June 2,2010
Were the United Nations Security Council to go ahead with new sanctions against Iran, the mediation pushed forward by Turkey and Brazil on the nuclear issue would fall through, Tehran’s foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki said on Wednesday.
Leaders of Turkey and Brazil came to Tehran in mid May to strike a deal that would see Iran transfer 1,200 kilograms of 3.5—per—cent enriched uranium to Turkey, in exchange for 120 kilograms of 20—per—cent enriched uranium destined for a medical research reactor.
“Moving through (the) Security Council a resolution will kill this initiative,” Mr. Mottaki said during an event in Brussels hosted by the European Policy Studies (EPC) think—tank.
The proposed swap would take place under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) but has not convinced the United States and the European Union, which are still pushing for stronger sanctions at the UN.
Both fear the trilateral deal does not offer enough assurances against the threat of Iran using the enriched uranium to manufacture nuclear weapons.
“There are two options: the first option is based on cooperation and confidence building, the other option is based on confrontation.
We do consider moving to a resolution in the Security Council as a base for confrontation,” Mr. Mottaki warned.
“That is not what we prefer, that is not our priority. But it’s up to the other parties who would like to move in that direction,” he added, without mentioning any particular country.
But the foreign minister said that Iran might go ahead with domestic production of enriched uranium even if the uranium swap deal went ahead.
“When we receive our 20—per—cent—enriched uranium ... then we will decide — that is our decision — (whether) it is feasible to find 20—per—cent uranium through exchange or buying or producing. That is our decision,” he stressed.
Still, Mr. Mottaki said he was “optimistic” about the success of the Brazil—Turkey deal, claiming that his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, told him in a telephone conversation on Sunday that he supported the proposal.
Russia is one of the five permanent UN Security Council members that has been dealing with the Iranian nuclear programme in the “5+1” Group. The other countries are the United States, China, France, Britain and Germany.
The EU conducted negotiations with Tehran on behalf of the group, but talks have been going nowhere for years.
During his trip to Brussels Mr. Mottaki had a closed door meeting on Tuesday in the European Parliament, a body which has no say on EU foreign policy. No meetings were foreseen with the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton.
Source: http://beta.thehindu.com/news/international/article444565.ece
Showing posts with label Britain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Britain. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
Britain reveals planned size of nuclear stockpile
May 28, 2010
LONDON - Britain's new coalition government has revealed the planned size of its nuclear weapons stockpile for the first time, saying that it will not exceed 225 warheads.
Officials have said before that the country has 160 warheads that are operational; that is, ready to fire.
In an announcement on Wednesday coinciding with a United Nations Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty conference in New York, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain hopes its disclosure will contribute to efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons worldwide.
"We believe that the time is now right to be more open about the weapons we hold," he told Parliament.
"We judge that this will assist in building a climate of trust between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states."
Countries around the world that do not possess nuclear weapons have long demanded more openness from the nuclear-weapon states about the size and nature of their arsenals.
Earlier this month, the United States disclosed for the first time that it has 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile and "several thousand" more retired warheads awaiting the junk pile.
Source: http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100528-0000074/Britain-reveals-planned-size-of-nuclear-stockpile
LONDON - Britain's new coalition government has revealed the planned size of its nuclear weapons stockpile for the first time, saying that it will not exceed 225 warheads.
Officials have said before that the country has 160 warheads that are operational; that is, ready to fire.
In an announcement on Wednesday coinciding with a United Nations Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty conference in New York, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain hopes its disclosure will contribute to efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons worldwide.
"We believe that the time is now right to be more open about the weapons we hold," he told Parliament.
"We judge that this will assist in building a climate of trust between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states."
Countries around the world that do not possess nuclear weapons have long demanded more openness from the nuclear-weapon states about the size and nature of their arsenals.
Earlier this month, the United States disclosed for the first time that it has 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile and "several thousand" more retired warheads awaiting the junk pile.
Source: http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100528-0000074/Britain-reveals-planned-size-of-nuclear-stockpile
Nuclear treaty talks on brink of failure: diplomats
May 28, 2010
Reuters
Talks on shoring up the global anti-nuclear arms treaty were on the edge of failure on Friday as the United States and its allies clashed with Egypt over a push to pressure Israel to scrap any atom bombs it has.
For a month the 189 signatories of the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty have been meeting in New York in hopes of agreeing on a plan to shore up the troubled pact, which analysts say has been hit by Iran's and North Korea's atomic programs and failure by the nuclear powers to disarm.
The latest draft of a final declaration for the NPT review conference calls for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to organize a meeting of all Middle Eastern states in 2012 on how to make the region free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as demanded by a 1995 NPT resolution.
