John Kerry

Yet the US media has covered Israeli complaints that they are not being kept informed -- and actually seemed to imply that the US was being unfair to Israel. The Israeli press (not so much Haaretz which is left leaning) has argued that "as the most affected country" Israel should have been actually involved in the negotiations.

As to what Netanyahu prefers to an agreement, that was the question asked by the Obama administration this weekend. It is beyond strange that neo cons are acting as if they are really concerned because the agreement would be "just for 10 years". Ignoring that the agreement does not preclude any further agreement in 10 years, this ignores that being able to monitro this and prevent it for 10 years is a pretty big deal.

There is really no possibility of tougher INTERNATIONAL sanctions. The Congress might be in danger of being led by Netanyahu, but he simply does not have that power elsewhere. So, Netanyahu may leave just two possibilities - military or Iran not being constrained and possibly working towards a nuclear bomb. (Much as the NYT diminishes any Kerry legacy (which is really also Obama's on foreign policy) - they ignore that Netanyahu's legacy might be the end of Israel as a democratic state, the end of the possibility of a two state solution, and a war with Iran. Personally, I would far prefer the legacy that Kerry/Obama end up with - and I assume that both are working to make the world better - not to get a good grade on their permanent records!