From media reports, part of the stalling by Iran appears to reflect internal divisions between hardliners resisting any concessions (and perhaps committed to achieving a nuclear weapons capability) and more moderate elements willing to make accomodations and refrain from rushing the pace of progress toward nuclear arms if Iran can achieve important concessions in return.

the primary mover to isolate and push america to attack iran is israel. what israel fears is 1) america making a strategic grand bargain with iran where iran becomes important than israel in helping american strategic interests in the middle east and 2) israel losing its bully status in the neighborhood which would prevent israel from realizing their greater israel dream.

The neocons haven't gone anywhere. If you want to know the skinny on the sanctions state of play (sorry) just watch the watchers @ the Weekly Standard et al. They know where the action is....

The itchiest trigger fingers are as always, in Congress. They're moving all this sanctions stuff to the forefront via the
"Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act of 2009"; negotiations be damned:

Senator Bob Corker introduced an amendment yesterday calling for these sanctions to be imposed in coordination with Russia and China. The amendment was adopted, and in an interview with THE WEEKLY STANDARD this afternoon, Corker warned that if unilateral U.S. sanctions were imposed, the difference in Iran's imports would "easily be made up by Russia and China." The Obama administration can "exercise some testosterone doing it ourselves," but in Iran, Corker says, "the effect that we can have on refined petroleum is very small."

Of course, targeting gasoline imports was a key plank of Obama's Iran policy during the campaign, and the measure itself seems to have broad bipartisan support in both houses of Congress. During the campaign Obama talked a lot about multilateral sanctions, but in the event he's been unable to secure the support of either Russia or China and looks to have little hope of doing so. Multilateral sanctions would be better than unilateral sanctions, but unilateral sanctions look likely to be the only option.

However, it wasn't the amendment that Corker introduced yesterday that had Iran-watchers talking, it was an amendment he had planned to introduce today but pulled at the last minute. This second amendment would have changed the 'shalls' in the bill to 'mays' -- i.e., the bill would no longer command President Obama to impose petroleum sanctions in 120 days barring some major diplomatic breakthrough (the president shall...), but would instead allow the president to impose those sanctions (the president may...).

Corker offered several rationales for this attempt to change the language. First off, he said, "when we pass this the president has to do it in 120 days...I question the timing." In other words, Corker worries that the language would limit the president's flexibility. However, it's not at all clear that's true -- the bill, like many other pieces of Iran legislation, contains a national security waiver that can be invoked at the president's discretion (it also has several other waivers, including a waiver that would allow the president to waive sanctions on individual companies based in allied countries where the government is cooperating with the United States on the Iran threat).

Corker also said that he "made the point that by using the word 'shall,' they were sending a message of no confidence in the president." Corker said that observation was met by silence from the Democrats in the room, but sources familiar with the history of this legislation note the language was crafted before Obama's election, and add that the use of the word 'shall' is standard legislative language.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/corker_amendment_shall_not_be.asp

The above article mentions other legislative sanctions efforts in addition to cutting off refined petroleum, "attempts to halt the flow of goods into Iran from Middle East ports" among them.

A blockade by any other name?

...a premature push for sanctions.

Premature? Surely you jest. It hardly seems likely that another decade of hemming and hawing will do much good.

Another just in case report from the Happi Warriors @ DEBKAFILE:

Israeli urgently orders two stealth corvettes from Germany DEBKAfile Special Report October 27, 2009, 5:55 PM (GMT+02:00)

German MEKO A-100 Corvette

DEBKAfile's military sources report that the two corvettes are needed to meet the build-up of Iranian submarines and Syria warships in the Mediterranean Sea and defend coastal infrastructure facilities such as power stations and naval bases which Israel intelligence fears will be at risk in a regional war.

The order placed during Israeli chief of staff Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi's three-day visit to Berlin this week as guest of the German high command surprised the defense ministry. Germany is contributing 500 million euros toward the two Dolphin submarines already on order for the Israeli Navy. The new order is worth several million more. German sources report that the Israeli request has been referred to Chancellor Angela Merkel for her to decide.

The German corvette is a 2,200-tonner, 91 meters long and 13.4 meters wide. It carries a crew of 94, a medium-sized helicopter on its deck and 24 weapons systems - 16 sea-to-shore and 8 ship-to-ship launchers adapted to US-made missiles, as well as missile defenses and automatic cannons. It has a range of 7,400 kilometers and maximum speed of 30 knots. The corvette's great advantages for the Israeli navy are its formidable firepower and advanced radar-evading capabilities, making it extremely hard to spot by shore- or ship-based radar.
Before commissioning the warships from Germany, the Israeli Navy researched the market: After the US Lockheed Martin's product proved too pricey - $600 million apiece - purchasing agents opened negotiatons with the Hamburg shipbuilders Blohm and Voss. The initial plan was to have the order subcontracted to Haifa shipyards with Israel's aero industry and Navy installing the weapons systems and electronics. But in view of the spiraling tensions with Iran, Israel's high command decided to set about strengthening the country's marine defenses in the shortest time possible.

Also taken note of was the new clause inserted in the new Merkel government's coalition agreement: promising to phase out the Germany fleet operating off Lebanese shores as part of the UN peacekeeping mission: "Within the scope of the United Nations we will work towards a phased reduction of our German contribution to the Maritime Task Force of UNIFIL with the aim to terminate it."

Because the fleet to be phased out includes two corvettes, the possibility of transferring them directly to Israel instead of sending them back to home base in Germany is under consideration in view of the troublesome vibes besetting in the region.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6343

How very gracious of Angela should this come to pass.

The NeoCons see sanctions as simply an increment towards war.