Iran Nuclear Talks

[Jersay]

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran announced on Tuesday it was deferring until next week talks with Russia on its nuclear plans, but gave no sign it was ready to stop enriching uranium on its own soil -- the key element in Moscow's plan.

ADVERTISEMENT

Russia's proposal to enrich uranium on Iran's behalf is designed to allay world fears about Iranian scientists diverting nuclear material into bombs and to defuse a standoff that has already seen Tehran reported to the U.N. Security Council.

Iranian nuclear negotiator Javad Vaeedi said the talks would now start in Moscow on February 20.

"We still want to reach a formula to prove that we will not divert uranium enriched on Iranian soil," he told reporters.

Russia confirmed that Iran had asked to postpone the talks, originally scheduled for Thursday, until Monday.

"We are trying to agree on whether that date is acceptable for the Russian side," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said, RIA news agency reported.

Iran has already undercut the aim of Moscow's proposal by resuming uranium enrichment in underground facilities near the town of Natanz, arguing the Islamic Republic has every right to purify the uranium it mines in its central deserts.

Iranian officials have said Russia will have to alter its terms to gain Tehran's consent for its proposal.

Diplomats in Vienna, home of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said Tehran wanted to spin out dialogue without committing itself to anything, calculating this could make the Security Council hesitate before taking any action against it.

Western countries suspect Iran is seeking enriched uranium to build nuclear weapons and this month persuaded the IAEA's ruling board to report Iran to the council. Iran denies it wants bombs, saying it needs atomic fuel only for power stations.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference in Yerevan there was still room for Iran and Russia to discuss where enrichment would take place.

However, in the past such remarks have indicated Iran's willingness to enrich uranium jointly with Russia, not that it is ready to surrender its right to produce atomic fuel at home.

CALLS FOR DIPLOMACY

Germany and China called for diplomacy to resolve the nuclear dispute with Iran.

"The international community should not give up diplomatic efforts under the IAEA's framework," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said. "A solution through dialogue serves the interests of China, Iran and all parties concerned."

German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung said: "A military solution is not being discussed right now. I hope that if the international community stands together we can find a solution."

Vaeedi also confirmed that Iran had revived small-scale uranium enrichment, which it had stopped for two and a half years while negotiating with European Union powers.

"The order to resume uranium enrichment has been issued and, in accordance with that, the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization has restarted the process," he told reporters.

Iran's parliament passed a law in November binding the government to resume making atomic fuel and limit cooperation with the IAEA if its case went to the Security Council.

However, Vaeedi said Iran would not be able to reach industrial-scale production of atomic fuel quickly.

"We need some time to reach that level with all centrifuges because of the 2-1/2 year suspension. However, the preliminary phases have been launched," he said.

Centrifuges enrich uranium by spinning it at supersonic speed.

Diplomats said in September that Iran could have serious technical difficulties in enriching uranium on an industrial scale, which requires getting centrifuges to work in cascades.

Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said steps were being taken to limit U.N. observation of atomic facilities, previously allowed by Tehran when it was observing the Additional Protocol of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has not ratified the protocol.

"Since the Additional Protocol is not in force any more some of those cameras should be taken out," he told state television.

(Additional reporting by Sophie Hardach in Sestriere, Guy Faulconbridge in Moscow and Mark Heinrich in Vienna)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060214/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_dc

So it appears that this might be resolved.

 

[ElPolaco]

How far will the US go against Iran and still maintain its Shiite allies in Iraq? Even if Israel does the dirty word for the US, it will still be too obvious to them. I guess, thus far, it'll have to let the Europeans give it a go.

 

[darkbeaver]

Ptrodollar Warfare : Dollars Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse by William Clark aug 3rd 2005




Synopsis:
It is not yet clear if a U.S. military expedition will occur in a desperate attempt to maintain petrodollar supremacy. Regardless of the recent National Intelligence Estimate that down-graded Iran’s potential nuclear weapons program, it appears increasingly likely the Bush administration may use the specter of nuclear weapon proliferation as a pretext for an intervention, similar to the fears invoked in the previous WMD campaign regarding Iraq.

