The negotiations on the Iranian nuclear issue at a crucial point

The need to conclude the agreement on Iran's nuclear clashes with the contingencies of domestic and foreign policy of the parties involved. The deadline of November 24, the deadline set for what was, according to the best estimates, being the date by which you had to reach a final agreement, is fast approaching, but the positive outlook are really practical. In the group of 5 + 1 (China, Germany, USA, France, UK, Russia), the suspicion that behind the desire to achieve nuclear reactors for civilian purposes, there are actually military purposes. The group of 5 + 1, while heterogeneous in terms of diplomatic, strategic and geopolitical objectives and also in contrast to it, has reached an almost unanimous opinion on the need to prevent Iran from joining the club of the holders of 'nuclear device. In addition, other regional players such as Israel and Saudi Arabia are strongly opposed to the development of nuclear technology to Iran, whose sincerity of purpose have strong doubts. Among other things, a possible consequence of the exasperation of the Saudi monarchy, which has already been much worse relations with Washington because of the willingness of the US to continue the negotiations at all costs, it might just be to develop a nuclear weapon to balance the Iran's arsenal as possible; while not neglect the ever-present Israeli intentions to attack Iran to bomb sites in atomic research. Tehran has always declared the peaceful nature of his research, decision denying any connection with the military, but had to face the pressure from economic sanctions, which have greatly weakened the productive structure and created a heavy inflation. For the White House, the solution of the problem has always been a priority, which has become more urgent since Iran, albeit informally, has sided with the Iraqi forces to fight the Islamic state. Between the two countries, more formally enemies were initiated secret negotiations to reach an agreement to establish certifying the civilian nature of the Iranian project and at the same time, free from economic sanctions. The opinion of the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, is that the opportunity to resolve the dispute in a peaceful manner is close, but, on the contrary, a failure of the negotiations could be a very dangerous scenario for the world balance, because it would in a further compromise the situation is already very difficult, in the Middle East. In these circumstances it is difficult to fault the Secretary of State: Iran, at the moment, it is essential for the containment of the Islamic state, but also in a broader perspective, the stabilization of relations between Washington and Tehran would be the 'beginning of a certain way for the closure of a front always very dangerous. Even in view of the management of energy resources more global, there is an interest that Iran is among the largest producers of oil, lost position with sanctions. However, afterlife, with the best intentions that exist between the negotiators, the practical issues are those that determine the outcome of the negotiation. The central issue is represented by the potential of centrifuges in relation to their ability to enrich uranium, subject to certain construction of nuclear weapons. Another controversial issue is the nature and frequency of inspections, such as the agreement with Iran does not seem to be any closer. Tehran has adopted the tactic of stepping up to try to check as soon as possible the best conditions, but this will completely and immediately impractical for the intentions of the negotiators of the Group 5 + 1. The real problem is that without an agreement on all points there is no agreement on anything, all the different situations under negotiation should reach a solution satisfactory to the parties, otherwise the overall result would be compromised. For these reasons, a possible solution could be represented by a new postponement of the deadline, but this possibility is viewed with concern the difficulties present in the internal political scenarios of a number of countries taking part in the negotiations. This factor is especially present in the United States, where the majority of the congress reached by Republicans, could be an obstacle to Obama's intentions, while Iran has a mirror image with the growing importance of the hardliners of the regime, which is opposed agreements deemed too burdensome for the country. The scenario seems to be less optimistic than diplomacy wants to appear, the rush could be a further obstacle, but the need to reach an agreement soon could lead to the achievement of a rushed at all satisfactory to both parties, leaving the question pretty much always open.