The Iranian delegation is leaving the talks in Geneva standing firm about what it calls its nuclear rights—in others words, there has been no shift in its position about proceeding apace with its enrichment program.  So what was the point of these talks?  This was another case of the world powers meeting with Iran, talking to Iran, and then, watching Iran go home to keep enriching uranium, for what Tehran says is a peaceful nuclear energy program, but which many countries fear is ultimately for weapons.

One senior U.S. Administration official admitted that expectations were low before these talks, and said those expectations were not exceeded.  He said there was a fair amount of Iranian venting and posturing involved in the day and a half of conversations, the first such talks in over a year.

Sifting out the relevant information about what was really achieved in these discussions here is difficult.  Officials involved in the talks were at pains to explain in simple language what the outcome really was.  The bottom line—representatives of the six world powers say they feel it was worth the trip.  The six world powers (The United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China) were unified in their stance about Iran complying with its international obligations.  And they are committed to the dual track approach of engaging Iran, while still simultaneously applying pressure—sanctions.  Because of that, western representatives of the group all say that they find value in sitting and talking with the Iranians, as they try to find a way to engage them in a way that will ultimately lead to a resolution of their concerns, but also one of the representatives to the talks acknowledged that they are very aware of the danger of being talked to death by the Iranians.  The message—as long as Iran gives them the minimum glimmer of hope that talks can be built upon and expanded in the direction the six world powers desire, they will meet again, and plan to next month in Turkey.

Europe’s Foreign Policy Chief Lady Catherine Ashton told the press,

“We have had nearly two days of substantive talks focusing on the Iranian nuclear program and the need for Iran to comply with its international obligations.”

The six world powers, also referred to as the P5+1 or the E3+3, say that about 75% of the time spent with the Iranians was in talks about its nuclear program.  The Iranians, on the other hand, say they did not talk about their nuclear program at all.  That is a huge contradiction and may be chalked up to the way both sides are spinning this event for respective domestic audiences.

So the gulf between Iran and the others remains wide.  The UN Security Council Resolutions passed against Iran all require it to stop enriching uranium.  Today, the six world powers appear quite far from being able to press that demand with the Iranians who, again, continue to say that it is their right to enrich.

Saeed Jalili, Iran’s Chief Nuclear Negotiator, claimed in a press conference, that Iran’s economy is better than it has ever been and its political system rock solid—a fully functioning democracy was roughly the way he described it.  He basically said Iran is a powerhouse that the rest of the world should feel privileged to have a chance to cooperate with on a number of issues.

But the six world powers point to the fact that Iran has been seriously hurt by sanctions, and of course, it is clear from stories emanating from Iran, that intra-regime squabbles and pockets of opposition and discontent among the populace, pose a challenge to Iran’s leadership.

While Iran took the opportunity to discuss the assassination of one of its nuclear scientists last week, to question where Israel got its nuclear weapons from, and to air its views on any number of other issues on its own agenda, a senior U.S. administration official said that the six world powers raised its concerns about Iran’s human rights efforts and its undermining of the Middle East peace process.

A British diplomat here in Geneva said, “The outcome of the meeting reflected what we had hoped to get out of it.”

That said, no one involved in the talks on the side of the six world powers expressed any sense that Iran’s position has shifted, nor has its understanding of international concerns about its nuclear ambitions.

But there is really a commitment to try to resolve the standoff with Iran over its nuclear ambitions through negotiations.

What remains to be seen is whether Iran is just employing stalling tactics or whether it is serious or can ultimately be serious about engaging with the six world powers over their concerns about Iran’s nuclear issue.