Category Archives: nuclear issues

U.S. accepts offer from Tehran for broad talks

U.S. accepts offer from Tehran for broad talks
By Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, September 12, 2009

The United States has decided to ignore Iran’s refusal to discuss its nuclear program and instead accept a vague Iranian plan for talks on security issues as the opening gambit to draw Tehran into real negotiation.

The effort to “test” Iran’s intentions, announced on Friday, came after Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said his country is skeptical of the need for new sanctions on Iran, giving the Americans little choice but to treat seriously Iran’s latest offer.

Iran this week ruled out talks on its program, instead offering a five-page plan that it said would lay the groundwork for peace and stability in the region. The document, first posted Thursday on the Web site of ProPublica news service, made no reference to international demands that Iran suspend its efforts to enrich uranium, but did mention ending proliferation in nuclear weapons as well as a broad offer of dialogue. [continued…]

Why Washington should welcome Iran’s broadening of the agenda
By Trita Parsi, Huffington Post, September 11, 2009

The Iranian proposal is best understood not from the prism of the West’s focus on the nuclear program, but from the vantage point of Iran’s long standing objective to be recognized as a regional power with a permanent seat at the table of regional decision making. Iran believes it suffers from severe role deficit — though it is one of the most powerful countries in the region, its neighbors view it by and large as a disruptive, anti-status quo power and have consequently refrained from giving it access to recognized and institutionalized avenues of influence.

After all, the reigning order in the Middle East is one defined and upheld by the United States, which for the past thirty years has sought Iran’s isolation and exclusion, not its inclusion and rehabilitation. Breaking out of this isolation and forcing Washington and the regional capitols to grant Iran the role it craves have been overarching strategic goals of Iranian foreign policy for several decades now.

Iran believes that the nuclear stand-off provides it with an opportunity to achieve this objective. By broadening the agenda for negotiations, Iran takes the opportunity to discuss with the great powers matters where the views of the Iranian government hardly have been taken into account in the past. The broader aim is to institutionalize the great power’s recognition of Iran’s role and seat at the table.

Perhaps more importantly, the Iranians refuse to permit the P5 plus 1 to single-handedly set the parameters of the talks. By presenting its own proposal, Iran is introducing its own parameters. The Iranians are in essence negotiating about the shape of the table before negotiating matters of substance. This is hardly surprising. During the EU-Iranian negotiations on the nuclear issue, Tehran was immensely frustrated by Europe’s dismissal of several Iranian proposals and its insistence on solely discussing its own set of ideas and demands. By now, Iran seems determined not to let that happen again. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Iran urges disposal of all nuclear arms

Iran urges disposal of all nuclear arms
By Thomas Erdbrink, Washington Post, September 11, 2009

Iran is not prepared to discuss halting its uranium enrichment program in response to Western demands but is proposing instead a worldwide control system aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s top political aide said in an interview Thursday.

In a set of proposals handed to the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany on Wednesday, Iran also offered to cooperate on solving problems in Afghanistan and fighting terrorism and to collaborate on oil and gas projects, Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi said. A longtime confidant of the president’s, Samareh Hashemi is reportedly being considered for the key post of first vice president in Ahmadinejad’s new government.

As described by Samareh Hashemi, Iran’s offer is similar to a call by President Obama in April to eliminate the world’s nuclear weapons. Later this month, Obama is scheduled to chair a special session of the U.N. General Assembly’s annual meeting aimed at seeking consensus on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, rather than targeting individual nations such as Iran and North Korea. Ahmadinejad is also scheduled to attend the U.N. meeting and has said he is ready to debate Obama publicly.

“It’s not really responsive to our greatest concern, which is obviously Iran’s nuclear program,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said of Tehran’s package of proposals. “Iran reiterated its view that as far as it is concerned, its nuclear file is closed. . . . That is certainly not the case. There are many outstanding issues.” [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — As usual, Iran’s position is portrayed as being one of intransigence, yet at the core of the conflict here is a dispute over whether one side can claim the “right” to dictate the parameters of engagement. The US and its allies are in effect saying: we are the ones who get to set the agenda.

Is 2009 a real change from 2008? I’m still waiting to spot the difference.

The specific nuclear clause in Iran’s proposal is this:

Promoting the universality of NPT mobilizing global resolve and putting into action real and fundamental programmes toward complete disarmament and preventing development and proliferation of nuclear, chemical and microbial weapons.

