|
|
Top Stories
Guardian:
"The map was laid out in vague terms in a PowerPoint presentation
given by Zarif yesterday. Its contents have been tightly held but Zarif
deputy, Abbas Araqchi, has spelt out some important details. He said it
envisages an initial confidence-building deal within six months. This
would involve unspecified limits on Iran's uranium enrichment in return
for some sanctions relief. Then there would be a second phase, in which
the trust between the parties would somehow be further consolidated. It
is not at all clear how, but it would lead to the third stage, a new
equilibrium in relations between Iran and the rest of the world, in which
Iran continues to enrich uranium under agreed limits but without sanctions.
Araqchi named one of those limits. In the third phase, Iran would agree
to a regime of more intrusive inspections by the world's nuclear
watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The acceptance
of what is known as the 'Additional Protocol' is essential for an
enduring solution, as it gives inspectors the right in principle to visit
to any site it believes could be involved in nuclear activities - not
just those declared by Iran, as is presently the case. The protocol is
necessary for other countries to feel relatively sure that Iran is not
cheating." http://t.uani.com/17JXmPj
WSJ:
"Iranian officials described Mr. Zarif's presentation as an outline
of the 'endgame' that Tehran seeks for its nuclear program at the
conclusion of the negotiations. These officials stressed that Iran
wouldn't give up its ability to produce nuclear fuel through the
enrichment of uranium. They also said Tehran wouldn't commit to U.S.
demands that it ship out its stockpiles of fissile materials, or at least
safeguard them under international supervision. Still, Mr. Zarif's
deputy, Abbas Aragchi, said Iran's proposal would give negotiators
'comprehensive transparency and monitoring' through the International
Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog. He also told Iranian
state media that his government hoped to see the complete lifting of
sanctions within six months and that Tehran had proposed a supervising
committee including the six major powers and Iran to monitor
implementation of a deal. 'We should reach an agreement within a limited
time frame so no one gets the impression that we are just killing time,'
he said." http://t.uani.com/1cRyYDk
Washington Free
Beacon: "The latest round of nuclear negotiations
between world leaders and Iran this week are not likely to lead to a
comprehensive deal, according to President Obama's former 'WMD Czar.' 'I
have to say, the indications don't appear very promising that some kind
of a comprehensive agreement can be reached, because the Iranians, so far
anyway, are just not offering the kinds of concessions that the U.S. is
going to demand,' said United Against Nuclear Iran's Gary Samore, who
served as White House Coordinator for Arms Control and Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMDs) until earlier this year. He said Iran is expected to
offer to halt its uranium enrichment at 5 percent. The country has
already produced 20-percent enriched uranium, which puts it within close
range of producing 'weapons-grade' 90-percent enriched uranium. However,
Samore said there are no signs Iran will agree to physical limits on its
production capabilities, such as reducing its number of centrifuges or
relinquishing the uranium it has already enriched. This means Iran can
continue to shrink its 'breakout capacity,' the window of time the country
would need to quickly enrich enough weapons-grade uranium to build a
nuclear bomb. Samore estimated that Tehran currently has the ability to
build a nuclear weapon within 'a few months,' and could eventually
'squeeze that breakout time down from a couple of months to a couple of
weeks' if physical limitations are not placed on its program. 'The
Iranian proposal appears to be pretty much boiled over soup,' said
Samore. 'What they're offering is really no different from what we've
heard from the previous government, from [former Iranian President
Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad's government, for the last couple of years.' Samore
said he does not expect the Obama administration to agree to a deal that
does not put restraints on Iran's nuclear infrastructure." http://t.uani.com/1gKqI8b
Nuclear
Program
LAT: "In another sign of easing
tension between their nations, Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and
other Americans met for an hour with Iranians led by Deputy Foreign
Minister Abbas Araghchi at the U.N.'s Palais des Nations. It was only the
second such U.S.-Iranian bilateral meeting in seven years of diplomatic
efforts to resolve the conflict over Iran's nuclear program." http://t.uani.com/1fCC0fR
Reuters:
"Iran suggested it was ready to address calls to give the U.N.