If recent stories are correct regarding Cheney’s plan to possibly use another 9/11 terrorist attack as the pretext or casus belli for a U.S. aerial attack against Iran, this would confirm the Bush administration is prepared to undertake a desperate military strategy to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions, while simultaneously attempting to prevent the Iranian oil Bourse from initiating a euro-based system for oil trades.

However, as members of the U.N. Security Council; China, Russia and E.U. nations such as France and Germany would likely veto any U.S.-sponsored U.N. Security Resolution calling the use of force without solid proof of Iranian culpability regarding a terrorist attack in the U.S. A unilateral military strike on Iran would isolate the U.S. government in the eyes of the world community, and it is conceivable that such an overt action could provoke other industrialized nations to strategically abandon the dollar en masse.

Indeed, such an event would create pressure for OPEC and Russia to move towards a monopoly petroeuro system in an effort to cripple the U.S. dollar and thwart the U.S. global military presence. I refer to this in my book as the “rogue nation hypothesis.” (A similar tactic was used by the U.S. to end the 1956 Suez crisis.)

While central bankers throughout the world community would be extremely reluctant to ‘dump the dollar,’ the reasons for any such drastic reaction are likely straightforward from their government’s perspective – the global community is dependent on the oil and gas energy supplies found in the Persian Gulf.

Hence, industrialized nations would likely move in tandem on the currency exchange markets in an effort to thwart the neoconservatives from pursuing their desperate strategy of dominating the world’s largest hydrocarbon energy supply. Any such efforts that resulted in a dollar currency crisis would be undertaken – not to cripple the U.S. dollar and economy as punishment towards the American people per se – but rather to thwart further unilateral warfare and its potentially destructive effects on the critical oil production and shipping infrastructure in the Persian Gulf.

Barring a U.S. attack, it appears imminent that Iran’s euro-denominated oil bourse will open in March 2006. Logically, the most appropriate U.S. strategy is compromise with the E.U. and OPEC towards a dual-currency system for international oil trades.


Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes...known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few…No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
– James Madison, Political Observations, 1795

 

[Mogz]

Even if Israel does the dirty word for the US, it will still be too obvious to them.

What dirty work do you presume they'll do?

 

[I think not]

Iran has already undercut the aim of Moscow's proposal by resuming uranium enrichment in underground facilities near the town of Natanz, arguing the Islamic Republic has every right to purify the uranium it mines in its central deserts.

This is the problem I have with Iran, does it have a right to create nuclear energy or even THE BOMB? Sure it does, what makes anybody else so special. The issue becomes when Russia has offered to enrich uranium and Iran takes an opposite position, which only leads me to believe they have something other than peaceful intentions in mind.

They can just as easily stick it to the West by saying I told you so, we do not intend to use uranium to make bombs, Russia can do it for us, and face everybody down. But they are taking a hard stance, coupled with officially declaring they want to wipe Israel off the map, I say it's time Iran get's serious.

By serious I mean, if they think they will play the hardline and get away with it, they are sadly mistaken. They are making the error in assuming Europe and the US are in opposite positions, as they were during Iraq. I doubt a full blown invasion will occur, most likely air strikes and most likely by Israel, the Israelis aren't going to sit around waiting for the international community while Iran gets moving.

 

[Mogz]

most likely air strikes and most likely by Israel, the Israelis aren't going to sit around waiting for the international community while Iran gets moving.

It won't happen brother, so several reasons. If Israel launched air strikes on Iran, every Arab nation would invade Israel. While the Israeli Defence Force is an excellent fighting force, they'd still be heavily out numbered. However that aspect shouldn't even be humoured seeing as Israeli strike aircraft would have a hard time hitting targets in Iran. Look at a map of the Middle East, look at the terrain Israeli aircraft would have to cross in order to even reach Iran, namely Jordan/Syria. During the Yom Kippur War, Syria was defeated because their forces outpaced their air defence and the Israeli Air Force obliterated Syrian ground forces, thus buying their own ground forces time to reinforce. As a result of lessons learned, both Syria and Jordan maintain large and well trained Armys, each with active air-defence forces, consisting of; SA-13 and SA-14's, as well as ZSU-23 radar-controlled anti-aircraft guns. Any Israeli aircraft trying to cross either of those nations on their way to Iran would be cut to pieces.

