International diplomacy out of US hands

And with it the official dawn of a new era in world diplomacy.

With its feet dragged in Afghanistan and Iraq, its hands tied by the Israel lobby, its many crises at home, and its loss of credibility at the world stage when it comes to broker a peace deal, the US is no longer a real player when it comes to diplomacy.
Brazil and Turkey had just reached an agreement with Iran on their nuclear production.

Either way, skilful negotiating by two world leaders undermined the view, widely accepted in Washington, that Iran could only be made to compromise if it was threatened with sanctions and repeated warnings that the US would consider "all options" to block further progress in its nuclear program.

The New York Times is not happy about this: ''The agreement could well UNDERMINE the Obama administration’s chances of securing international approval for punitive measures against Iran.'' This journal which has advocated the war on Iraq and stands, most of the time, as a mouthpiece to Israel's interests in the region (i.e. no peace and war on every country and movement that emerges as strong) seems to consider that sanctions are the normal standard approach. So according to the New York Times, Peace may hinder sanctions and what sanctions can achieve ??? Famine instability and War. This is the logical contrary to their statement but they won't say it...

What this means also is that when countries genuinly want peace they can achieve it. Let Turkey broker the much needed peace between Palestinians and Israelis...I am sure the New York Times won't like it...because it may UNDERMINE current atrocities committed by Israelis toward Palestinians...

UPDATE: But the New York Times doesn't have to worry; In American wrestling parlance, it would be called the "P5 Smackdown". The permanent five members of the Security Council flattened Brazil and Turkey's effort at mediating the crisis, sending a clear message that only the big boys (and they are all boys) make or break the big deals.