The creation of a WMD-free zone would eventually force Israel to abandon any atomic bombs it has. The Jewish state, which like nuclear-armed India and Pakistan never signed the NPT, is presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies it. Israel is not participating in the NPT meeting.
In a radical departure from the previous U.S. administration, President Barack Obama's negotiators had agreed to join the NPT's other four official nuclear powers -- Britain, France, Russia and China -- in backing such a conference while encouraging reluctant Israel to participate.
The five permanent U.N. Security Council members and a group of Arab states led by Egypt are close to a deal that would make the 2012 conference happen, delegates say. But the two sides have reached an impasse on the question of whether Israel should be named in the declaration as a problem state.
The Egyptians insist the declaration must state explicitly that Israel should join the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state, but the Americans are refusing, diplomats said.
LAST-MINUTE COMPROMISE?
One Western diplomat familiar with the talks described the situation as "not looking too hopeful."
He said there was a "stark choice for the Arabs -- name and shame Israel or have a conference in 2012 to move forward the 1995 promise ... toward a WMD-free zone in the Mideast."
"My bet is their (the Arabs') short-term political needs will trump their long-term strategic interest," he said.
Other delegates confirmed the possibility that the NPT review conference would fail to agree on a final declaration because of disagreements on the Middle East question, repeating what happened at the last NPT review conference in 2005.
But diplomats said they hoped the United States and Egypt -- the key players in the Middle East negotiations -- would strike a last-minute compromise that salvaged the conference.
"We've worked so hard for the past month," one diplomat said. "We've got a strong draft that would strengthen all three pillars of the NPT -- disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. It shouldn't be thrown away."
Western diplomats said Israel had reluctantly agreed to attend the 2012 conference but only on condition that it not be "named and shamed" in the final declaration.
Iran's envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Tehran's chief delegate, accused the United States of causing the impasse at the NPT talks. Apart from the Middle East WMD-free zone, he said Washington and the other nuclear powers had rejected key demands of Iran and the other non-aligned developing nations.
Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh said those demands were for a precise deadline for nuclear powers to disarm, a call for negotiations on a treaty banning the use of atomic arms, and a pledge from the five nuclear powers not to use atomic bombs on states without them, known as a "negative security assurance."
"The nuclear weapon states, particularly the United States, have not cooperated to find a solution for these four main issues," Soltanieh told reporters, adding that the NPT talks had reached a deadlock.
If the nuclear powers refuse to compromise, "they should be blamed for consequences," Soltanieh said, adding that Tehran was prepared to block a declaration that it viewed as too weak. Since NPT meetings make decisions by consensus, Iran has a virtual veto.
(Editing by Bill Trott)
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64Q72D20100528
Reuters
Talks on shoring up the global anti-nuclear arms treaty were on the edge of failure on Friday as the United States and its allies clashed with Egypt over a push to pressure Israel to scrap any atom bombs it has.
For a month the 189 signatories of the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty have been meeting in New York in hopes of agreeing on a plan to shore up the troubled pact, which analysts say has been hit by Iran's and North Korea's atomic programs and failure by the nuclear powers to disarm.
The latest draft of a final declaration for the NPT review conference calls for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to organize a meeting of all Middle Eastern states in 2012 on how to make the region free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as demanded by a 1995 NPT resolution.
The creation of a WMD-free zone would eventually force Israel to abandon any atomic bombs it has. The Jewish state, which like nuclear-armed India and Pakistan never signed the NPT, is presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies it. Israel is not participating in the NPT meeting.
In a radical departure from the previous U.S. administration, President Barack Obama's negotiators had agreed to join the NPT's other four official nuclear powers -- Britain, France, Russia and China -- in backing such a conference while encouraging reluctant Israel to participate.
The five permanent U.N. Security Council members and a group of Arab states led by Egypt are close to a deal that would make the 2012 conference happen, delegates say. But the two sides have reached an impasse on the question of whether Israel should be named in the declaration as a problem state.
The Egyptians insist the declaration must state explicitly that Israel should join the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state, but the Americans are refusing, diplomats said.
LAST-MINUTE COMPROMISE?
One Western diplomat familiar with the talks described the situation as "not looking too hopeful."
He said there was a "stark choice for the Arabs -- name and shame Israel or have a conference in 2012 to move forward the 1995 promise ... toward a WMD-free zone in the Mideast."
"My bet is their (the Arabs') short-term political needs will trump their long-term strategic interest," he said.
Other delegates confirmed the possibility that the NPT review conference would fail to agree on a final declaration because of disagreements on the Middle East question, repeating what happened at the last NPT review conference in 2005.
But diplomats said they hoped the United States and Egypt -- the key players in the Middle East negotiations -- would strike a last-minute compromise that salvaged the conference.
"We've worked so hard for the past month," one diplomat said. "We've got a strong draft that would strengthen all three pillars of the NPT -- disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. It shouldn't be thrown away."
Western diplomats said Israel had reluctantly agreed to attend the 2012 conference but only on condition that it not be "named and shamed" in the final declaration.
Iran's envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Tehran's chief delegate, accused the United States of causing the impasse at the NPT talks. Apart from the Middle East WMD-free zone, he said Washington and the other nuclear powers had rejected key demands of Iran and the other non-aligned developing nations.
Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh said those demands were for a precise deadline for nuclear powers to disarm, a call for negotiations on a treaty banning the use of atomic arms, and a pledge from the five nuclear powers not to use atomic bombs on states without them, known as a "negative security assurance."
"The nuclear weapon states, particularly the United States, have not cooperated to find a solution for these four main issues," Soltanieh told reporters, adding that the NPT talks had reached a deadlock.
If the nuclear powers refuse to compromise, "they should be blamed for consequences," Soltanieh said, adding that Tehran was prepared to block a declaration that it viewed as too weak. Since NPT meetings make decisions by consensus, Iran has a virtual veto.
(Editing by Bill Trott)
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64Q72D20100528
Friday, May 21, 2010
Q+A: What's in and behind the Iran sanctions draft?
May 20, 2010
Reuters - The United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China agreed this week on a draft sanctions U.N. Security Council resolution against Iran over its nuclear program.
The 15-nation council has the resolution and is expected to vote on it in the coming weeks. If approved, it will impose a fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Tehran for refusing to suspend an uranium enrichment program Western powers fear is for developing weapons but Iran says is for civilian purposes.
WHAT'S NEW IN THE DRAFT RESOLUTION?
The draft resolution names for the first time the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as linked to Iran's nuclear and missile programs. It describes the corps' link to "the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems."
The annexes to the resolution, once they are agreed by the six, will include a list of IRGC members and firms controlled by it that will be added to the list of those subject to asset freezes and travel bans under previous sanctions resolutions.
It specifically names the Central Bank of Iran in a paragraph calling on U.N. member states to be vigilant in all transactions with Iranian banks to ensure they are not linked to Tehran's nuclear or missile programs.
It also prohibits Iran from acquiring stakes abroad in uranium mines or any nuclear- or missile-related activities.
It expands existing U.N. restrictions on arms trade with Iran to include more categories of heavy weapons.
It calls for setting up a cargo inspection regime similar to one in place for North Korea aimed at stopping and seizing banned air and sea cargo to and from Iran.
The annexes will include a list of individuals and firms linked to the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines that will be subject to asset freezes and travel bans. Other firms, banks and individuals will be listed in the annexes as well.
The resolution bans the establishment of new Iranian banks, representative offices or subsidiaries abroad, or maintaining correspondent relationships with Iranian banks, if there are "reasonable grounds" to suspect that the banks might be involved in financing Iran's nuclear or missile programs.
The draft resolution would establish a so-called panel of experts to provide detailed reports on compliance with the sanctions regime to the U.N. Iran sanctions committee.
WHAT DID THE U.S., EUROPEANS HAVE TO GIVE UP?
During months of closed-door negotiations, U.N. diplomats say, the United States, Britain, France and Germany had to give up a number of proposed sanctions to secure the support of Russia and China, which have close trade ties to Iran.
Originally the French proposed targeting Iran's oil and gas trade. The United States suggested banning new investments in Iran's energy sector. Moscow and Beijing rejected those ideas.
All that is left of the proposed energy measures in the draft is a reference in the preamble to a "potential connection" between energy revenues and Iran's atomic program.
There was also a proposal to blacklist Iran's central bank but that was rejected by Russia, China and Germany, who feared it would make it impossible to do any business with Iran.
Most of the measures outlined in the draft resolution were originally intended to be mandatory. In the final version many have been made voluntary.
Russia and China also insisted that any sanctions taken against Iran be justified by a suspected connection to Tehran's nuclear or ballistic missile program.
HOW WILL THE RESOLUTION BE IMPLEMENTED?
If the resolution is passed, the European Union will approve its own rules on implementing it, and possibly additional sanctions that go beyond the U.N. sanctions.
The EU, United States and their allies have been increasingly aggressive in implementing existing sanctions against Iranian banks and other Iranian firms. The result has been that some of the voluntary measures in the three previous sanctions resolutions have become de facto mandatory.
WHEN WILL IT BE PASSED?
Western diplomats expect negotiations on the resolution between the five permanent veto-wielding Security Council members and the 10 elected members to continue for several weeks. The draft will likely be amended during that time.
The diplomats expect that a vote on the resolution will come in the first weeks of June at the earliest.
WILL IT BE VOTED UNANIMOUSLY?
Security Council resolutions need nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members to be adopted.