How serious a proposal is this?

In a way it’s clearly simply a rhetorical challenge. It’s a way of calling Obama’s bluff. Was his Prague declaration more than a piece of campaign-style fluff? A way of offering Europeans a feel-good moment that would make his tour Kennedyesque? Or was he serious?

If nuclear disarmament is ever going to reach the negotiating table then the Middle East’s sole nuclear power is first going to have to come out of the closet. And this goes to the heart of the current impasse: Iran’s opponents insist that the nuclear file cannot include discussion about Israel’s nuclear weapons. Iran must curtail its nuclear aspirations (even though we don’t actually know what they are) while Israel is at liberty to conceal its nuclear actualities.

“They’re baaaaack….”
By Stephen Walt, Foreign Policy, September 11, 2009

When I started blogging back in January, one of my early posts questioned the belief that Obama’s election had ended talk of military action against Iran. I thought this view was “almost certainly premature,” because I didn’t think a rapid diplomatic breakthrough was likely and I knew that advocates of a more forceful approach would soon come out of the woodwork and start pushing the new administration to get tough with Tehran.

Well, I hate to say I told you so, but … Right on cue, Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal had an op-ed from former Senators Dan Coats and Chuck Robb and retired Air Force general Chuck Wald, recommending that Obama “begin preparations for the use of military options” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. They argue that keeping the threat of force “on the table” is the only way to achieve a diplomatic solution, but they also make it clear that they favor bombing Iran if diplomacy fails. In their words, “making preparations now will enable the president, should all other measures fail to bring Tehran to the negotiating table, to use military force to retard Iran’s nuclear program.” [continued…]

Russia says sanctions against Iran are unlikely
By Clifford J Levy, New York Times, September 11, 2009

Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov on Thursday all but ruled out imposing new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, brushing aside growing Western concerns that Iran had made significant progress in recent months in a bid for nuclear weapons.

Mr. Lavrov said he believed that a new set of proposals that Iran gave to European nations on Wednesday offered a viable basis for negotiations to end the dispute. He said he did not believe that the United Nations Security Council would approve new sanctions against Iran, which could ban Iran from exporting oil or importing gasoline.

“Based on a brief review of the Iranian papers, my impression is there is something there to use,” Mr. Lavrov said at a gathering of experts on Russia. “The most important thing is Iran is ready for a comprehensive discussion of the situation, what positive role it can play in Iraq, Afghanistan and the region.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Netanyahu’s secret Moscow visit was part of campaign against missile sales to Iran

Netanyahu’s secret Moscow visit was part of campaign against missile sales to Iran
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz, September 10, 2009

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trip to Moscow on Monday was part of quiet diplomacy between Russia and Israel over Russia’s plan to supply S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Iran, Haaretz has learned.

A senior government source in Jerusalem confirmed yesterday that Netanyahu was in Russia for talks on security issues, particularly the sale of Russian weapons to Iran.

The missiles could help Iran protect its nuclear facilities from attack.

The purpose of the prime minister’s trip, disclosed to only a few government officials, was to persuade senior officials in Russia’s government and security establishment not to move ahead on a deal to give Iran the missiles.

The discussion also dealt with Russia’s refusal to back more sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. Continue reading →

Facebooktwittermail

US Jewish leaders push Obama to act on Iran

US Jewish leaders push Obama to act on Iran
By Hilary Leila Kreiger, Jerusalem Post, September 10, 2009

Several hundred Jewish leaders and activists are planning to arrive here Thursday to urge top Obama administration officials and US congressmen to take action on Iran.

They are pushing for Congress to quickly pass an Iran sanctions bill sponsored by US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman and otherwise take serious economic and diplomatic steps to pressure Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear capabilities that threaten Israel.

“Congress is back, legislation is on the agenda, and this is September, when at some level decisions are being made in connection with Iran,” Anti-Defamation League Washington Director Jess Hordes said of the planning of the event.

His organization will be joining the United Jewish Communities, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the National Conference of Soviet Jewry and several other groups as part of the effort. [continued…]

U.S. says Iran could expedite nuclear bomb
By David E. Sanger, New York Times, September 10, 2009

American intelligence agencies have concluded in recent months that Iran has created enough nuclear fuel to make a rapid, if risky, sprint for a nuclear weapon. But new intelligence reports delivered to the White House say that the country has deliberately stopped short of the critical last steps to make a bomb.

