"..Certainty, that any deal with Iran will have to allow them to retain some kind of nuclear enrichment program.."

From MEPGS, December 18:

"President-elect Obama has shown, with the selection of the top members of his National Security team, a certain ruthlessness that is impressing veteran US officials as well as long timeWashington observers. To begin with, by naming Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, Obama has, in the view of a number of observers, effectively sidelined Vice President Biden. "Biden was supposedly selected for his foreign policy experience," noted one State Department official. "I guess watching Biden in action on the [Senate] Foreign Relations Committee did not leave Obama impressed." Another veteran State Department official noted that unlike his predecessor, Obama did not choose to keep his long time foreign policy advisor close by his side. As this official put it, "I guess he figured his Rice unlike Bush's Rice, was best employed out of town."
Instead, Obama named former Marine Commandant, James Jones as his National Security Advisor. Jones, who also served as NATO commander, is highly regarded by the Europeans (especially in France, perhaps because he is fluent in French). Arab diplomats compliment his "worldliness," while Israelis, who have had experience working with him on the ground [Survey, November 22, 2008] found him to be, in the words of one official who dealt with him frequently, "...the complete professional. Someone without a political predisposition." However, US officials, who likely know him best, describe him as "nasty and tough," two traits that may well reflect his new boss' predisposition.
In keeping Robert Gates on as Defense Secretary, at least temporarily, Obama has, again in the view of veteran State Department officials, demonstrated a toughness, this time shutting out those in the Democratic party who expected an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. As one State Department
official argued last week, "Obama's pledge to withdraw all combat troops within sixteen months is a dead letter. It is now the "SOFA"[Status of Forces Agreement] that will govern our actions there."
Iraq's adoption of the SOFA, painstakingly negotiated over the past year, envisions the withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraqi cities by the middle of next year and all of them out of the country by the end of 2011. Elated State Department officials say the agreement demonstrated a larger truth about the political situation in Iraq. As one well-placed official put it, "The Iraqis had to learn how to go for the best and settle for something less."

What made this all possible, say key US officials, is a "virtuous cycle" that began with last year's "Surge." As US troops moved against the insurgents, they also turned the Iraqi security forces into, what one US official calls, "The number one militia in the country." At the same time Prime Minister al- Maliki replaced brigade commanders suspected of sectarianism. Soon weapons' caches were routinely being uncovered and intelligence on "the bad guys" improved dramatically. A "tipping point" was reached, says one key US official, when, in his words, "The Sunnis realized the Shia weren't going to do to them what they had done to the Shia."

Especially pleasing to US officials was seeing Iran having no choice but to acquiesce in the SOFA. "It showed that Iran was prepared to accept the reality of their reduced power in Iraq," said one US analyst. However, if Iran has not achieved its greatest ambitions in Iraq, its power is still on the ascendancy, say most analysts. US officials who have recently visited the region find increasing concern, especially among Gulf Arab states. And just this week, representatives from most of these states along with top diplomats from Egypt, Jordan and Iraq met with their counterparts from the Permanent five members of the UN Security Council and Germany -- who have been trying to rein in Iran's nuclear program. Some analysts believe that the Gulf Arabs fear that any deal with Iran, especially one negotiated by the Obama Administration, may come at their expense. In effect, they see that in return for Iranian concessions on their nuclear enrichment program, the outside powers would acquiesce in a form of Iranian hegemony over the Gulf.
However, US officials say there is long way to go before any kind of deal, let alone one that may unnerve the Arabs, is concluded. So far, Iran has shown little inclination to bargain away its ability to develop a nuclear program. Current US officials, like the leadership in the region, appear to be
waiting for the Obama Administration to confront the issue. The President-elect has given few hints but the expectation among most serving US officials is that an attempt to reach out to Iran on a bi-lateral basis, is inevitable. The questions remaining, therefore are timing, level of involvement and the degree to which US allies will be involved in the process.
Although Secretary Rice was, according to informed sources, given the "green light" to make the Administration's final gesture to Iran by sending US diplomats to man an "interest section" in Teheran, ultimately she was prevailed upon by aides not to do so. "Perhaps it would have been a fitting end to her legacy of turning the Administration away from the military option," said one State Department insider. "But it would have been a `freebie' for Iran and not helped the incoming Administration one bit."

Although some veteran analysts are certain that any deal with Iran will have to allow them to retain some kind of nuclear enrichment program, others argue that Israel will not permit such
an outcome. This will especially be the case, if, as now expected, Benjamin Netanyahu and his hard line Likud party takes power after Israel's parliamentary elections next year. One veteran US analyst, who had many dealings with Netanyahu when he was Israel's Prime Minister in the 1990's, predicts Netanyahu saying in his first meeting with President Obama, "We have a problem with Iran. What are we going to do about it?" [Former Clinton Administration officials still wince at the memory of Netanyahu's overly familiar style with the President. One recalls watching President Clinton try to control his temper during a phone call with Netanyahu, when asked "How's Hillary?"]
Israel's ability to influence US policy when it impinges on its perceived security was most recently on display when Jerusalem, in effect, vetoed a number of arms transfers the Administration was trying to make to the Lebanese Armed Forces. Sale of Apache helicopter gunships was nixed, despite the support of the US Ambassador to Lebanon. In fact, the Lebanese are now in line to receive only single engine (Cessna) aircraft outfitted with air-to-ground missiles.