I have spent part of the evening reading all the comments on the failure of negotiations in Geneva, but I have no definitive conclusion in what I called a diplomatic thriller stronger than Homeland. http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/sena....
The reality is that Israel, as well as Saudi Arabia and the neo-conservatives of all stripes have much to lose with the occurrence of an agreement.
Without going too far back in history, the real or perceived insecurity of Israel allows a puncture of millions of dollars, to which must be added the cost of military training paid by the U.S. budget and a massive endowment of the AIPAC. *
The real or perceived insecurity of Saudi Arabia allows it to act within a troubled global policy, and economically to weigh heavily on the oil markets, like their neighbors and friends of the GCC.
As for the Iranian neo-conservatives, they expect Rohani to lose the difficult gamble of opening.
Nothing is simple in this Rubik's Cube of the complicated Middle East.
If Iran tomorrow is not the big bad wolf then everyone will have to revise their positions, priorities and policies.
Therefore we understand very well that the status quo is something reassuring.
Regarding the role of Laurent Fabius, always very suspicious towards Iran, history might enlighten us; today the disappointment is meeting the expectations and it is established that he did not intervene in the direction of a successful end of the negotiations.
We'll have to wait 20 November, hoping that the disbelief and skepticism, the comfort of the status quo gives way to an agreement that will bring Iran in the concert of nations without the risk of Apocalypse or threats to its neighbors.
* I'm not saying that insecurity is feigned or does not exist; I adopt a formula style to get outside the classic debate on Israel's security.