In the first public acknowledgment of the intelligence findings, the American ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency declared on Wednesday that Iran now had what he called a “possible breakout capacity” if it decided to enrich its stockpile of uranium, converting it to bomb-grade material.

The statement by the ambassador, Glyn Davies, was intended to put pressure on American allies to move toward far more severe sanctions against Iran this month, perhaps including a cutoff of gasoline to the country, if it failed to take up President Obama’s invitation for serious negotiations. But it could also complicate the administration’s efforts to persuade an increasingly impatient Israeli government to give diplomacy more time to work, and hold off from a military strike against Iran’s facilities. [continued…]

Iran dims hopes for diplomacy
By Farnaz Fassihi and Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, September 10, 2009

ran rejected any compromise with the West over its nuclear program Wednesday, as blunt comments from the Obama administration over Tehran’s bomb-making capability suggested that the two sides were headed toward a renewed diplomatic crisis.

Iran offered Western officials a long-awaited package of proposals to restart negotiations over its nuclear program. But diplomats who viewed the offer Wednesday said the document of fewer than 10 pages essentially ignored questions over Iran’s production of nuclear fuel and instead focused broadly on other international issues.

It made no mention of Tehran’s willingness to suspend its uranium-enrichment activities or to enter into substantive talks about the future of its nuclear program, they said. [continued…]

Russia ‘delivers SAMs to Syria’
UPI, September 4, 2009

Russia has begun deliveries of Pantsir S1 air-defense missiles to Syria, some of which are expected to be passed on to Iran, Syria’s strategic ally that has largely bankrolled the deal, according to the Interfax-AVN military news agency.

Interfax quoted Yuriy Savenkov, deputy director general of the Instrument Design Bureau, or KBP, as saying that deliveries started several weeks ago. KBP produces the Pantsir and other high-precision weapons.

Meantime, Kommersant quoted Alexei Fedorov, head of Russia’s United Aircraft Corp., as confirming the existence of a 2007 contract with Syria for eight twin-engined MiG-31E interceptors.

This aircraft, NATO codename Foxhound, can fly at three times the speed of sound and engage several targets at a range of up to 110 miles simultaneously. [continued…]

Taking Iran seriously
By Daniel R Coats, Charles S Robb and Charles Wald, Wall Street Journal, September 10, 2009

Given Iran’s shortening nuclear timetable and diplomatic challenges for forging an international consensus on sanctions, we urge Mr. Obama simultaneously to begin preparations for the use of military options. Now is the time for the president to reinforce his commitment to “use all elements of American power to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon,” as he stated in February. We believe only a credible U.S. military threat can make possible a peaceful solution.

By showing that he has not taken the military option off the table, Mr. Obama may also be able to convince Israel to forgo a unilateral military strike while forcing Tehran to recognize the costs of its nuclear defiance. Furthermore, making preparations now will enable the president, should all other measures fail to bring Tehran to the negotiating table, to use military force to retard Iran’s nuclear program. We do not downplay the risks of this option and recognize its complications, but we do believe it to be a feasible option of last resort. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Ahmadinejad invites six powers to Tehran

Ahmadinejad invites six powers to Tehran
By Thomas Erdbrink, Washington Post, September 8, 2009

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday invited representatives from a group of six world powers, including the United States, to Tehran, but he said negotiations over his country’s right to a nuclear program would be off the table.

Discussion on the nuclear issue, he told reporters at a news conference, is “finished.”

“We will never negotiate on the Iranian nation’s obvious rights,” he said, adding that Iran would not halt its uranium enrichment efforts. Ahmadinejad said Iran had prepared a proposal for breaking the deadlock on its nuclear program, and he asked diplomats to come to Tehran to pick it up. [continued…]

Ahmadinejad levels new broadside at opponents
By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2009

Three months after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad derided his opponents as “dirt and dust,” sending hundreds of thousands of angry protesters into the streets, he risked enraging them again Monday by likening them to “pollutants” staining “the gown of the revolution.”

The comment, during prepared remarks at a news conference, drew an immediate rebuke from a conservative clerical association in the holy city of Qom, which urged the president and his staff to “concentrate their minds seriously on economic woes and social challenges and avoid uttering unnecessary and provocative remarks.”

But along with Ahmadinejad’s defiant and boastful tone on the sensitive nuclear issue, Monday’s statement also suggested that three months of the worst domestic unrest in the Islamic Republic’s history had not caused the president to change his ways. [continued…]

Khamenei tells Ahmadinejad to listen to criticism
By Hiedeh Farmani, AFP, September 7, 2009

Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to listen to “benevolent criticism” as the hardliner began another term in office amid opposition claims his re-election was fraudulent.

“There is internal criticism backed by foreign media with the aim of sabotage but there is also benevolent criticism which may not come from supporters of the government but they contain good comments,” Khamenei said in a meeting with Ahmadinejad and his cabinet, state television reported.

He called on the government to have its “ears open to criticism.”

Also on Monday a leading Iranian conservative clerical group told Ahmadinejad to avoid “provocative” comments, in a first such message to the hardliner whose disputed re-election has bitterly divided the political elite. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

A nuclear deadline looms for Iran — and for Obama

A nuclear deadline looms for Iran — and for Obama
By Tony Karon, Time, September 3, 2009

President Barack Obama took office promising to pursue a diplomatic solution to the standoff over Iran’s nuclear program, but so far, he’s gotten little out of Tehran. So little, in fact, that the President has given Iran a Sept. 15 deadline to respond positively to his offer of negotiations, or face a heightening of sanctions. As U.S. officials huddled with European, Russian and Chinese counterparts in Germany on Wednesday to review the issue, Iran signaled that it will, indeed, respond — by offering its own package of proposals to achieve a diplomatic resolution to the standoff. Western leaders at the meeting in Germany urged Iran to agree to a meeting with Russia, China, the key European nations and the U.S. before Sept. 23. But nobody is expecting Iran’s proposals to come close to meeting current Western demands, and that could leave Obama facing the unenviable choice either of being painted as feckless, or else moving down a road of escalation that puts a diplomatic solution further beyond reach. [continued…]

Iran’s flip-flopper supreme
By Roger Cohen, New York Times, September 3, 2009

Will the real Ayatollah Ali Khamenei please stand up?

On June 19, a week after Iran’s disputed presidential election, the supreme leader shed the garb of the lofty arbiter to deliver a raging sermon in which he warned of “bloodshed and chaos” in Tehran if protests continued. They did, the next day, and I will never forget the blood that flowed at Khamenei’s behest.

Khamenei, abandoning the plausible deniability of the Prophet’s avatar, opting instead for perilous political partisanship, said then: “Please see the hungry wolves in ambush who are gradually removing their mask of diplomacy to show their true faces.” He identified the most evil of these foreign wolves as “the British government,” no less.

Now, 10 weeks later, with the Iranian revolutionary establishment still shaken by the brazenness of the June 12 electoral fraud and the rashness of the supreme leader’s gambit, Khamenei declares: “I don’t accuse the leaders of the recent incidents of being affiliated with foreign countries, including the United States and Britain, since the issue has not been proven to me.”

Well, sir, which is it? [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

How the US Congress plans on supporting the Iranian Revolutionary Guard

Buying American in Tehran
By Jerry Guo, New York Times, September 2, 2009

American sanctions against this country are not only obviously ineffective, … they often have unintended consequences that hurt American interests.

President George W. Bush’s 2005 sanctions on financial assets, meant to crack down on rogue banks facilitating Iran’s nuclear program, had two unforeseen side effects. Freezing the financial assets of these banks increased the price of credit, making it more costly for honest financial firms like ours to operate. It also increased the value of Western goods like TV satellite dishes, cigarettes and alcohol, which the Revolutionary Guards sell on the black market, netting an estimated $12 billion a year.

Today, five members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany are to meet to consider cutting off Iran’s supply of imported gasoline and diesel — which accounts for 40 percent of the country’s total consumption — if the regime does not agree to restart negotiations over its nuclear weapons program by the end of this month. Sadly, though, the only people such sanctions would hurt would be the poor, who would face higher prices for food and bus fare.

Sanctions against foreign investment firms hurt ordinary Iranians, too, because those businesses pour money into companies that make medicine and build roads and housing, providing jobs for the millions of young Iranians who graduate each year with limited job prospects.

Further isolating Iran economically may in fact play right into the hands of Revolutionary Guard hard-liners. Tougher sanctions would rally this fratricidal conservative bloc against an old common enemy and help the Guards’ many businesses, which include smuggling goods through secret landing spots on the coast. [continued…]

Iran says it’s ready to reopen nuclear talks
By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times, September 2, 2009

Iran’s top nuclear negotiator said Tuesday that the country was prepared to resume talks with world powers over its contentious nuclear technology program and that it had prepared a package of proposals for discussions.

Saeed Jalili, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and its point person on the nuclear issue, did not disclose details of the package but said that it would be an updated version of one submitted last year. That package was criticized by Western countries for failing to address key points of disagreement.

Still, Jalili’s comments were the most substantive official remarks on the nuclear issue since the contentious June 12 election and could give the Obama administration, which has offered to have direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program, an opportunity to try to engage Tehran before resorting to a fresh round of sanctions. [continued…]

Purge of Iranian universities is feared
By Michael Slackman, New York Times, September 2, 2009

As Iran’s universities prepare to start classes this month, there is growing concern within the academic community that the government will purge political and social science departments of professors and curriculums deemed “un-Islamic,” according to academics and political analysts inside and outside Iran.

The fears have been stoked by speeches by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as well as by confessions of political prisoners, that suggest that the study of secular topics and ideas has made universities incubators for the political unrest unleashed after the disputed presidential election in June.

Ayatollah Khamenei said this week that the study of social sciences “promotes doubts and uncertainty.” He urged “ardent defenders of Islam” to review the human sciences that are taught in Iran’s universities and that he said “promote secularism,” according to Iranian news services. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Pressuring Iran on nukes: would a gas embargo help?

Pressuring Iran on nukes: would a gas embargo help?
Time, August 31, 2009

While the Obama Administration may think that a gasoline embargo, even a partial one, would pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its nuclear activities, Tehran may be hoping for just that sanction to help it with one of its longtime goals: reducing gasoline consumption. Indeed, the Iranian government, which has been subsidizing pump prices for years and keeping them well below the international market price (at a huge burden to the national budget), would love the U.S. to take the political hit for helping to end the subsidies.

Former President Mohammad Khatami stated that his greatest economic failure during his tenure was not reducing the massive subsidies the Iranian government spends to keep gas prices low. Every year, his government had to draw millions of dollars from Iran’s special “rainy day” oil revenue reserve fund in order to pay out the subsidies. By 2003, the leaders today associated with the ongoing Green Movement opposition — Khatami, Mehdi Karroubi and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani — all supported rationing gasoline in order to reduce domestic consumption and government expenditure. [continued…]

Panel in Iran will oversee investigations into unrest
By Michael Slackman, New York Times, August 31, 2009

Conservative rivals of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran have continued to challenge his drive to consolidate power, appointing a committee to supervise investigations into the unrest that swept the nation after he claimed a landslide victory in the disputed presidential election in June, political analysts said.

On Saturday, a day before Mr. Ahmadinejad stepped before a hostile Parliament to defend his 21 nominees for the cabinet — one of the many internal fights he is confronting — the chief of the judiciary, Sadeq Larijani, announced the appointment of a panel to oversee investigations by allies of the president into the postelection unrest.

Mr. Larijani, a rival of the president, said the committee was told “to ensure that the defendants’ rights are reserved and that they are treated properly,” according to the semi-official Fars news service, offering a not-too-subtle vote of no confidence in the president’s handling of events. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Israel has Iran in its sights

Israel has Iran in its sights
By Micah Zenko, Los Angeles Times, August 30, 2009

If Israel attempts such a high-risk and destabilizing strike against Iran, President Obama will probably learn of the operation from CNN rather than the CIA. History shows that although Washington seeks influence over Israel’s military operations, Israel would rather explain later than ask for approval in advance of launching preventive or preemptive attacks. Those hoping that the Obama administration will be able to pressure Israel to stand down from attacking Iran as diplomatic efforts drag on are mistaken.

The current infighting among Iran’s leaders also has led some to incorrectly believe that Tehran’s nuclear efforts will stall. As Friday’s International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran’s nuclear programs revealed, throughout the political crises of the last three months, Iran’s production rate for centrifuges has remained steady, as has its ability to produce uranium hexafluoride to feed into the centrifuges. [continued…]

Nuclear agency says Iran has bolstered ability to make fuel but slowed its output
By William J Broad and David E Sanger, New York Times, August 29, 2009

International nuclear inspectors reported on Friday that Iran had significantly increased its ability to produce nuclear fuel over the summer, even while slowing the pace at which it was enriching the uranium that the West fears could one day fuel nuclear weapons.

The slowdown puzzled the inspectors, and Iran offered no clues about whether technical problems or political considerations accounted for its action.

Nonetheless, outside nuclear experts who dissected the agency’s latest report — a critical one because it comes just as the United States and its European allies are debating far more damaging sanctions against Iran — said that if Iran’s current stockpile of low-enriched uranium was further purified, it would have nearly two warheads’ worth of bomb fuel. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Nuclear drive a casualty of Iran’s turmoil

Nuclear drive a casualty of Iran’s turmoil
By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times, August 28, 2009

Iran’s political crisis could prevent the nation from making any swift move to ratchet up its nuclear program, said analysts and officials, giving President Obama and Western allies more time to grapple with the issue.

The chaos over the disputed reelection of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad brings into question who calls the shots in Tehran, and what any deal with the Islamic Republic involving its nuclear program would look like.

The Obama administration, concerned that Tehran is seeking to amass the materials needed to manufacture nuclear weapons, set an informal deadline of September for Iran to respond positively to an offer to discuss the matter rather than risk new economic sanctions. [continued…]

Ahmadinejad calls for prosecution of opposition leader
AP, August 28, 2009

Iran’s president called Friday for the prosecution of opposition leaders over the postelection turmoil, saying that senior activists currently on trial shouldn’t be the only ones punished.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s call stepped up the pressure against reformers in the continuing unrest that has gripped the country following the June 12 presidential election.

“Serious confrontation has to be against the leaders and key elements, against those who organized and provoked [the riots] and carried out the enemy’s plan. They have to be dealt with seriously,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told a crowd of thousands in Tehran before Friday prayers. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Policy on Tehran faces new test

Policy on Tehran faces new test
By Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2009

The expected release Thursday of a key United Nations report on Tehran’s nuclear program kicks off a month of international diplomacy that could severely test the Obama administration’s Iran policy, said U.S. and Western diplomats.

Washington and other Western powers are pressing Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency, to include in the report a detailed summary of Tehran’s alleged efforts to weaponize its nuclear technologies, said these diplomats.

U.S. and other Western officials view the information as potentially crucial to the Obama administration’s efforts to rally international support for new economic sanctions on Tehran. President Barack Obama has set a late September deadline for Iran to respond to his calls for direct talks on the nuclear issue or face greater financial penalties.

Many U.S. and European officials who are focused on the IAEA, however, said they remain doubtful Mr. ElBaradei will include the summary Western countries want. Mr. ElBaradei will head his last Board of Governors meeting next month before handing power to Japan’s Yukiya Amano in November. [continued…]

Iran calls for death penalty on reformists in dock
By James Hider, The Times, August 26, 2009

Iranian prosecutors called for the death penalty in a mass trial of some of the country’s leading reformists, including six former ministers, who stand accused of fomenting riots in the wake of June’s disputed presidential elections.

The prosecution said that the men, including a key instigator of Iran’s reformist movement, had been plotting to topple the Islamic regime. It called the huge street demonstrations against alleged electoral fraud an attempt to stage a “soft coup” against the government.

Reformist critics denounced the proceedings as a “show trial”. It was the fourth mass trial so far in what opponents of the theocratic regime see as a concerted attempt to uproot all moderate opposition to the hardline leadership of President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. [continued…]

Iran reformist unveils case of raped detainee
AP, August 24, 2009

An Iranian opposition leader on Monday released what he said was an account by a prisoner raped by his jailers in a challenge to the country’s leadership which has sought to silence claims of torture and abuses in the postelection crackdown.

The allegations of torture and even rapes against imprisoned opposition protesters have become a source of embarrassment to the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran’s clerical leadership as they try to put behind them the turmoil of the disputed June presidential election. [continued…]

Iran wins nuclear plant support
MSN, August 26, 2009

Ian, whose nuclear facilities are under threat of possible Israeli military strikes, has enlisted the support of more than 100 non-aligned nations in its push for a ban on such attacks.

The 118-nation Nonaligned Movement backs Tehran in a letter submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency endorsing Iran’s plan to submit a resolution on the topic when IAEA nations meet next month. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Iran official denies he made nuclear talks statement

Iran official denies he made nuclear talks statement
By Zahra Hosseinian, Reuters, August 18, 2009

A senior Iranian official denied on Tuesday he had made any statement saying Tehran was ready for talks with the West on its disputed nuclear program, state television reported.

The same television network earlier said the official — Iran’s envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Ali Asghar Soltanieh — “announced Iran’s readiness to take part in any negotiations with the West based on mutual respect.”

But it later quoted Soltanieh, Iran’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) representative, as saying he had not given any interviews or made any comments on the issue, without elaborating where the initial report came from. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Israel envoy to U.S.: We have no plan to strike Iran

Israel envoy to U.S.: We have no plan to strike Iran
Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren interviewed by Fareed Zacharia, CNN, August 16, 2009

ZAKARIA: Let’s talk about Iran.

John Bolton has recently said that he believes that Israel is likely to attack Iran by the end of this year. Is that true?

OREN: I don’t think it’s true. I think that we are far from even contemplating such things right now.

The government of Israel has supported President Obama in his approach to Iran, initially the engagement, the outreach to Iran. The prime minister…

ZAKARIA: You’re just saying this, Michael. You don’t really — it is well known that the government of Israel was deeply uncomfortable and nervous about the idea of an engagement with Iran.

OREN: We were. But we were greatly comforted during the prime minister’s visit here in May, when the president told the prime minister, sure, that there would be a serious reassessment of the engagement policy before the end of the year.

And we are further reassured now that that end-of-the-year deadline has been moved up to September. We actually have a date when it’s going to occur.

We are comforted by the fact that the administration, in the aftermath of recent events in Iran, has exhibited greater willingness to consider formulating a package of serious sanctions against Iran, even now in advance of the reassessment.

ZAKARIA: Isn’t it true that we now know something about Iran that we weren’t quite sure about, which is, there are many moderates in Iran, both on the streets of Tehran and the rest of the country, but also within the government.

OREN: Unquestionably. We know that the Iranian — certainly, the Iranian people, but even the Iranian leadership, is not as monochromatic as we thought, that there are dissenters. Not necessarily moderates in the sense of their relationship with Israel, but moderates certainly in an internal Iranian context.

But what concerns us, at the end of the day, is not so much a change of personalities, but a change of policy. We would like to see an Iranian willingness to desist from supporting terrorist groups, Hezbollah, Hamas. We’ve seen none of that; on the contrary, business as usual.

We would like to see indications of Iranian willingness to suspend the enrichment of uranium. We’d like to see a willingness evinced on the part of the Iranians to stop producing the centrifuges that enrich that uranium. We’ve seen none of that. On the contrary, we see business as usual for the Iranians, even in their rhetoric across the board. [continued…]

Throwing Ahmadinejad a lifeline
By Hossein Askari and Trita Parsi, New York Times, August 14, 2009

The economics of a gasoline embargo simply doesn’t make sense. Iran imports roughly 40 percent of its domestic gasoline consumption at world prices and then sells it along with domestically refined gasoline at a government-subsidized price of about 40 cents per gallon. As a result, domestic gasoline consumption is high. It is also smuggled and sold to neighboring countries.

Over the past 10 years, this policy has cost Iran in the range of 10 to 20 percent of its G.D.P. annually, depending on world prices and the government-mandated pump price. Yes, a whopping 10 to 20 percent of G.D.P. In need of additional revenues, the regime has wanted to eliminate this subsidy, raise the price to world levels and reduce consumption, but has been paralyzed by the specter of a domestic backlash.

Even assuming that a gasoline embargo would be effective, what would be its result? Consumption would decline by 40 percent and government revenues would go up, because no payment would be needed for gasoline imports.

If Tehran allowed the reduced supply of gasoline to be sold at a price that would equate demand to supply, the price would increase to a level that would eliminate the subsidy, meaning no subsidy for imported gasoline and no subsidy for domestically refined gasoline. The government would have more revenue to spend elsewhere. The sanctions would have done what Tehran has wanted to do for years and the government would not be held responsible! [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Pakistan denies militants attacked nuclear sites

Pakistan denies militants attacked nuclear sites
AP, August 12, 2009

A military spokesman denied a recent report that militants have attacked Pakistan’s nuclear facilities three times in two years, saying Wednesday there is “absolutely no chance” the country’s atomic weapons could fall into terrorist hands.

Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said an article written by a U.K.-based security expert was false because none of the bases named actually had any nuclear facilities.

“It is factually incorrect,” he said.

Taliban militants’ brief takeover of areas some 60 miles (100 kilometers) from the capital, Islamabad, raised new fears about the security of Pakistan’s atomic weapons being seized by extremists linked to al-Qaeda, although the country insists its arsenal is secure.

Shaun Gregory, a professor at Bradford University’s Pakistan Security Research Unit, wrote that several militant attacks have already hit military bases where nuclear components are secretly stored. The article appeared in the July newsletter [PDF] of the Combating Terrorism Center of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Israel clouds Obama’s nuclear summit

Israel clouds Obama’s nuclear summit
By Josh Gerstein, Politico, August 11, 2009

President Barack Obama’s call for a nuclear security summit next March could end up turning an uncomfortable spotlight on at least one nation — Israel — and further strain the administration’s relations with the Jewish state, analysts said.

Obama told leaders at the G-8 summit in July that he planned to ask the heads of 25 to 30 countries to come to Washington to discuss securing nuclear stockpiles. The final invites haven’t gone out yet, and one key question for Obama is this: Does he ask Israel to attend, or not?

There’s no good choice.

Invite Israel, and open its leaders up to questions about the country’s widely reported nuclear weapons program — which the Israelis have long refused to discuss.

But leave out Israel, and the Middle Eastern nations who would seem to be a necessity at any summit discussing nuclear security would feel compelled to point to Israel’s reported efforts as a source of instability in the region. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Sanctions unlikely to stop Iran’s nuclear quest

Sanctions unlikely to stop Iran’s nuclear quest
By Tony Karon, Time, August 10, 2009

Unless Iran responds positively to President Obama’s offer of talks on its nuclear program by next month, it could face what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls “crippling sanctions.” That was the message from Administration officials touring the Middle East in recent weeks. And it’s backed by congressional moves to pass legislation aimed at choking off the gasoline imports on which Iran relies for almost a third of its consumption, by punishing third-country suppliers. It sounds impressive and, for an undiversified economy like Iran’s, potentially calamitous. But a number of Iran analysts are skeptical that new sanctions will break the stalemate.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government has promised to present a new package of proposals on the nuclear issue to Western negotiators in the coming weeks. But that package is unlikely to reflect any shift in Tehran’s rejection of the U.S. demand that it forgo the right to enrich uranium as part of its nuclear-energy program. “If the U.S. position remains unchanged,” says Farideh Farhi, an Iran expert at the University of Hawaii, “Iran may well come to the table, but only in order to demonstrate to its own people that its regime has been recognized, not to seriously engage with U.S. proposals or give ground.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

The Pentagon’s nuclear posture landmine

The Pentagon’s nuclear posture landmine
By Joe Cirincione, Huffington Post, August 10, 2009

Defense officials are writing a new U.S. nuclear policy that could blow up President Obama’s declared agenda. The White House must reassert its control.

The Nuclear Posture Review, or NPR, will be issued at the end of the year, but Obama’s defense officials are briefing others in the administration this week, hoping to lock in their policies before the end of the month.

Why should you care? Joan Rohlfing, vice-president of the Nuclear Threat Initiative headed by Sam Nunn and Ted Turner, explained in a speech before the Arms Control Association May 20: [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

So time is ticking away on Iran? Let’s stop the clock

So time is ticking away on Iran? Let’s stop the clock
By Tony Karon, The National, August 9, 2009

The clock is ticking on Iran, or so we’re told. But whose clock, and what exactly is it timing? Obama administration officials say Iran has until September to respond to the US offer to negotiate over its nuclear programme or face what the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, calls “crippling sanctions”. But what exactly is being demanded of Iran, and what is being offered? And what if those sanctions don’t change its stance?

Iran insists that its programme is entirely for peaceful energy production, and that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons. But – and this is perhaps the crucial point in the conversation – it very much insists that as a signatory of the Non Proliferation Treaty, it does, in fact, have the right to enrich uranium, and has no intention of surrendering that right. That, moreover, is not only the position of the hardline Ahmadinejad government, but also of its pragmatic and reformist rivals who continue to challenge the legitimacy of the president’s reelection.

The US and its allies believe Iran is using the cover of a civilian nuclear energy programme to put in place many of the key elements of a bomb, particularly the ability to enrich uranium. The Non Proliferation Treaty allows its signatories (including Iran) to enrich uranium as reactor fuel, under monitoring by the International Atomic Energy to ensure that it is not enriched to weapons grade. According to the US Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, the US intelligence community believes Iran won’t have the technical capacity to produce weapons-grade material until 2013; that its leaders have not taken a political decision to create a bomb; and that they won’t do so as long as their programme remains under international scrutiny. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail