Iran’s supreme leader dismisses direct US talks

[karynnj]

1. Interesting in that they are saying that the US did not reward them for

the secret meetings. While this is not surprising - or new, it does show that the hard liners in Iran are using that against the ongoing negotiations. (ie - saying - in essence - when we tried, the US gave us nothing for doing so.)

From the US POV, even Obama/Kerry would say that it was ONLY when they agreed to the interim agreement that made concessions the P5 wanted made. In addition, they have made the point that the reduction for the interim agreement is only small.

Parallel to their hardliners stating the negotiations have given them nothing (the direct US) or little, while asking much of them -- our "hardliners", which unfortunately include most of our Congress, led by Menendez, even as the negotiations continue want INCREASED sanctions. This in spite of Iran having abided by the interim agreement. Note that Clinton somewhat aligned herself with the Netanyahu and the hardliners in the Goldberg interview. One question is the impact of her comments as the likely next President. (Would they push Iran to deal with the less hostile Obama or consider that he is a lame duck and - Republican or Democratic - the next President might reverse any relaxations in sanctions?)

As has been the case since negotiations started, Rouhani (on Iran's side) and Obama (on ours) have had to fight their own hardliners. Both need to argue the gains that could happen through negotiations. Both have hardliners wanting to argue that they got nothing and could gain more through intransigence.