Iran and Russia are gaining traction toward a potential multibillion-dollar oil pact that may lighten pressure on Tehran in nuclear talks, Reuters reports.
Russia could exchange nonmonetary goods for up to 500,000 barrels of Iranian petroleum each day under the possible arrangement, which may ultimately pave the way for as much as $20 billion in trade, insiders told the news agency for a Wednesday report. The unconfirmed claims came as Iran pursued talks with six world powers on potentially accepting long-term restrictions on its disputed nuclear activities in return for relief from international sanctions.
One expert on punitive economic measures said the petroleum plan “would ease further pressure on Iran’s battered energy sector.”
“If Washington can’t stop this deal, it could serve as a signal to other countries that the United States won’t risk major diplomatic disputes at the expense of the sanctions regime,” according to Mark Dubowitz, who heads the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Washington and its allies hope such penalties will encourage Tehran to clear up global fears that its atomic activities are secretly aimed at establishing a nuclear-bomb capacity.
The U.S. State Department on Wednesday said it could not verify whether Tehran and Moscow had achieved momentum in the oil-swap talks, but spokeswoman Mare Harf said any resulting pact would be “inconsistent” with an interim atomic accord finalized in November. Harf also reaffirmed Washington’s willingness to consider penalizing beneficiaries of the possible Iranian-Russian arrangement.
According to one Iranian insider, the possible pact would call for Moscow to supply Tehran with missiles, as well as help in constructing two new atomic facilities.
Meanwhile, specialists from Tehran were set on Thursday to begin four days of technical nuclear discussions with counterparts from China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, Iran’s Fars News Agency reported.
What We're Following See More »
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."
President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"