Jeffrey LewisE3/EU+3 or P5+1

I am getting punchy waiting for an Iran deal.  In case you are confused/annoyed/amused by the interchangeable use of E3/EU+3 and P5+1.


  1. Ara Barsamian (History)


    Nice Venn diagram; however,

    E3 is irrelevant, so is P5+1.

    Not withstanding the P5 seats at the UN Security Council, the only ones that count in the real world are the US, Russia, China, and Germany. That makes P3+1 which is not on your diagram…

    I hope Obama and Rouhani conclude a “win-win” deal for everybody.

  2. rwendland (History)

    Isn’t it just E3+3 or E3/EU+3 (when EU High Representative is also involved) in the text of the official documents though? The November 2013 document suggests so:

    Strictly, aren’t the E3/EU+3 and P5+1 different groupings? As I understand it it is E3/EU+3 when EU High Representative is also involved, and E3+3 (same as P5+1) when the EU High Representative is not involved.

    • Rob Goldston (History)

      I think you are basically correct. There used to be two groupings,
      EU3+3 and P5+1 = 6 entities.

      Now we have added a third grouping,
      E3/EU+3 = 7 entities.

      This signals that we have 8 members, including the EU itself and Iran, in the total deal.

  3. Ben D (History)
  4. Bradley Laing (History)

    Are you refering to this song in the title above?

    Artist: Chicago
    Album: Chicago II
    Released: 197

  5. Bradley Laing (History)

    Are you referring to the 1970 song by “Chicago,” “25 or 624” in the title, above?

  6. shaheen (History)

    It’s actually:
    “EU3/EU” = “FR, GE, UK / EU (Mogherini)”
    “+3” = “CH, RU, US”

    I won’t comment on what Ara Barsamian said, but ask the Iranians if the French did not matter during the past 18 months of negotiation.

    • Jeffrey (History)

      I considered that, even filling in the bubbles with pictures of the various persons and then I realized … it was time to stop.