atomic watchdog wider inspection powers as part of Tehran's proposals to
resolve a decade-old nuclear dispute with the West. The comments from
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi appeared to be the first
specific indication of what concessions Tehran might be prepared to make
in return for the removal of sanctions hurting its oil-dependent
economy... Iran did not give details of its proposal On Tuesday, but said
it included monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear body which regularly inspects declared
Iranian facilities. Iran's official IRNA news agency asked Araqchi about
the issues of uranium enrichment and the so-called Additional Protocol to
Iran's agreement with the IAEA. 'Neither of these issues are within the
first step (of the Iranian proposal) but form part of our last steps,' he
replied without going into further details, in comments reported on
Wednesday. The Additional Protocol allows unannounced inspections outside
of declared nuclear sites and it is seen as a vital tool at the IAEA's
disposal to make sure that a country does not have any hidden nuclear
work." http://t.uani.com/H3RvhK
Reuters:
"But Iran did not intend to renounce all enrichment itself 'under
any circumstances,' the Russian state news agency RIA quoted an unnamed
Iranian delegation source as saying. He was dismissing the maximal demand
of U.S. and Israeli hawks which Western diplomats concede would undermine
Rouhani's authority at home by exposing him to accusations of a sell-out
from conservative hardliners in the clerical and security elite. 'Apart
from suspending 20 percent enrichment, it is possible to consider a
scenario involving reducing the number of centrifuges (enriching
uranium),' RIA quoted the delegate as saying. 'However, for this,
concrete steps from our opponents are required, which we do not see yet.'
Iran has sharply expanded its uranium enrichment capacity in recent years
and it now has roughly 19,000 installed such machines. Of those, about
10,400 are currently enriching, a U.N. watchdog report showed in August.
The fact that Iran has so many idle centrifuges suggests it could quickly
expand the work, if it wanted, or possibly use them as a bargaining chip
in negotiations with the powers." http://t.uani.com/1eqXd9n
USA Today:
"Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif offered Tuesday to
take a year to resolve Iran's nuclear standoff with world powers. That is
probably too long a time period for the West and Israel, which says Iran
is stalling for time to complete its bomb. Zarif's written offer was
labeled 'Closing an Unnecessary Crisis, and Opening a New Horizon.' It
proposes a three-step plan to settle the conflict 'within a year.' ...
'In the real world, we don't have a year,' said David Albright, president
of the Institute for Science and International Security. 'If Zarif wants
to wait a year, he's going to face stronger U.S. sanctions and
potentially an Israeli strike.'" http://t.uani.com/1cUWIGx
Reuters:
"Six world powers and Iran will likely meet again in Geneva in
several weeks time to try to hammer out details of an emerging agreement
aimed at ending the standoff over Tehran's nuclear ambitions, Western
diplomats said on Wednesday... 'Are we there yet? No, but we need to keep
talking,' a Western diplomat told Reuters as talks resumed between Iran
and the five permanent U.N. Security Council members - United States,
Britain, France, Russia and China - plus Germany. Another Western
diplomat said 'we'll probably be back here in a few weeks' for a second
round of negotiations in Geneva between Iran and the six powers." http://t.uani.com/19Im3yk
WSJ:
"The fate of the U.S.'s point person's campaign to curb Iran's
nuclear program will depend on lessons she gleaned from the Clinton
administration's unsuccessful efforts to forge a rapprochement with North
Korea, said Western diplomats and proliferation experts. Wendy Sherman,
the U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs and the top
American official in Geneva for the resumption of international nuclear
talks with Iran, met Tuesday with Iran's deputy foreign minister on the
sidelines of the talks. The Obama administration's No. 3 diplomat, during
the past 20 years she has led U.S. efforts to rein in Iran and North
Korea, two of the world's most-dangerous rogue states. Both Iranian and
North Korean negotiators are notorious for driving hard diplomatic
bargains and, ultimately, backing out of formal agreements, said Western
diplomats and proliferation experts." http://t.uani.com/17tEzZm
AP:
"Beyond having to deal with six world powers making demands on his
country's nuclear program, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif
has another pressing problem: back pains so intense he's had to use a
wheelchair. Zarif heads the Iranian delegation at key talks this week
with the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany. He
apparently wasn't keen on sharing his ailment with the public. Instead of
leaving his posh Geneva hotel by the main exit hours after returning from
the talks and complaining of back pains, he was wheeled out of the
service entrance and into a waiting van Tuesday." http://t.uani.com/1byfMqc
Sanctions
Reuters:
"Any easing by Washington of sanctions on Iran in exchange for
Tehran taking steps to scale back its nuclear program is likely to be
fleeting and symbolic, with any moves for bigger concessions likely to be
blocked by Congress... Even if Iran promises to take serious steps, it is
unlikely to satisfy key members of the U.S. Congress, which generally
takes a harder line on Iran than President Barack Obama's administration.