Council diplomats expect that adoption will not be unanimous. Lebanon is expected to abstain, because the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah is in its government.
Turkey and Brazil have also made clear that they would have trouble voting for new sanctions because of a nuclear fuel swap agreement with Iran they recently brokered.
There are also questions about Uganda and Nigeria, though Western diplomats say they will probably vote yes in the end. Even if they do not, the West is counting on a minimum of 10 votes in favor -- enough to pass the resolution but short of the overwhelming expression of support Washington would like.
Editing by Cynthia Osterman
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64J5R920100520?feedType=RSS&feedName=Iran&virtualBrandChannel=10209
Reuters - The United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China agreed this week on a draft sanctions U.N. Security Council resolution against Iran over its nuclear program.
The 15-nation council has the resolution and is expected to vote on it in the coming weeks. If approved, it will impose a fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Tehran for refusing to suspend an uranium enrichment program Western powers fear is for developing weapons but Iran says is for civilian purposes.
WHAT'S NEW IN THE DRAFT RESOLUTION?
The draft resolution names for the first time the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as linked to Iran's nuclear and missile programs. It describes the corps' link to "the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems."
The annexes to the resolution, once they are agreed by the six, will include a list of IRGC members and firms controlled by it that will be added to the list of those subject to asset freezes and travel bans under previous sanctions resolutions.
It specifically names the Central Bank of Iran in a paragraph calling on U.N. member states to be vigilant in all transactions with Iranian banks to ensure they are not linked to Tehran's nuclear or missile programs.
It also prohibits Iran from acquiring stakes abroad in uranium mines or any nuclear- or missile-related activities.
It expands existing U.N. restrictions on arms trade with Iran to include more categories of heavy weapons.
It calls for setting up a cargo inspection regime similar to one in place for North Korea aimed at stopping and seizing banned air and sea cargo to and from Iran.
The annexes will include a list of individuals and firms linked to the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines that will be subject to asset freezes and travel bans. Other firms, banks and individuals will be listed in the annexes as well.
The resolution bans the establishment of new Iranian banks, representative offices or subsidiaries abroad, or maintaining correspondent relationships with Iranian banks, if there are "reasonable grounds" to suspect that the banks might be involved in financing Iran's nuclear or missile programs.
The draft resolution would establish a so-called panel of experts to provide detailed reports on compliance with the sanctions regime to the U.N. Iran sanctions committee.
WHAT DID THE U.S., EUROPEANS HAVE TO GIVE UP?
During months of closed-door negotiations, U.N. diplomats say, the United States, Britain, France and Germany had to give up a number of proposed sanctions to secure the support of Russia and China, which have close trade ties to Iran.
Originally the French proposed targeting Iran's oil and gas trade. The United States suggested banning new investments in Iran's energy sector. Moscow and Beijing rejected those ideas.
All that is left of the proposed energy measures in the draft is a reference in the preamble to a "potential connection" between energy revenues and Iran's atomic program.
There was also a proposal to blacklist Iran's central bank but that was rejected by Russia, China and Germany, who feared it would make it impossible to do any business with Iran.
Most of the measures outlined in the draft resolution were originally intended to be mandatory. In the final version many have been made voluntary.
Russia and China also insisted that any sanctions taken against Iran be justified by a suspected connection to Tehran's nuclear or ballistic missile program.
HOW WILL THE RESOLUTION BE IMPLEMENTED?
If the resolution is passed, the European Union will approve its own rules on implementing it, and possibly additional sanctions that go beyond the U.N. sanctions.
The EU, United States and their allies have been increasingly aggressive in implementing existing sanctions against Iranian banks and other Iranian firms. The result has been that some of the voluntary measures in the three previous sanctions resolutions have become de facto mandatory.
WHEN WILL IT BE PASSED?
Western diplomats expect negotiations on the resolution between the five permanent veto-wielding Security Council members and the 10 elected members to continue for several weeks. The draft will likely be amended during that time.
The diplomats expect that a vote on the resolution will come in the first weeks of June at the earliest.
WILL IT BE VOTED UNANIMOUSLY?
Security Council resolutions need nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members to be adopted.
Council diplomats expect that adoption will not be unanimous. Lebanon is expected to abstain, because the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah is in its government.
Turkey and Brazil have also made clear that they would have trouble voting for new sanctions because of a nuclear fuel swap agreement with Iran they recently brokered.
There are also questions about Uganda and Nigeria, though Western diplomats say they will probably vote yes in the end. Even if they do not, the West is counting on a minimum of 10 votes in favor -- enough to pass the resolution but short of the overwhelming expression of support Washington would like.
Editing by Cynthia Osterman
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64J5R920100520?feedType=RSS&feedName=Iran&virtualBrandChannel=10209
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)