked to approve the initiative.

"Informed sources" have said that prisoner release and a change in Government could occur within days, as well as the arrest and prosecution of some "rogue" officials and demotion of others.

Now for a caution: this is the second "draft" to have appeared; the first, published in Fars News, provoked much comment and criticism that it was not the "real" plan. So, while this latest news is imporant, we await other signs that this indeed is the working scheme for reconciliation.

0805 GMT: Wow. The editorial staff at The New York Times must have been taking multi-strength vitamins (or getting words in their ears from those in the Obama Administration who aren't thrilled about the talks with Iran):

This is no time for complacency or wishful thinking. The United States and its partners must push Iran to open all of its declared nuclear facilities and allow inspectors to interview any Iranian scientist they choose to — the only way to figure out what else Iran may be hiding. The leading powers must also be ready to impose tough sanctions if Iran resists or if negotiations go nowhere.

0750 GMT: Chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili has repeated: "Within the framework of the IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the nuclear watchdog will be allowed to inspect the [second] nuclear site as it has been the case with the Natanz nuclear facility."

0730 GMT: Leading Principlist MP Hamid-Reza Katouzian has raised questions about the Parliamentary commission that is supposedly investigating post-election abuses. He notes that its composition is not "diverse", "its legal status is unclear", and it has not yet met.

0725 GMT: The commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, has launched a pre-emptive strike against any plan for national unity, arguing that it is unnecessary given the legitimacy of the Presidential election and the strength of the Iranian system.

0700 GMT: Gary Sick, whose analysis on US-Iranian relations is always to be valued, yesterday put the "surprisingly productive" tag on the Geneva talks on Iran's nuclear programme. Juan Cole also held this view, adding, "Obama pwns Bush-Cheney on Iran", and this was soon picked up by other commentators such as Andrew Sulivan.

I share the hope that this is a breakthrough but, at the same, my concern (and that of EA colleagues) was that Geneva was being overplayed as a US victory "wringing concessions" out of the Iranians. The portrayal also obscured, even ignored, the tensions that continue within the Obama Administration.

So this morning "significant progress" has turned into "significant doubts" with the Obama Administration falling into confusion and squabbles over whether to welcome the engagement with Iran or to wag a finger of warning. We've got a separate analysis, "Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama’s Balance Wobbles".

0555 GMT: We're back after taking Friday night off to recharge.

Many thanks to our readers for a discussion which I think offers some of the best analysis of the internal politics, possibilities, and challenges. Where else on the Internet can you find a thorough discussion of Tehran Mayor Qalibaf, who may become a key figure in a plan for political resolution?

One of the questions which continues to occupy us is the strategy of Mir Hossein Mousavi. I have been sceptical of Mousavi's move "into the tent", setting aside a front of political opposition for a social network and apparent negotiation within the system, through a role on a committee for 2national unity. (My concern is not as much about Mousavi's decision as it is about the exclusion of Mehdi Karroubi from the process.) Our readers, however, have been considering the idea that Mousavi is fulfilling the long-term approach of the Green Wave; recognising that head-on confrontation will only lead to the crushing of the movement, he is seeking reform through some co-operation with the establishment's inquiries and re-evaluations. Still others don't trust Mousavi at all because of his past record, particularly as Prime Minister in the 1980s.

Very little movement on the internal front so far this morning, however, from Mousavi or anyone else.

Iran's Nuclear Programme: Obama's Balance Wobbles

The Latest from Iran (3 October): Debating Mousavi’s Strategy
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks
Latest Iran Video: Nuclear Official Jalili on CNN (1 October)
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama Remarks on Geneva Talks

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

It only took 24 hours for the Obama Administration, after the "substantial progress" of Thursday's Geneva talks on Iran's nuclear programme, to hit the choppy waters of Washington and Tehran politics.

On Friday morning, it was looking very good for the White House. Most of the US media were putting out the news of Iran's agreement to invite the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the Qom enrichment facility and to ship uranium to Russia to be enriched. They were adding the Administration's gloss that this was all made to a forceful American stance which had pushed the Iranians into concessions.

By Friday afternoon, the public-relations glue had come unstuck, as a State Department briefing turned into black comedy. (Watch the clip from the 8:44 mark.) The first wobble was over the "third-party enrichment" which had supposedly been established. Journalists challenged that Iranian officials were saying only that they had agreed to consider the proposal; the Department spokesman, unprepared for this information, could only warble about an "agreement in principle".

He came off even worse in the second exchange over Iran's invitation to inspect the Qom plant, after he said there was "no hard-and-fast deadline" for the inspections. Why then, journalists clamoured, had Barack Obama pointedly mentioned on Thursday night a "two-week deadline"? Caught between his opening line of flexibility and the inconvenience of the President's firm marker, the spokesman, umm, stammered.

This would all be good voyeuristic fun if it did not pont to the two larger problems for the Administration. The first is that the Iranian Government is not going to go gently into the diplomatic night playing its assigned role. Tehran, in our view, was already going to be conciliatory at the opening discussions in the hope of getting more discussions. It was not going to jump into any hard-and-fast deal.

The spin that the US Government "forced" Iran's concessions only adds to the dfficulty. Not wanting to appear to be forced into anything, Iranian officials "clarify" that firm measures have not been agreed but must be the subject of further talks, in this case, technical discussions in Vienna on 18 October and the next Iran meeting with the 5+1 powers, possibly at the end of this month.

The second and even greater challenge for the Obama Administration from within. There has always been a group of officials in the Executive who saw negotiations as a process that had to be endured before, with the Iranians inevitably breaking the talks and/or agreements, more pressure could be put on Tehran.

So, even as the "significantly positive" outcome of Geneva was being announced, they were tossing a bucket of red herrings to the media. There might be even more "secret" sites that Tehran had not declared. Iran still had enough uranium to make The Bomb. The Israelis were watching carefully. (Juan Cole points out how all these diversions made their way into Friday's New York Times.)

The loudest of these heckles was that, whatever happened at Geneva, The Iranians Weren't Really Serious. Yesterday morning The Wall Street Journal, which might as well declare that it is a propaganda sheet masquerading as news, declared in its opening paragraph, "Analysts cautioned that the Iranians merely may be seeking to defuse pressure for sanctions while continuing their nuclear program." (The two "analysts" were an Israeli reservist general and George W. Bush's "special envoy on nonproliferation issues".)

Lo and behold, this morning The New York Times headlines, "U.S. Wonders if Iran Is Playing for Time or Is Serious on Deal". Helene Cooper splashes about "administration officials" warning "the trick now for Mr. Obama...will be to avoid getting tripped up", which is actually only one "senior" official (Who is he/she? On the side of those pushing for a lasting agreement with the Iranians? On the side of those seeing no prospect of an agreement?) putting out the dampening comment, “That’s the big ‘if,’ isn’t it? Will they do it? No one wants to do a premature victory lap.”

Let's just put this basic comment out, already fearing that it will disappear in the media wash. The Iranian Government is playing this process "long". It is likely to allow an IAEA inspection of Qom, although even this will be subject to discussions on conditions, but other issues including third-party enrichment, will go into a set of committees. Any agreement will take months, rather than weeks, of contact.

From the start, the Obama Administration --- split between different factions --- have been locked into playing the process "short". A quick result had to be obtained, otherwise sanctions would have to be sought quickly. That is why all the fatuous talk of deadlines --- December? September? October? --- has loudly accompanied and even out-shouted the complexities of engagement.

The President has been unable to extricate himself from this unproductive dilemma. So once again, we will have a two-week cycle of domestic fury, even though the Administration has no stick to wield, before the technical talks in Vienna.

Iran's Nuclear Programme: Obama Remarks on Geneva Talks

The Latest from Iran (1 October): From Geneva to “Unity”?

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

OBAMA: Today in Geneva, the United States, along with our fellow permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, namely Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom, as well as Germany, held talks with the Islamic Republic of Iran. These meetings came after several months of intense diplomatic effort.

Upon taking office, I made it clear that the United States was prepared to join our P-5-plus-1 partners as a full participant in talks with Iran. I extended the offer of meaningful engagement to the Iranian government. I committed the United States to a comprehensive effort to strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear power, provided that they live up to their international obligations.

And we have engaged in intensive bilateral and multilateral diplomacy with our P-5-plus-1 partners and with nations around the world to reinforce this point, including a historic U.N. Security Council resolution that was passed unanimously last week.

The result is clear. The P-5-plus-1 is united and we have an international community that has reaffirmed its commitment to nonproliferation and disarmament. That's why the Iranian government heard a clear and unified message from the international community in Geneva.

OBAMA: Iran must demonstrate through concrete steps that it will live up to its responsibilities with regard to its nuclear program.

In pursuit of that goal, today's meeting was a constructive beginning, but it must be followed with constructive action by the Iranian government.

First, Iran must demonstrate its commitment to transparency. Earlier this month we presented clear evidence that Iran has been building a covert nuclear facility in Qom. Since Iran has now agreed to cooperate fully and immediately with the International Atomic Energy Agency, it must grant unfettered access to IAEA inspectors within two weeks.

I've been in close touch with the head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, who will be traveling to Tehran in the days ahead. He has my full support and the Iranian government must grant the IAEA full access to the site in Qom.

Second, Iran must take concrete steps to build confidence that its nuclear program will serve peaceful purposes, steps that meet Iran's obligations under multiple U.N. Security Council resolution. The IAEA proposal that was agreed to in principle today with regard to the Tehran research reactor is a confidence-building step that is consistent with that objective, provided that it transfers Iran's low- enriched uranium to a third country for fuel fabrication.

As I've said before, we support Iran's right to peaceful nuclear power. Taking the step of transferring its low-enriched uranium to a third country would be a step towards building confidence that Iran's program is in fact peaceful.

Going forward, we expect to see swift action. We're committed to serious and meaningful engagement, but we're not interested in talking for the sake of talking. If Iran does not take steps in the near future to live up to its obligations, then the United States will not continue to negotiate indefinitely, and we are prepared to move towards increased pressure.

If Iran takes concrete steps and lives up to its obligations, there is a path towards a better relationship with the United States, increased integration for Iran within the international community, and a better future for all Iranians.

So let me reiterate. This is a constructive beginning, but hard work lies ahead. We've entered a phase of intensive international negotiations. And talk is not substitute for action. Pledges of cooperation must be fulfilled.

We have made it clear that we will do our part to engage the Iranian government on the basis of mutual interests and mutual respect, but our patience is not unlimited.

This is not about singling out Iran; this is not about creating double standards. This is about the global nonproliferation regime and Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy, just as all nations have it, but with that right comes responsibilities.

And the burden of meeting these responsibilities lies with the Iranian government, and they are now the ones that need to make that choice.

Thank you very much.

The Latest from Iran (1 October): From Geneva to "Unity"?

Iran: Mousavi Meeting with Reformists (30 September)
Iran: Karroubi Letter to Rafsanjani (27 September)
Iran Top-Secret: The President’s Gmail Account
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama Backs Himself into a Corner
UPDATED Iran: So What’s This “National Unity Plan”?
The Latest from Iran (30 September): Confusion

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

1955 GMT: How to Claim Victory. The Times of London slaps the headline, "Iran bows to sanctions pressure to allow inspectors", on its summary of the Geneva talks. Hmm.... There's nothing in the article to suggest an Iranian concession to a meaningful sanctions threat, and having been up-close-and-personal with Press TV tonight, trust me, the Iranians aren't bowing. Posturing, even swaggering a bit, but not bowing.

1945 GMT: And Now Obama. The President has given his seal of approval to the US line: a "constructive start" but if Iran does not live up to its obligations, US will move to "increase pressure". He signalled that Mohammed El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, will soon visit Iran. "Hard work lies ahead."

1935 GMT: The Deal? Meanwhile, the Western media continues to miss the announcement, enthusiastically proclaimed by Press TV, that officials from Iran and the "5+1" powers will have technical talks on 18 September on "third-party enrichment".

A further signal why this is important: "Russia is ready to further enrich Iran’s uranium stocks for use as fuel in a civilian research reactor, depending on approval from the United Nations, a person familiar with the matter said today."

1920 GMT: Hold the Line. As the US Government prepares to consider its position after today's talks, no doubt in a domestic environment with critics screeching "appeasement", Hillary Clinton amplified the American statement (see 1753 GMT):

It was a productive day, but the proof of that has not yet come to fruition, so we’ll wait and continue to press our point of view and see what Iran decides to do....We want to see concrete actions and positive results. And I think that today’s meeting opened the door, but let’s see what happens.

1830 GMT: Another twist in the line of Foreign Minister Mottaki over the revelation of the second enrichment plant. Having put forward the case of four Iranian officials and scientists who have "disappeared" since 2007 (see 1350 GMT), Mottaki told the Council for Foreign Relations, "We think in Pittsburgh President Obama was misled based on wrong information and wrong analysis. The wrong analysis was provided by the British. Wrong information by certain terrorist groups."

It appears that, even though this issue has been overtaken by today's talks, Mottaki's statement points to a wider strategy: blame the British for being "hard-line" while praising the US as "flexible" and willing to negotiate if they are not misled by their partners (see 1710 GMT).

1723 GMT: In contrast to the forceful moves by the Iranians, the US post-talk statement is, well, weak: "[Undersecretary Burns] addressed the need for Iran to take concrete and practical steps that are consistent with its international obligations and that will build international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of it program."

1715 GMT: This is already a Huge-Win Day for the Iranian Government, and they're looking to make it bigger. European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana has said that Iran has promised to invite the International Atomic Energy Agency to visit the second enrichment facility near Qom, possibly "in the next couple of weeks". And chief Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili gets a prime-time platform on CNN with Christiane Amanpour this evening.

1710 GMT: Press TV is positively gushing over today's talks with "progress to some extent". They are noting that there will be not only the renewed high-level talks at the end of the month but a meeting on 18 October to consider "third-party enrichment" of uranium for an Irnaian facility. Interestingly, their correspondent says Britain and France seemed to have a hard line in the talks, but the US was "much more flexible".

1640 GMT: We'll have a full analysis tomorrow on the talks in Geneva but here's a teaser: Crunch Time for Obama?

The Iranians have achieved their primary objective, which is to avoid an immediate condemnation and the threat of sanctions from a "breakdown" of today's discussions. That's why they were so eager to let it be known that another round of talks is planned for the end of October.

But, as we've noted, President Obama will now have to face his domestic critics who will wonder, after his tough talk last week on the "secret nuclear plants", why he is even agreeing to another get-together. The response to that may have been laid out by the lead US official at today's talks, Undersecretary of State William Burns, who told National Public Radio yesterday, “If the talks fail, which I assume they will, because of the Iranians, then I think President Obama will be in a stronger position internationally to argue for stronger sanctions,” and predicted the collapse would occur within a month.

Fair enough. What happens, however, if the Iranians continue to give just enough for the prospect of an agreement but not necessarily a grand resolution by 1 November? Will the US Government collapse the talks just to get the showdown that is being pressed upon Obama?

As I told La Stampa earlier this week, the President is caught between two wings in his Administration. He cannot maintain his balance between them forever.

1610 GMT: Confirmation. Well, the Iranians didn't wait long. The delegation was hardly out the door of the Geneva talks when it informed the Islamic Republic News Agency, "The next round of talks will be held at the end of October."

1515 GMT: And Here's The Spin for The Continuing Talks. A US official is telling journalists in Geneva that the tone has been "civil" but Iran's delegation lacks the "cohesion and confidence" to make a deal.

1510 GMT: Score One for Us Good Guys. We projected that the best result coming out of today's meeting in Geneva would be an agreement to have another meeting. This just in from The Los Angeles Times:

Undersecretary of State William Burns met Saeed Jalili, Iran's chief negotiator, "on the margins" of the nuclear talks this morning, said State Department spokesman Robert A. Wood. The meeting lasted about 30 minutes.

The bilateral session came after Iran and representatives of six great powers convened this morning in a secluded villa on the outskirts of Geneva to try to relieve growing international pressure over Tehran's nuclear program. Burns and Jalil went off as the others ate a seafood buffet lunch, then all of diplomats reconvened in a plenary session and were expected to talk for several more hours this afternoon.

U.S. officials said they expected the session to perhaps lead to another meeting.

1505 GMT: Iranian businessman Bijan Khajehpour was released on bail Wednesday, days after US National Public Radio raised his case in an interview with President Ahmadinejad.

1450 GMT: So Which Congressmen Did Iran's Foreign Minister Meet? Washington TV, drawing from the Islamic Republic News Agency, says that Manouchehr Mottaki was not just seeing the sights in Washington. He met two members of the "Foreign Relations Committee" (presumably in the US Senate). They "asked Mottaki whether Iran would allow access to the [[second enrichment] site, to which he replied that Iran has always cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency and was ready to allow inspectors to visit the site". Mottaki added that Iran would “not give up its rights” under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT], but added that Tehran “has no plans to quit the NPT.”

1350 GMT: Espionage Story of the Day. The Arabic newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reports that Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, spekaing with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, has complained about the disappearance of four Iranian officials and scientists, including former Deputy Minister of Defence Alireza Asgari. The newspaper speculates that one of the "kidnapped" quartet may be the source of revelations about Iran's second enrichment facility near Qom.

The story of the missing Iranians has provoked controversy since 2007. Asgari was reported by some sources to have "defected", but Tehran has maintained that he was abducted. Subsequent stories have pointed to an Israeli programme to disrupt Iran's nuclear plans through kidnappings.

1230 GMT: Clerical Movement. Grand Ayatollahs Nasser Makarem-Shirazi and Lotfallah Safi-Golpaygani have met at the latter's house for discussion. It is the first reported meeting of senior clerics after the emergence of a purported "National Unity Plan" and comes a day after Makarem-Shirazi's public call for unity.

1155 GMT: Fars News has posted an article on the morning talks in Geneva, considering subjects and "operational strategies" for the discussions. Saeed Jalili, the Secretary of Iran's National Security Council, led Tehran's delegation in the talks with the "5+1" countries and representatives from the European Union. Under Secretary of State William Burns headed the US team.

1120 GMT: A slow period as we've tended to academic duties. The non-Iranian media is wall-to-wall on the Geneva talks but with precious little to say before a statement is issued after the discussions. Joe Klein of Time takes the Gold Medal for media foolishness with a hot-air "profile", "Ahmadinejad: Iran's Man of Mystery". Its one merit is the irony of Klein's assertion, "The real headline [of meeting Ahmadinejad] was his apparent cluelessness," given that the article is clueless about Iran's nuclear programme, internal politics, and the character of the Iranian President.

The Silver Medal goes to William Broad and David Sanger of The New York Times who, not content with having presented the Administration's portrayal of the "secret nuclear plant" as Qom as Nuclear Bomb Gospel, decide they will write a piece that Iran might have Lots and Lots of such plants. Their evidence? The cryptic words "and others" in a statement from Iran's top nuclear official and, well, that's it really.