 

[I think not]

Hey Mogz, I don't have a head for military strategy, if it is not feasible for the Israelis striking Iran, I am sure some way somehow they will do what they have to do, either by way of Mossad or other means. I assumed they would strike Iran, since they have done the same thing in Iraq, either way, Iran isn't getting what they want. IMO.

 

[Mogz]

Oh don't get me wrong, I agree that Iran will never be allowed to enrich their own uranium. I was just point out that Israel would be in a real pickle if the World decides to drag their heels. I will for sure agree that if it did come to it, Israel would no doubt employ Mossad operatives in conjection with Shabak (Shin Bet) intelligence

 

[the caracal kid]

Iran will eventually enrich its own uranium.

 

[ElPolaco]

Re: RE: Iran Nuclear Talks

Even if Israel does the dirty word for the US, it will still be too obvious to them.

What dirty work do you presume they'll do?

bomb whatever the US wants bombed in Iran so the US doesn't have to do it themselves and hopefully not alienating their Shiite allies in Iraq

 

[I think not]

France Says Iran Making Arms

The foreign minister bluntly accuses Tehran of having a clandestine atomic program, but Germany is optimistic and Britain is cautious.

From Associated Press

PARIS — France on Thursday accused Iran of secretly making nuclear weapons, in remarks that echoed the tough U.S. stance on Tehran's disputed atomic program.

The accusation by French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy — which Iran quickly denied — appeared to reflect mounting exasperation and a tougher stance by one of three key European negotiators.

"No civilian nuclear program can explain the Iranian nuclear program. It is a clandestine military nuclear program," Douste-Blazy said on the France 2 television network.

By contrast, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Thursday that she was "truly optimistic, I would even say very optimistic, that we can do everything to solve this conflict with diplomatic means."

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was cautious, saying there were "strong suspicions internationally that Iran may be seeking … to develop a nuclear weapons capability," but "we do not have absolute proof."

The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, voted this month to refer Tehran to the U.N. Security Council, but Russia, a close ally of Iran, insisted that the council not take up the issue until March. Tehran subsequently resumed small-scale uranium enrichment.

The next big test comes Monday when Iranian-Russian talks begin in Moscow on a proposal to move Iran's enrichment program to Russia and suspend enrichment on Iranian soil.

Tensions over Iran are likely to diminish if Tehran agrees to the Russian proposal — and to balloon if it does not.

"The international community has sent a very firm message in telling the Iranians to return to reason and suspend all nuclear activity and the enrichment and conversion of uranium, but they aren't listening to us," Douste-Blazy said.

"Now it's up to the Security Council to say what it will do, what means it will use to stop, to manage, to halt this terrible crisis of nuclear proliferation caused by Iran," he said.

Link

 

[Mogz]

bomb whatever the US wants bombed in Iran so the US doesn't have to do it themselves and hopefully not alienating their Shiite allies in Iraq

Do you even read every post in this thread?:

most likely air strikes and most likely by Israel, the Israelis aren't going to sit around waiting for the international community while Iran gets moving.

It won't happen brother, so several reasons. If Israel launched air strikes on Iran, every Arab nation would invade Israel. While the Israeli Defence Force is an excellent fighting force, they'd still be heavily out numbered. However that aspect shouldn't even be humoured seeing as Israeli strike aircraft would have a hard time hitting targets in Iran. Look at a map of the Middle East, look at the terrain Israeli aircraft would have to cross in order to even reach Iran, namely Jordan/Syria. During the Yom Kippur War, Syria was defeated because their forces outpaced their air defence and the Israeli Air Force obliterated Syrian ground forces, thus buying their own ground forces time to reinforce. As a result of lessons learned, both Syria and Jordan maintain large and well trained Armys, each with active air-defence forces, consisting of; SA-13 and SA-14's, as well as ZSU-23 radar-controlled anti-aircraft guns. Any Israeli aircraft trying to cross either of those nations on their way to Iran would be cut to pieces.