The nuclear deal and the lebanese president

Dear Reader,
Greetings and Good Day,

It is a fact that there are some historic periods that imprint an important course.
The treaty of Westphalia, the French revolution, the nascent USA , the end of the Chinese Empire,
the post WW2 international institutions, the fall of the wall of Berlin, the downturn of 2008 and finally,
the moving dynamics in geopolitics and the re-order / reform of the world in the 21st century.

While there are different strategic views expressed by Naumann, Mackinder , Mahan , Spykman, Brzezinski, and Cohen, it goes without saying that solid positive commercial balances enable any major state to dedicate resources for research of new armaments.
These trade pluses create also the assets to train capable armies ready to deploy and to project dominant
fire power in different areas of the globe.
Trade, Markets, resources, arms, research and education, played at unison with nuanced diplomacy will aggrandize the valor of power and influence.

Considering that first rank nations are the US, China, India, Japan, UK, Russia and Europe (rotating around the Franco- German entente), it is likely that influencing events will require economies to develop security for the citizenry, by the means of a foreign policy balancing and savvy international relations.

In an ever evolving war fare panorama, one can assess the importance of sea trade, energy resources, water basins, arable lands, technologies and new armaments.

A reorder of the world will much depend on the equilibrium between existing powers and emerging ones, the first rank powers and the second rank ones ( Brazil, Indonesia, Turkey, Iran, Israel , Kenya, Vietnam, KSA and Egypt, South Africa, Australia, Canada).
China and the US are already leading in different sectors, yet these two front runners, alternate a dominant leopard gaze to an asymmetric bi-colorful cooperation/competition.
Several areas require major attention to acquire primary role.
Jurisprudence, Immigration, space technology, arms development, international empowerment in resolving regional crisis, soft power, and so on, are all fields where China will need to intensify its efforts to reach out to the global audience as a leader.
While the US needs to develop infrastructure, reinvent the US significance and reaffirm its guidance in reforms.
It is not sufficient to build railroads, to activate a pearl strategy, or to educate millions of citizens, all this is a preliminary phase to transform the leopard gaze into a full advent for China and the same goes for the US in accelerating the pace to recognize the need for immediate action on the global sphere to reform the international institutions by giving more power to rising nations.

Unfortunately Russia is acting in an opposite direction to the course of history, as it could be a nuclear , neutral and new country rather than a revanchist one fueled by bully-ism and mafia practices.

Recently everyone is debating the nuclear deal with Iran, and while the US intervention to help countries empower their institutions brought some benefits (Iraqi elections) it also unintentionally wreaked havoc on the Israeli eastern and northern fronts (Sciite crescent, ISIS appearance in Mosul and Syrian Crisis).
As for Israel the power play between regional actors Iran, KSA, Turkey and Egypt may well threaten the essence of the nationhood.
Speeches are given and ironically all administrations involved, US, Iranian, KSA and Israeli are committing their own mistakes.
Fretting a nuclear deal at any cost by July can produce tensions and unnecessary reactions, and this is exactly where old Chinese adage will be most relevant. We mostly need the strategic harmony to rein and this will require a slower nuance in the negotiations tempo, although the contour of the agreement is mostly delineated.
In its map management of world theaters, the US inevitably has to detect long term scenarios
where policy will be pursued.
The nuclear deal will have ramifications in Syria and Lebanon, where in the first a transition government is the only rational outcome far from any Iranian sponsored bottom up effort to transform a diverse society into a flattened one as per Basij grip.
While in the latter only a secular president ( better female ) capable to entice and implement reforms will be the rational solution far from any Iranian effort to impose an old general (Michel Aoun) capable to make much talk and achieve poor deeds.
We know that Iran is entangled in Iraq and Yemen and trying to build up military capability and a regional role that stretches beyond its classic geographic sphere, affecting not only the Gulf States but also the economies of the Eastern Mediterranean and the basin hydrocarbon resources. But we know also that ISRAEL initiated several military conflicts, and possesses nuclear active war heads and deterrents, while pursuing an illegal policy of settlements without respect to the Palestinian rights and narrative.
Above all the importance of the deal is being an integral part of the trust building process and of the future intentions.
The contribution for the next meeting in Switzerland, in the midst of a great US employment rate ( even if one million jobs are still needed) and a beneficial Chinese slow down ( the new normal), is to advance a US/ Sino solution.
The idea is that the deal can be announced on a date; and start counting down the duration retroactively from another one.
The deal can be announced in Norouz 2016 (sixteen) and the start for counting the duration can be from September 2015 (fifteen|. Being the timing of the announcement integral part of the trust building measures, one can work meanwhile a letter of intent which will reinforce the joint memorandum of understanding.
As for the other aspects, I think that a tandem of a sovereign national Iranian declaration by September 15, specifying (the number of centrifuges, the level of enrichment and the quantities inside and outside national soil….) , to be coupled with unfettered inspections and verifiable IAEA updates, will pave the way for the US presidential action to ease some sanctions by September 16 , one year later;( although the sanctions architecture is so complex and dates back to the administration of Jimmy Carter and has ramifications within the UN and the EU and the SWIFT dynamics) .
The Iranian announcement will also clarify accurately the purpose of Arak and Fordow and subject both to verifications.
Year by year , for 8 or 10 years, this will go on, and ultimately we will have reinforced the Iranian liberal forces rather than alienating them as indicated by the stubborn reasoning of the settlements enforcers in Israel.
In fact, while it is true that after the duration of 8 years or 10 , the sunset clause may deliver an Iranian program similar to Holland or Japan, it is also true that Iran would have elected twice a new parliament and its economic growth inevitably elevated from actual levels, will generate absolute changes in the structure of the state.
Everyone would profit from above to form a decade of regional easiness.

Thank you,