0820 GMT: Most Surprising Story of Day (So Far). In contrast to Press TV's "All is Well" story about the reaction to Iran's nuclear programme (0600 GMT), the Iranian Labour News Agency considers the comments of Mohammad El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and headlines, "IAEA chief: Iran should take US offer".

0815 GMT: Telling Half the Story. The New York Times features an article by Michael Slackman on the regional perspective around the talks on Iran's nuclear programme. The piece begins:

As the West raises the pressure on Iran over its nuclear program, Arab governments, especially the small, oil-rich nations in the Persian Gulf, are growing increasingly anxious. But they are concerned not only with the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran but also with the more immediate threat that Iran will destabilize the region if the West presses too hard, according to diplomats, regional analysts and former government officials.

That seems a balanced assessment of the position of Middle Eastern states. So how does the headline portray this balance?

"Possibility of a Nuclear-Armed Iran Alarms Arabs"

0725 GMT: Reading the Clues for Geneva. CNN is the morning mouthpiece for the White House, repeating without considering the assertions of "three senior U.S. administration officials": "The United States wants a United Nations nuclear watchdog to have unfettered access to Iran’s recently revealed uranium enrichment site." And, if Iran doesn't make the correct response, "then isolation and sanctions are other options": “If it’s not going to succeed then there has to be consequences. They will respond. If not they will pay the price.”

Fox's Major Garrett, bizarrely, converts the same briefing into this lead paragraph: "The United States will not push for sanctions against Iran in Thursday's multilateral talks on its nuclear program in Geneva and is prepared to talk one-on-one with Iranian negotiations if such engagement appears 'useful'."

Those who want to do better than CNN or Fox News can read through the transcript of the State Department's "background briefing". Meanwhile, Reza Aslan cuts through the Administration line and the poor reporting to make the key point, "In short, without a real military option and with no guarantee that sanctions will have any effect, all we are left with—like it or not—is these negotiations"

0620 GMT: What the media is missing, as it is distracted by the Geneva talks, is the significant but still far-from-clear change in Iran's political landscape in the last 48 hours.

All indications are that a plan for political reconciliation --- whether it is in draft or final version --- has been circulating. Yesterday there was the dispute over whether Ayatollah Haeri-Sharazi had branded the plan "a lie", the supporting calls for unity from figures like Ayatollah Makarem-Shirazi, and, most importantly, the meeting of Mir Hossein Mousavi with the reformist Parliamentary minority, the Imam Khomeini Line.

Mousavi is clearly working with the notion of a "National Unity Plan", but we're divided here at Enduring America over whether that means Mousavi is reinforcing the Green Wave's challenge to the system or giving up political opposition for a more conciliatory, even accommodating concept of "social movement". Personally, what has disturbed me, putting all the reports together, is the exclusion of Mehdi Karroubi from the process. This feels like a compromise between Mousavi and elements within the regime (to be blunt, Mousavi and Rafsanjani). If true, what that means for the future of President Ahmadinejad is uncertain --- could there even be a vision of a new Government in which Mousavi would have a role? The Supreme Leader, on the other hand, would be in a far stronger position.

We should know more today after Rafsajani and former President Mohammad Khatami meet the Imam Khomeini Line.

0600 GMT: For the world's media, "Iran" will mean little more today than the talks on Tehran's nuclear programme in Geneva. While there are some useful scraps of informaton, most of the coverage relies on generalisations ahead of any meaningful news from Switzerland. Thus, CNN's "IAEA: Iran broke law with nuclear facility" squares off with Press TV's "Exclusive: IAEA letter thanks Iran over notification".

More importantly, almost none of the news outlets are able to read behind the superficial spin from the participating countries. Thus, the emerging picture --- that Washington's high-profile pressure tactics over the "secret nuclear plant" have put the Administration in a corner, as the possibility of significant sanctions recedes --- is missed. So, if Iran does not offer a meaningful concession to US demands today, Obama faces a bigger challenger than Tehran's non-Bomb: the domestic groups who will insist on a punishment that cannot be meted out.