Lawmakers including Robert Menendez, the chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, have signaled they want Tehran to stop even
low-level enrichment of uranium used in generating power before they
would take steps to wind down existing sanctions, or even agree not to
put through tougher ones. 'Sanctions relief is easier said than done,'
said Ali Vaez, an Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, an
organization that seeks to prevent and resolve conflict. 'Without a
fundamental reorientation of Iran's approach, a significant relaxation in
sanctions is not in the cards.'" http://t.uani.com/18lyKkb
FT:
"Record highs have become routine at the Tehran Stock Exchange as
hopes soar in Iran's markets that the government of Hassan Rouhani will
bring about an improvement in the economy and ease international
sanctions over the nuclear programme... However, the wider economic
picture is less encouraging. The latest official figures show the economy
contracted by 5.4 per cent over the past year, youth unemployment stands
at 28.3 per cent, and inflation has risen to 40 per cent. Central Bank
figures also show food prices in the capital have rocketed over the past
year. Rice has gone up by 70.4 per cent, grain by 79.7 per cent,
vegetables by 83.7 per cent, sugar by 43.2 and vegetable oil by 46.9 per
cent... According to Mr Tayebnia around 70 per cent of businesses in the
industrial sector are struggling financially and are unable to obtain
loans. The previous government's policy of granting cheap bank loans to
the poor and to small industrial businesses has led to a huge rise in
defaults, causing a crisis in the banks. Many banks are now reluctant to
lend to businesses in the industrial sector." http://t.uani.com/15HVsC3
Foreign
Affairs
AFP:
"Iran and Britain agreed Wednesday to name a charge d'affaires to
each other's country within two weeks, following a break in diplomatic
ties since 2011, state news agency IRNA reported. 'This agreement was
reached at a bilateral meeting between (deputy foreign minister) Mohammad
Takht Ravanchi and his British counterpart, Simon Gass,' on the sidelines
of nuclear negotiations in Geneva, IRNA said. 'An announcement will be
made soon,' the Foreign Office in London told AFP. Britain ordered the
closure of Iran's embassy in London after closing its own in Tehran
following the storming of the compound by hundreds of angry Islamist
students in November 2011." http://t.uani.com/17tyfkJ
Opinion
& Analysis
UANI Advisory Board Member Irwin Cotler in JPost:
"Negotiations about Iran's nuclear program are set to resume this
week in Geneva between the P5+1 countries (USA, UK, France, Russia, China
and Germany) and the new Iranian leadership - arguably the most important
diplomatic encounter in a decade. This new round of talks takes place
against the backdrop of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's charm
offensive - including the nuclear file - where he spoke of Iran's pursuit
of nuclear energy for 'peaceful purposes only,' while Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Khamenei has spoken of 'heroic flexibility in the nuclear
talks.' Yet this soothing rhetoric is otherwise contradicted by the
Iranian insistence on its 'inalienable right to enrich,' and its just
announced negotiating 'red line' excluding the export of highly enriched
uranium from Iran. US President Barack Obama, after welcoming the Iranian
leadership's conciliatory words, added that 'the test will be meaningful,
transparent and verifiable actions.' Such skepticism is eminently
warranted, given the track record and 3- D negotiating strategy of the
Iranian regime - denial, deception and delay - and that of the supposedly
moderate President Hassan Rouhani himself. Indeed, as Iran's chief
nuclear negotiator with several European countries in 2004, Rouhani
admitted that, 'while we were talking with the Europeans in Tehran, we
were installing equipment in parts of the facility in Isfahan.... In
fact, by creating a calm environment, we were able to complete the work
on Isfahan,' a position Rouhani affirmed on Iranian TV during the
presidential election. Consequently, if a new round of negotiations is to
effectively roll back the Iranian nuclear threat - rather than create
another 'calm environment' enabling increased nuclear activity - there
are a series of specific undertakings that Iran must be called upon to
carry out verifiably. These undertakings are as follows..." http://t.uani.com/1hWjhIF
Amos Yadlin &
Avner Golov in WSJ: "Hopes are running high in many
quarters that the West and Iran could begin to work out a deal over the
Iranian nuclear program this week in Geneva. As the Iranian deputy
foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, put it before the negotiations began on
Tuesday: 'We need to move towards a trust-building road map with the
Westerners.' Such sweet talk-and the White House's strong desire to avoid
a confrontation with Tehran-could result in a dangerous deal that would
lift international sanctions on Iran without ensuring an end to the
Islamic Republic's nuclear-weapons program. This is not to say that any
diplomatic solution would be a bad deal for the West. A diplomatic
solution is welcome if it actually offers a better alternative than the
two current options: bombing Iran's nuclear program or accepting Iran
with a nuclear weapon. We see four types of potential deals that the six
major powers currently gathered in Geneva could make with Iran: an ideal
agreement, a reasonable agreement, a bad agreement and an agreement in
phases. The ideal agreement for the so-called P5+1 (the permanent United
Nations Security Council members-the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K. and
France-plus Germany) consists of an Iranian commitment to dismantle its
nuclear program. Tehran would stop enrichment at all levels-even for
nonmilitary purposes. It would close Fordow, its underground enrichment
facility, and the Arak reactor, which is capable of producing plutonium
for a bomb. Iran would also have to ship out its entire stockpile of
enriched uranium, which today is enough to produce five to seven bombs.
Such an agreement would meet the stipulated demands of the Security
Council, as well as prior demands by the U.S. and Israel. In exchange,
the West would lift all sanctions on Iran. A less good, but still
reasonable, agreement would be a compromise that meticulously addresses
the critical elements of Iran's nuclear program. Iran would retain its
right to enrich uranium, but only to a low 3.5%-5% nonmilitary grade.
This agreement would put clear limits on Iran's centrifuges. The country,
which currently has more than 19,000, would be allowed to keep a small,
symbolic number to prove that Iran has the presumptive right to enrich
for nonmilitary purposes. It would also cap the amount of enriched
material, which the International Atomic Energy Agency would oversee. To
ensure this, Iran would have to re-sign and implement the additional
protocol, which would enable the IAEA to carry out much more thorough
inspections. The Iranians would also have to guarantee that the Arak
reactor is not functional. Fordow would be closed, and all Iranian
nuclear activity would have to be carried out at Natanz. Last, the
transformation to fuel rods would be done outside of Iran to ensure that
the Iranians won't ever be able to use the enriched uranium for a bomb in
case they abandon the agreement in the future. Although such an agreement
does not meet the Security Council's demand for Iran to dismantle its
nuclear program, it would give the West enough time to detect any Iranian
violation-and, critically, to stop Iran from producing nuclear weapons if
necessary. This compromise would prolong the Iranian breakout capacity
timeline to years rather than months, and it may well be preferable to
bombing Iran's nuclear program or accepting an Iranian nuclear weapon. A
bad agreement would have the West ease sanctions against Tehran in
exchange for a partial dismantlement of its nuclear program. Such a deal
could, for example, limit Iran's uranium-enrichment level to a
nonmilitary grade, but wouldn't put a cap on Iran's stockpile of
centrifuges or wouldn't force the regime to shut down the Arak reactor.
This would be disastrous for Western interests, because it would allow
Iran to manufacture a nuclear weapon rapidly and whenever it wants, under
the cover of an agreement with the international community. A fourth type
of agreement would be a process of reciprocal, partial steps designed to
build trust between the two sides. For example, Iran would agree not to
continue to enrich to 20%, or would agree not to install new centrifuges,
in exchange for sanction relief. This seems to be the type of agreement
that the P5+1 is pursuing." http://t.uani.com/17tyVGJ
Jeffrey Goldberg
in Bloomberg: "One of the several dilemmas facing
Obama administration officials in their chess match with Iran is this: At
what point do they meet serious Iranian nuclear concessions (assuming, as
I don't, that these concessions are in the offing) with actual sanctions
relief? If Iran shows itself willing to scale back dramatically its
stockpiles of enriched uranium, or give up a substantial number of its
centrifuges, wouldn't the U.S. have to meet such gestures by lifting of
at least some sanctions? And here lies a problem -- many of the Americans
involved in these negotiations believe that any sanctions relief at all
would lead to the quick crumbling of the entire sanctions program. Pull
one brick out of the sanctions wall, I've heard it said repeatedly, and
the entire edifice crumbles. Certainly, this is the Israeli position.
Many countries, and many companies, are eager to see the sanctions
disintegrate, and they would take any American move to provide even the
tiniest bit of relief to Iran as a sign that the crisis is over, and that
they can go back to business as usual. We may be, right now, at (to
borrow a phrase) peak sanctions. It only gets harder from here for the
Obama administration to hold the line. But if the U.S. meets an Iranian
concession with absolutely no concessions of its own, then the entire
denuclearization effort could be in serious trouble; the Iranians,
sensing no give whatsoever in the U.S. position, could simply go home and
proceed apace with their nuclear program. This dilemma has caused some in
the administration to embrace a third path, a program of what might be
called non-sanctions-related financial relief. More than $50 billion of
Iranian money is frozen, or semi-frozen, in banks around the world,
thanks to the Herculean efforts of the White House and the Treasury
Department. Iran is in desperate need of this cash. The crippling of the
Iranian economy by the U.S. sanctions regime is the only reason Iran is
even negotiating at all. Several administration officials told me that
U.S. negotiators currently in Geneva for the Iran negotiations are
prepared to offer Iran access to at least some of this money in exchange
for verifiable concessions. American officials are careful to note that
such access would not violate their promise -- and they've made this
promise repeatedly -- that actual sanctions relief is not a near-term
prospect, barring something like total Iranian capitulation. This plan,
to reward Iran, in essence, with its own money, would not violate a
pledge to keep the sanctions in place until a final deal is within
reach." http://t.uani.com/16fHLYk
|
|
Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against
Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear
Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive
media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with
discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please
email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com
United Against Nuclear
Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a
commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a
regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons. UANI is an
issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own
interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of
nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment