June 07, 2010
VIENNA (AFP) — Iran's controversial nuclear drive tops the agenda at a week-long meeting of the UN atomic watchdog starting here Monday as world powers are poised to slap new sanctions on Tehran.
The International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-member board of governors was scheduled to convene at 10:30 am (0830 GMT) for a heavy agenda, focussing not only on Iran and Syria, but also wider discussions on nuclear programmes in the Middle East.
But it was Iran that was again set to dominate as the UN Security Council prepared to pass another round of punitive actions on the Islamic republic over its refusal to halt sensitive nuclear activities which the West believes masks a covert drive to build a bomb.
Last week, the IAEA circulated its latest report on Iran, in which it found that Tehran is pressing ahead with its contested uranium enrichment activities -- despite three existing rounds of UN sanctions -- and is now producing enriched uranium at even higher levels of purification.
The report said Iran had produced at least 5.7 kilos (12.5 pounds) of higher-enriched uranium, ostensibly for a research reactor that makes radioisotopes for medical purposes.
But the West fears the material could be ultimately intended for a nuclear weapon, and even the IAEA itself says it remains concerned about the true nature of the activities.
Iran has so far been enriching uranium to levels of no more than 5.0 percent, but started enriching to close to 20 percent purification in February, claiming it wanted to ensure a supply of fuel for the research reactor in case an international supply deal fell through.
The UN Security Council has already ordered Iran to halt all enrichment activities. Thus, the move to higher levels of purification drew wide condemnation because it brings the Islamic republic closer to levels needed to make the fissile material for a nuclear bomb, especially as the West charges that Iran does not have the technology to turn the material into the fuel rods for the reactor.
In an IAEA-brokered deal last October, the United States, Russia and France proposed they take most of Iran's stockpile of low-enriched uranium (LEU) and turn it into the much-needed fuel rods.
But Iran refused to take up the offer and has drawn up an alternative deal with Brazil and Turkey instead.
Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hQ9pLnwJNiuxz3dcCwTqIMXs3RHQ
Showing posts with label IAEA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IAEA. Show all posts
Monday, June 7, 2010
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Expert Accuses Burma of Trying to Build Nuclear Bomb
June 04, 2010
Kate Woodsome
Voice of America
A retired U.N. nuclear expert says Burma is mining uranium and acquiring components for a nuclear weapons program. But evidence documented in his report indicates the military regime is far from becoming a nuclear threat.
Nonetheless, Robert Kelley, former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, believes Burma's intent is clear: to build a nuclear bomb. Kelley has spent months scouring photographs and documents provided by a former Burmese defense engineer who recently fled the country.
Kelley makes his case in a new report commissioned by the Burmese dissident group the Democratic Voice of Burma, based in Norway. The most compelling evidence that Burma is developing a nuclear weapons program is photographs of bomb-reduction vessels, says co-researcher, Ali Fowle.
"The machines had been built in the factories seemed quite clearly to be for making chemical compounds of uranium. That vessel looks like it's made to turn enriched uranium grain salt into uranium metal, which there are other reasons you could do that, but it's likely to be for a nuclear program," she said.
The color photographs analyzed in the report show Burmese military officials and civilians posing beside a machine called the vacuum glove box, which is used in the production of uranium metal.
Early stages
The two factories analyzed in the report appear to be solely run by Burmese engineers, according to Fowle, who says that Burma is in the very early stages of developing nuclear technology.
"Some of the machines they've been making or some of the products they've been making are very crude, probably because they haven't been having outside help. There's one item that's a burning chamber that has two pipes coming out of it," she said. "Bob [Robert Kelley] remarked to me that his plumber could have done a better job than that. I mean it is very crude welding."
Burmese defector
At the center of the investigation is Sai Thein Win, a former defense engineer and missile expert who worked in factories in Burma. Fowle said the Russian-trained defector felt morally compelled to share his knowledge with the world.
In his analysis of Sai Thein Win's evidence, Kelley acknowledged that a report based on one source is not ideal, and that it is possible to fake photographs. But he testifies to the credibility of the defector's background and says it is appears the photographs are real because of their volume and quality.
North Korea
Hours before the report was released, U.S. senator Jim Webb canceled a planned trip to Burma. This week in Bangkok, Webb cited the report's findings and U.S. concerns about an alleged shipment of North Korean arms to Burma.
"I do not know the validity of this information, but at the same time I think there's enough in these two allegations of Burmese involvement with North Korea and potentially with a nuclear program," said Webb. "There's enough that needs to be resolved that it would be inappropriate for me to be going into Burma at this time."
Webb chairs a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations panel on East Asia, and has been key in the Obama administration's new effort to open a dialogue with Burma's military government.
A United Nations report asserted last month that North Korea has been secretly exporting missile and nuclear technology to Burma.
"None of our evidence implies that North Korea has anything to do directly with evidence that we think points to a nuclear program," said Fowle, dismissing assumptions that North Korea is backing Burma's nuclear activities.
Meanwhile, Robert Kelley is urging the international community to conduct a full investigation into the report.
Source: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Expert-Accuses-Burma-of-Trying-to-Build-Nuclear-Bomb-95607209.html
Kate Woodsome
Voice of America
A retired U.N. nuclear expert says Burma is mining uranium and acquiring components for a nuclear weapons program. But evidence documented in his report indicates the military regime is far from becoming a nuclear threat.
Nonetheless, Robert Kelley, former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, believes Burma's intent is clear: to build a nuclear bomb. Kelley has spent months scouring photographs and documents provided by a former Burmese defense engineer who recently fled the country.
Kelley makes his case in a new report commissioned by the Burmese dissident group the Democratic Voice of Burma, based in Norway. The most compelling evidence that Burma is developing a nuclear weapons program is photographs of bomb-reduction vessels, says co-researcher, Ali Fowle.
"The machines had been built in the factories seemed quite clearly to be for making chemical compounds of uranium. That vessel looks like it's made to turn enriched uranium grain salt into uranium metal, which there are other reasons you could do that, but it's likely to be for a nuclear program," she said.
The color photographs analyzed in the report show Burmese military officials and civilians posing beside a machine called the vacuum glove box, which is used in the production of uranium metal.
Early stages
The two factories analyzed in the report appear to be solely run by Burmese engineers, according to Fowle, who says that Burma is in the very early stages of developing nuclear technology.
"Some of the machines they've been making or some of the products they've been making are very crude, probably because they haven't been having outside help. There's one item that's a burning chamber that has two pipes coming out of it," she said. "Bob [Robert Kelley] remarked to me that his plumber could have done a better job than that. I mean it is very crude welding."
Burmese defector
At the center of the investigation is Sai Thein Win, a former defense engineer and missile expert who worked in factories in Burma. Fowle said the Russian-trained defector felt morally compelled to share his knowledge with the world.
In his analysis of Sai Thein Win's evidence, Kelley acknowledged that a report based on one source is not ideal, and that it is possible to fake photographs. But he testifies to the credibility of the defector's background and says it is appears the photographs are real because of their volume and quality.
North Korea
Hours before the report was released, U.S. senator Jim Webb canceled a planned trip to Burma. This week in Bangkok, Webb cited the report's findings and U.S. concerns about an alleged shipment of North Korean arms to Burma.
"I do not know the validity of this information, but at the same time I think there's enough in these two allegations of Burmese involvement with North Korea and potentially with a nuclear program," said Webb. "There's enough that needs to be resolved that it would be inappropriate for me to be going into Burma at this time."
Webb chairs a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations panel on East Asia, and has been key in the Obama administration's new effort to open a dialogue with Burma's military government.
A United Nations report asserted last month that North Korea has been secretly exporting missile and nuclear technology to Burma.
"None of our evidence implies that North Korea has anything to do directly with evidence that we think points to a nuclear program," said Fowle, dismissing assumptions that North Korea is backing Burma's nuclear activities.
Meanwhile, Robert Kelley is urging the international community to conduct a full investigation into the report.
Source: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Expert-Accuses-Burma-of-Trying-to-Build-Nuclear-Bomb-95607209.html
Friday, June 4, 2010
US, India for early FMCT talks
June 4, 2010
ANI
The United States and India have agreed and committed themselves to achieving an early start of negotiations on a multilateral, non-discriminatory and internationally and effectively verifiable Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty at the Conference on Disarmament.
A joint statement issued after the first US-India Strategic Dialogue held here, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated the two countries' shared vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and restated their commitment to address the challenges of global nuclear proliferation.
Krishna reiterated India's appreciation for President Obama's initiative to host the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington.
Both expressed satisfaction over the summit's outcome and the adoption of a Communiqui and Work Plan.
Secretary Clinton welcomed India's announcement of establishing a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership with focus on advanced nuclear energy systems, nuclear security, radiological safety and applications of radio isotopes and radiation technologies and appreciated India's intent to welcome participation by international partner countries and IAEA in the work of the Centre.
On the issue of energy security, both said that the United States and India have taken crucial steps towards full implementation of civil nuclear cooperation.
Krishna and Clinton reiterated that nuclear energy could make a significant contribution to building a sustainable and clean energy future.
They highlighted the Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation Action Plan recently signed by the two countries.
According to the joint statement, they welcomed the successful conclusion of negotiations on the Arrangements and Procedures Agreed between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India pursuant to Article 6(iii) of the India-U.S. Agreement Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, which sets forth the arrangements and procedures for India's reprocessing of U.S.-obligated spent nuclear fuel.
They also discussed progress on energy and climate change issues since the signing of the U.S.-India Memorandum of Understanding on Energy Security, Clean Energy, and Climate Change.
They stressed that the Clean Energy and Climate Change Initiative they finalized last year would contribute to achieving sustainable development and a clean energy future for the people of both countries.
Both also discussed their respective national action plans and initiatives to address the challenge of climate change. They noted the enormous potential for scientific and commercial collaboration in clean energy technologies and recognized that their respective experience and expertise in renewable energy and energy efficiency provided a sound platform for building their bilateral partnership further and supporting similar efforts in other countries, especially developing countries.
They reaffirmed their support for the Copenhagen Accord as a positive step forward in meeting the global climate challenge, and underscored its importance in building a consensus in the ongoing negotiations under the UNFCCC.
They also welcomed the launch of the India-U.S. Climate Dialogue, which seeks to enhance bilateral U.S.-India cooperation with a view to achieving a successful outcome of the ongoing multilateral climate change negotiations.
Source: http://sify.com/news/us-india-for-early-fmct-talks-news-international-kgerOjegbeb.html
ANI
The United States and India have agreed and committed themselves to achieving an early start of negotiations on a multilateral, non-discriminatory and internationally and effectively verifiable Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty at the Conference on Disarmament.
A joint statement issued after the first US-India Strategic Dialogue held here, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated the two countries' shared vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and restated their commitment to address the challenges of global nuclear proliferation.
Krishna reiterated India's appreciation for President Obama's initiative to host the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington.
Both expressed satisfaction over the summit's outcome and the adoption of a Communiqui and Work Plan.
Secretary Clinton welcomed India's announcement of establishing a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership with focus on advanced nuclear energy systems, nuclear security, radiological safety and applications of radio isotopes and radiation technologies and appreciated India's intent to welcome participation by international partner countries and IAEA in the work of the Centre.
On the issue of energy security, both said that the United States and India have taken crucial steps towards full implementation of civil nuclear cooperation.
Krishna and Clinton reiterated that nuclear energy could make a significant contribution to building a sustainable and clean energy future.
They highlighted the Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation Action Plan recently signed by the two countries.
According to the joint statement, they welcomed the successful conclusion of negotiations on the Arrangements and Procedures Agreed between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India pursuant to Article 6(iii) of the India-U.S. Agreement Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, which sets forth the arrangements and procedures for India's reprocessing of U.S.-obligated spent nuclear fuel.
They also discussed progress on energy and climate change issues since the signing of the U.S.-India Memorandum of Understanding on Energy Security, Clean Energy, and Climate Change.
They stressed that the Clean Energy and Climate Change Initiative they finalized last year would contribute to achieving sustainable development and a clean energy future for the people of both countries.
Both also discussed their respective national action plans and initiatives to address the challenge of climate change. They noted the enormous potential for scientific and commercial collaboration in clean energy technologies and recognized that their respective experience and expertise in renewable energy and energy efficiency provided a sound platform for building their bilateral partnership further and supporting similar efforts in other countries, especially developing countries.
They reaffirmed their support for the Copenhagen Accord as a positive step forward in meeting the global climate challenge, and underscored its importance in building a consensus in the ongoing negotiations under the UNFCCC.
They also welcomed the launch of the India-U.S. Climate Dialogue, which seeks to enhance bilateral U.S.-India cooperation with a view to achieving a successful outcome of the ongoing multilateral climate change negotiations.
Source: http://sify.com/news/us-india-for-early-fmct-talks-news-international-kgerOjegbeb.html
Iran Disputes IAEA Assertion on Nuclear Equipment
June 4, 2010
Global Security Newswire
Iran yesterday challenged the International Atomic Energy Agency's assertion in a report issued this week that a Tehran laboratory in recent months housed sensitive equipment that could aid in separating weapon-usable nuclear material, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, June 3).
Experiments conducted at the Jabr Ibn Jayan Multipurpose Research Laboratory were aimed at producing uranium metal from spent nuclear fuel to serve as radiation shielding, Iranian Atomic Energy Organization head Ali Akbar Salehi said, adding without providing details that his country possessed a large quantity of depleted uranium. The U.N. nuclear watchdog's statement that the facility had carried out pyroprocessing work was a "misinterpretation," he said.
"The experiments have no relation to pyroprocessing," state media quoted Salehi as saying. "We believe the agency used this false report about a process that has not yet taken place, with the purpose of influencing public opinion."
The U.N. agency's international standing could be undermined by such "mistakes," the official added. The United States and several European powers suspect that Iran's nuclear program is geared toward weapons development; Tehran has consistently denied the assertion.
The Middle Eastern state informed the agency in January that it had pursued pyroprocessing efforts. When the Vienna-based organization sought details, Tehran reversed its declaration and indicated it had never carried out such work. During a visit to the Tehran laboratory in May, U.N. inspectors learned "that the electrochemical cell had been removed" from the facility, the IAEA safeguards report states.
The Iranian official said his country had not transferred any equipment from the site and the agency's assertion was "not correct," AP reported. Iran would provide proof to refute the assertion, Salehi said, failing to state when it would offer the evidence (Nasser Karimi, Associated Press/Google News, June 3).
The Obama administration yesterday said the U.N. Security Council was likely to adopt a fourth sanctions resolution against Iran next week, despite speculation that the measure could be held up over Israel's violent seizure of a Turkish-registered ship transferring aid to the Gaza Strip, Agence France-Presse reported.
"We've seen sanctions introduced in the U.N. Security Council that we believe will be voted on next week and approved by the U.N. Security Council," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
Washington was working to win adoption of the resolution without support from Brazil or Turkey, two nonpermanent members of the body, high-level U.S. officials said last week. Security Council actions require support from at least nine of the group's 15 member nations, and no veto by any of its permanent members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, June 3).
China yesterday said the United Nations should avoid pursuing any measures that would harm the Gulf nation's populace, China Daily reported.
"The U.N. action should help resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said.
"The vote on the draft proposal does not mean the door to diplomatic efforts is closed," Jiang said, noting that Beijing still stands by an international strategy of using both pressure and dialogue to seek alterations to Tehran's nuclear policies (Ma Liyao, China Daily, June 4).
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad today said his nation would assert itself, even if it becomes subject to further U.N. penalties, AFP reported.
"We are standing in the face of enemies. To defend the rights of the nation, we will pull out any resolutions from the mouth" of the nation's antagonists, he said (Agence France-Presse II/Google News, June 4).
Meanwhile, former IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei last week said he was "surprised" that Washington and its allies continued their pursuit of new Iran sanctions after the Middle Eastern nation reached a uranium exchange deal with Brazil and Turkey.
The deal calls for the Gulf nation to store 1,200 kilograms of its low-enriched uranium in Turkey for one year; other countries would be expected within that period to provide nuclear material refined for use at a Tehran medical research reactor in exchange for the Iran-origin uranium.
The arrangement appeared similar to another proposal, formulated in October by the International Atomic Energy Agency, that was intended to defer the Middle Eastern state's ability to fuel a nuclear weapon long enough to more fully address U.S. and European concerns about its potential nuclear bomb-making capability. Tehran ultimately rejected the IAEA proposal.
"I was frankly not surprised that the offer came through, I was surprised at the reaction that some countries would continue to say that they want to apply sanctions, because, the Iranian issue, if you remove over half of the material that Iran has to Turkey, that is clearly a confidence-building measure regarding concerns about Iran’s future intentions," ElBaradei told the Jornal do Brazil newspaper.
"The material that will remain in Iran is under IAEA safeguards and seals. There is absolutely no imminent threat that Iran is going to develop the bomb tomorrow from the material that they have in Iran," he added.
ElBaradei also expressed doubt that Israel would attempt military action against Iranian nuclear facilities.
"I can’t read their intention but I hope they don’t because I think it would be madness to attack Iran right now. As I have said before and continue to say now, it could turn the Middle East into a ball of fire, it would not resolve the Iranian issue but it would be an incentive and invitation for Iran -- even if they are not working or developing the ambition to build a weapon -- to develop a nuclear weapon. It could delay an Iranian nuclear program for a year or two but definitely they would come back with a clear mission of developing a nuclear weapon," he said (Jornal do Brazil/Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, June 3).
Russia yesterday called for further discussion of the uranium exchange plan, the United News of India reported.
"We count on the fact that the countries involved in the project will have a chance in the foreseeable future to discuss all necessary practical aspects linked to the implementation of the fuel swap scheme with the Iranian side," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Andrei Nesterenko said.
"In our opinion it is good to hold such a meeting under the IAEA aegis," he said (United News of India/New Kerala, June 3).
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed the three-nation agreement and other elements of the Iranian nuclear dispute by telephone, ITAR-Tass reported today.
"They exchanged views on the situation around the Iranian nuclear program in the context of the work in the U.N. Security Council on the draft resolution on Iran and prospects for the fulfillment of the fuel swap scheme for the Tehran research reactor," the Russian Foreign Ministry said today (ITAR-Tass, June 4).
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was set to travel today to Germany, where he is expected to address the nuclear standoff and other nuclear weapons issues in talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, RIA Novosti reported (RIA Novosti, June 4).
Source: http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100604_6379.php
Global Security Newswire
Iran yesterday challenged the International Atomic Energy Agency's assertion in a report issued this week that a Tehran laboratory in recent months housed sensitive equipment that could aid in separating weapon-usable nuclear material, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, June 3).
Experiments conducted at the Jabr Ibn Jayan Multipurpose Research Laboratory were aimed at producing uranium metal from spent nuclear fuel to serve as radiation shielding, Iranian Atomic Energy Organization head Ali Akbar Salehi said, adding without providing details that his country possessed a large quantity of depleted uranium. The U.N. nuclear watchdog's statement that the facility had carried out pyroprocessing work was a "misinterpretation," he said.
"The experiments have no relation to pyroprocessing," state media quoted Salehi as saying. "We believe the agency used this false report about a process that has not yet taken place, with the purpose of influencing public opinion."
The U.N. agency's international standing could be undermined by such "mistakes," the official added. The United States and several European powers suspect that Iran's nuclear program is geared toward weapons development; Tehran has consistently denied the assertion.
The Middle Eastern state informed the agency in January that it had pursued pyroprocessing efforts. When the Vienna-based organization sought details, Tehran reversed its declaration and indicated it had never carried out such work. During a visit to the Tehran laboratory in May, U.N. inspectors learned "that the electrochemical cell had been removed" from the facility, the IAEA safeguards report states.
The Iranian official said his country had not transferred any equipment from the site and the agency's assertion was "not correct," AP reported. Iran would provide proof to refute the assertion, Salehi said, failing to state when it would offer the evidence (Nasser Karimi, Associated Press/Google News, June 3).
The Obama administration yesterday said the U.N. Security Council was likely to adopt a fourth sanctions resolution against Iran next week, despite speculation that the measure could be held up over Israel's violent seizure of a Turkish-registered ship transferring aid to the Gaza Strip, Agence France-Presse reported.
"We've seen sanctions introduced in the U.N. Security Council that we believe will be voted on next week and approved by the U.N. Security Council," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
Washington was working to win adoption of the resolution without support from Brazil or Turkey, two nonpermanent members of the body, high-level U.S. officials said last week. Security Council actions require support from at least nine of the group's 15 member nations, and no veto by any of its permanent members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, June 3).
China yesterday said the United Nations should avoid pursuing any measures that would harm the Gulf nation's populace, China Daily reported.
"The U.N. action should help resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said.
"The vote on the draft proposal does not mean the door to diplomatic efforts is closed," Jiang said, noting that Beijing still stands by an international strategy of using both pressure and dialogue to seek alterations to Tehran's nuclear policies (Ma Liyao, China Daily, June 4).
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad today said his nation would assert itself, even if it becomes subject to further U.N. penalties, AFP reported.
"We are standing in the face of enemies. To defend the rights of the nation, we will pull out any resolutions from the mouth" of the nation's antagonists, he said (Agence France-Presse II/Google News, June 4).
Meanwhile, former IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei last week said he was "surprised" that Washington and its allies continued their pursuit of new Iran sanctions after the Middle Eastern nation reached a uranium exchange deal with Brazil and Turkey.
The deal calls for the Gulf nation to store 1,200 kilograms of its low-enriched uranium in Turkey for one year; other countries would be expected within that period to provide nuclear material refined for use at a Tehran medical research reactor in exchange for the Iran-origin uranium.
The arrangement appeared similar to another proposal, formulated in October by the International Atomic Energy Agency, that was intended to defer the Middle Eastern state's ability to fuel a nuclear weapon long enough to more fully address U.S. and European concerns about its potential nuclear bomb-making capability. Tehran ultimately rejected the IAEA proposal.
"I was frankly not surprised that the offer came through, I was surprised at the reaction that some countries would continue to say that they want to apply sanctions, because, the Iranian issue, if you remove over half of the material that Iran has to Turkey, that is clearly a confidence-building measure regarding concerns about Iran’s future intentions," ElBaradei told the Jornal do Brazil newspaper.
"The material that will remain in Iran is under IAEA safeguards and seals. There is absolutely no imminent threat that Iran is going to develop the bomb tomorrow from the material that they have in Iran," he added.
ElBaradei also expressed doubt that Israel would attempt military action against Iranian nuclear facilities.
"I can’t read their intention but I hope they don’t because I think it would be madness to attack Iran right now. As I have said before and continue to say now, it could turn the Middle East into a ball of fire, it would not resolve the Iranian issue but it would be an incentive and invitation for Iran -- even if they are not working or developing the ambition to build a weapon -- to develop a nuclear weapon. It could delay an Iranian nuclear program for a year or two but definitely they would come back with a clear mission of developing a nuclear weapon," he said (Jornal do Brazil/Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, June 3).
Russia yesterday called for further discussion of the uranium exchange plan, the United News of India reported.
"We count on the fact that the countries involved in the project will have a chance in the foreseeable future to discuss all necessary practical aspects linked to the implementation of the fuel swap scheme with the Iranian side," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Andrei Nesterenko said.
"In our opinion it is good to hold such a meeting under the IAEA aegis," he said (United News of India/New Kerala, June 3).
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed the three-nation agreement and other elements of the Iranian nuclear dispute by telephone, ITAR-Tass reported today.
"They exchanged views on the situation around the Iranian nuclear program in the context of the work in the U.N. Security Council on the draft resolution on Iran and prospects for the fulfillment of the fuel swap scheme for the Tehran research reactor," the Russian Foreign Ministry said today (ITAR-Tass, June 4).
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was set to travel today to Germany, where he is expected to address the nuclear standoff and other nuclear weapons issues in talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, RIA Novosti reported (RIA Novosti, June 4).
Source: http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100604_6379.php
Burma 'trying to build nuclear weapon'
June 4, 2010
BBC
Burma is working to develop a nuclear weapon, according to an investigation by a Burmese exile broadcaster. The new film by Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) includes evidence from a Burmese army officer who defected. The years-long investigation concluded that Burma was a long way from building an atomic bomb.
A former UN nuclear inspector who has seen the findings said he believed Burma was trying to build nuclear weapons. The revelations come a day after a US senator cancelled a visit to Burma because of concern over its alleged nuclear ambitions. The new documentary, Burma's Nuclear Ambitions, features testimony from Major Sai Thein Win, who defected in February.
'Expending huge resources'
He brought out documents and pictures from a factory, which he says is building prototypes for nuclear components. A vessel allegedly used for converting uranium for the nuclear fuel cycle A vessel allegedly used for converting uranium for the nuclear fuel cycle
Maj Sai is a mechanical engineer who worked on machining parts and visited the Burmese nuclear battalion in Thabeikkyin, says the documentary. He provided photos purportedly of machines that can be used to convert uranium compounds for use in nuclear fuel or a nuclear weapon.
Robert Kelley, a former inspector with the International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN watchdog, said he believed Burma was probably mining uranium and exploring nuclear technology "useful only for weapons".
In an online article for DVB, he writes: "The information provided by [Major] Sai and other reporters from Burma clearly indicates that the regime has the intent to go nuclear and it is... expending huge resources along the way." Mr Kelley said the quality of the machine parts and the mechanical drawings was "poor".
"Nothing we have seen suggests Burma will be successful with [these] materials and components," he writes. He said if Burma was found to be developing nuclear weapons it should face sanctions.
'No Pyongyang link'
Norway-based DVB also said it did not believe Burma was capable of producing a nuclear weapon at this time. Burmese defector Sai Thein Win holding a purported rocket impeller Burmese defector Sai Thein Win holding a purported rocket impeller
"The intention is there," says Ali Fowle, a spokesperson for DVB, "but the reality is very different." A UN panel has accused North Korea of exporting nuclear and missile technology in defiance of a UN ban, to countries including Burma, Iran and Syria.
On Thursday, the US Senator who chairs a Senate committee on East Asia, Jim Webb, cancelled a visit to Burma because of concern it was working with North Korea to develop a nuclear programme. But DVB says that while North Korea may be involved in missile proliferation, there is no new evidence to suggest it is helping Burma to develop nuclear weapons.
DVB adds, however, that the Burmese government is modelling itself on North Korea, reckoning that if Pyongyang has nuclear weapons, the US or other countries would find it more difficult to attack.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10236381.stm
BBC
Burma is working to develop a nuclear weapon, according to an investigation by a Burmese exile broadcaster. The new film by Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) includes evidence from a Burmese army officer who defected. The years-long investigation concluded that Burma was a long way from building an atomic bomb.
A former UN nuclear inspector who has seen the findings said he believed Burma was trying to build nuclear weapons. The revelations come a day after a US senator cancelled a visit to Burma because of concern over its alleged nuclear ambitions. The new documentary, Burma's Nuclear Ambitions, features testimony from Major Sai Thein Win, who defected in February.
'Expending huge resources'
He brought out documents and pictures from a factory, which he says is building prototypes for nuclear components. A vessel allegedly used for converting uranium for the nuclear fuel cycle A vessel allegedly used for converting uranium for the nuclear fuel cycle
Maj Sai is a mechanical engineer who worked on machining parts and visited the Burmese nuclear battalion in Thabeikkyin, says the documentary. He provided photos purportedly of machines that can be used to convert uranium compounds for use in nuclear fuel or a nuclear weapon.
Robert Kelley, a former inspector with the International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN watchdog, said he believed Burma was probably mining uranium and exploring nuclear technology "useful only for weapons".
In an online article for DVB, he writes: "The information provided by [Major] Sai and other reporters from Burma clearly indicates that the regime has the intent to go nuclear and it is... expending huge resources along the way." Mr Kelley said the quality of the machine parts and the mechanical drawings was "poor".
"Nothing we have seen suggests Burma will be successful with [these] materials and components," he writes. He said if Burma was found to be developing nuclear weapons it should face sanctions.
'No Pyongyang link'
Norway-based DVB also said it did not believe Burma was capable of producing a nuclear weapon at this time. Burmese defector Sai Thein Win holding a purported rocket impeller Burmese defector Sai Thein Win holding a purported rocket impeller
"The intention is there," says Ali Fowle, a spokesperson for DVB, "but the reality is very different." A UN panel has accused North Korea of exporting nuclear and missile technology in defiance of a UN ban, to countries including Burma, Iran and Syria.
On Thursday, the US Senator who chairs a Senate committee on East Asia, Jim Webb, cancelled a visit to Burma because of concern it was working with North Korea to develop a nuclear programme. But DVB says that while North Korea may be involved in missile proliferation, there is no new evidence to suggest it is helping Burma to develop nuclear weapons.
DVB adds, however, that the Burmese government is modelling itself on North Korea, reckoning that if Pyongyang has nuclear weapons, the US or other countries would find it more difficult to attack.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10236381.stm
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Tehran has enough material for two nuclear bombs, IAEA says
June 02, 2010
Times Online
Iran has amassed enough fissile material to build two nuclear bombs, according to the United Nations atomic watchdog.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA’s) last report before a Security Council vote on proposed new sanctions for Iran also detailed how its inspectors have been denied access to facilities.
It renders obsolete Iran’s efforts to revive a fuel-swap deal which was aimed at delaying the moment it reaches nuclear capability.
The report said Iran has continued to evade questions over evidence of weapons work while improving its uranium enrichment capabilities.
Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium stands at two tonnes, enough to arm two nuclear warheads if enriched further. The country, which has been ordered five times by the Security Council to halt enrichment until weapons questions are addressed, defied the international community to begin enriching uranium to 20 per cent, bringing it closer to weapons-grade fuel. It claims that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only and says that it needs the 20 per cent fuel to make medical isotopes.
It began the higher enrichment process after the collapse of an IAEA deal to ship most of its nuclear fuel stocks abroad in return for 20 per cent fuel rods.
Western countries and Russia backed that deal in the hope that it would delay the moment when Iran amassed enough fuel to be able to build a bomb.
Iran rejected the deal then, but recently revived it with the backing of Turkey and Brazil, offering to ship the material to Turkey in the hope of forestalling any attempt to impose sanctions.
The new report suggests, however, that the amount agreed, 1,200kg (2,650lb), would still leave Iran with enough material for one bomb.
Washington has won the tentative backing of Russia and China for sanctions mostly targeting the Revolutionary Guard, the guardians of the nuclear programme, but has failed to win agreement on more stringent economic restrictions.
Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7142176.ece
Times Online
Iran has amassed enough fissile material to build two nuclear bombs, according to the United Nations atomic watchdog.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA’s) last report before a Security Council vote on proposed new sanctions for Iran also detailed how its inspectors have been denied access to facilities.
It renders obsolete Iran’s efforts to revive a fuel-swap deal which was aimed at delaying the moment it reaches nuclear capability.
The report said Iran has continued to evade questions over evidence of weapons work while improving its uranium enrichment capabilities.
Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium stands at two tonnes, enough to arm two nuclear warheads if enriched further. The country, which has been ordered five times by the Security Council to halt enrichment until weapons questions are addressed, defied the international community to begin enriching uranium to 20 per cent, bringing it closer to weapons-grade fuel. It claims that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only and says that it needs the 20 per cent fuel to make medical isotopes.
It began the higher enrichment process after the collapse of an IAEA deal to ship most of its nuclear fuel stocks abroad in return for 20 per cent fuel rods.
Western countries and Russia backed that deal in the hope that it would delay the moment when Iran amassed enough fuel to be able to build a bomb.
Iran rejected the deal then, but recently revived it with the backing of Turkey and Brazil, offering to ship the material to Turkey in the hope of forestalling any attempt to impose sanctions.
The new report suggests, however, that the amount agreed, 1,200kg (2,650lb), would still leave Iran with enough material for one bomb.
Washington has won the tentative backing of Russia and China for sanctions mostly targeting the Revolutionary Guard, the guardians of the nuclear programme, but has failed to win agreement on more stringent economic restrictions.
Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7142176.ece
Friday, May 28, 2010
Why is the West sceptical about Iran's fuel offer?
By Sylvia Westall
Reuters - Iran has outlined a plan to the U.N. atomic watchdog under which it would give up some of its nuclear material but diplomats say the gesture would have no effect on a push to widen sanctions against Tehran.
Under the plan agreed with Brazil and Turkey last week, Iran would transfer 1,200 kg (2,646 lb) of its low-enriched uranium -- enough for an atomic bomb if enriched to higher levels -- to Turkey within a month.
A year later the Islamic Republic would get special nuclear fuel rods for a medical research reactor which makes isotopes to help treat cancer patients.
Why is the West cautious about this proposal?
TIME LAPSE
Western officials say the landscape has changed in the seven months since they brokered a similar plan with Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as a way to ease tensions over Tehran's atomic work.
Iran has continued enriching uranium and taking away 1,200 kg now would still leave Iran with enough for a bomb if it wanted to build one. Tehran says it has no intention of doing this and says its work is for peaceful purposes only.
Some observers say the swap is still worth it because it would remove half the material. Others say the deal has now lost its value because the bomb risk would remain and it fails to build confidence.
HIGHER ENRICHMENT
Iran also started enriching uranium to higher levels in February, saying it wanted to make fuel for the reactor itself, but the move unsettled Western powers because it takes the material closer to the grade needed for atomic weapons.
Tehran said it took the step because it said it was tired of waiting for the original deal to be agreed. Western officials say it was Iran which stalled progress, with a series of new conditions for the swap which it knew would not be accepted.
Iran has vowed that it will not stop its higher enrichment, even if the fuel supply agreement goes through and has started setting up more equipment for it.
Western diplomats have described this refusal to halt higher enrichment as a likely deal-breaker. They also question why Iran would still need to continue this process -- which like its lower-grade enrichment violates U.N. sanctions -- when countries are prepared to give it the fuel rods it says it needs.
They say Iran lacks the capability to make the specialized fuel assemblies in the short-term, so it makes no sense to produce more highly enriched uranium for a reactor that Tehran says will run out of fuel by the end of the year.
LACK OF DETAILS
Unlike the IAEA plan, brokered by former IAEA-chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the new proposal does not included detail on who would make the fuel rods, who will pay for the process and what will happen to the low-enriched uranium stored in Turkey after the swap has been completed, Western officials say.
Without this sort of information, they say they cannot begin serious negotiations on Iran's offer, which many of them see as an attempt to stall sanctions negotiations.
Some Western officials say the Iranian move fits into a familiar pattern of Tehran offering concessions when punitive measures loom.
THE BIGGER PICTURE
Diplomats also say that with its promotion of the new proposal, Iran is trying to give the impression that it was the fuel deal which was at the centre of problems with the West, rather than its nuclear ambitions as a whole.
They acknowledge that the original IAEA-plan was always intended as a first step towards resolving the nuclear issue, not a solution.
But they say Iran's lack of cooperation with the agency on questions about its atomic programme and its delay in engaging on the fuel deal, have left negotiators feeling wary.
They also fear that Iran may go back on its word.
Talks over the original deal suffered from internal Iranian disputes. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad first appeared to favour the U.N. deal as a way to shore up his own power.
But he faced stiff opposition from rivals who did not want to see him reap credit for a breakthrough. Some voiced misgivings about parting with the nuclear material, which is seen as a strategic asset.
But analysts in Iran believe Ahmadinejad wouldn't have agreed on this deal without the blessing of the supreme leader.
Source: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48881820100528
Reuters - Iran has outlined a plan to the U.N. atomic watchdog under which it would give up some of its nuclear material but diplomats say the gesture would have no effect on a push to widen sanctions against Tehran.
Under the plan agreed with Brazil and Turkey last week, Iran would transfer 1,200 kg (2,646 lb) of its low-enriched uranium -- enough for an atomic bomb if enriched to higher levels -- to Turkey within a month.
A year later the Islamic Republic would get special nuclear fuel rods for a medical research reactor which makes isotopes to help treat cancer patients.
Why is the West cautious about this proposal?
TIME LAPSE
Western officials say the landscape has changed in the seven months since they brokered a similar plan with Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as a way to ease tensions over Tehran's atomic work.
Iran has continued enriching uranium and taking away 1,200 kg now would still leave Iran with enough for a bomb if it wanted to build one. Tehran says it has no intention of doing this and says its work is for peaceful purposes only.
Some observers say the swap is still worth it because it would remove half the material. Others say the deal has now lost its value because the bomb risk would remain and it fails to build confidence.
HIGHER ENRICHMENT
Iran also started enriching uranium to higher levels in February, saying it wanted to make fuel for the reactor itself, but the move unsettled Western powers because it takes the material closer to the grade needed for atomic weapons.
Tehran said it took the step because it said it was tired of waiting for the original deal to be agreed. Western officials say it was Iran which stalled progress, with a series of new conditions for the swap which it knew would not be accepted.
Iran has vowed that it will not stop its higher enrichment, even if the fuel supply agreement goes through and has started setting up more equipment for it.
Western diplomats have described this refusal to halt higher enrichment as a likely deal-breaker. They also question why Iran would still need to continue this process -- which like its lower-grade enrichment violates U.N. sanctions -- when countries are prepared to give it the fuel rods it says it needs.
They say Iran lacks the capability to make the specialized fuel assemblies in the short-term, so it makes no sense to produce more highly enriched uranium for a reactor that Tehran says will run out of fuel by the end of the year.
LACK OF DETAILS
Unlike the IAEA plan, brokered by former IAEA-chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the new proposal does not included detail on who would make the fuel rods, who will pay for the process and what will happen to the low-enriched uranium stored in Turkey after the swap has been completed, Western officials say.
Without this sort of information, they say they cannot begin serious negotiations on Iran's offer, which many of them see as an attempt to stall sanctions negotiations.
Some Western officials say the Iranian move fits into a familiar pattern of Tehran offering concessions when punitive measures loom.
THE BIGGER PICTURE
Diplomats also say that with its promotion of the new proposal, Iran is trying to give the impression that it was the fuel deal which was at the centre of problems with the West, rather than its nuclear ambitions as a whole.
They acknowledge that the original IAEA-plan was always intended as a first step towards resolving the nuclear issue, not a solution.
But they say Iran's lack of cooperation with the agency on questions about its atomic programme and its delay in engaging on the fuel deal, have left negotiators feeling wary.
They also fear that Iran may go back on its word.
Talks over the original deal suffered from internal Iranian disputes. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad first appeared to favour the U.N. deal as a way to shore up his own power.
But he faced stiff opposition from rivals who did not want to see him reap credit for a breakthrough. Some voiced misgivings about parting with the nuclear material, which is seen as a strategic asset.
But analysts in Iran believe Ahmadinejad wouldn't have agreed on this deal without the blessing of the supreme leader.
Source: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48881820100528
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Final week of UN nuclear conference has eyes on Iran
May 25, 2010
Agence France-Presse
UNITED NATIONS--A landmark UN conference on fighting the spread of nuclear weapons opened its final week Monday with eyes on Iran's efforts to avoid fresh UN sanctions against its nuclear program.
Iran is seen as a test case for the 189-nation Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as it claims its nuclear work is peaceful but is under three rounds of UN sanctions to get it to rein in its nuclear program over fears it seeks the bomb.
The NPT conference here was still struggling to formulate a draft final statement, three weeks after opening on May 3.
Committees met Monday on the three pillars of the NPT -- disarmament, monitoring nuclear programs worldwide to make sure they are not used to make weapons, and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The conference is to finalize a draft final statement later Monday and begin a last run of plenary sessions on Tuesday. It closes Friday.
In an effort to avoid new sanctions, Iran struck a last-minute deal with Brazil and Turkey last week on a nuclear fuel swap.
In Vienna Monday, Iran formally notified the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency of this deal.
The bargain is for Iran to ship half of its low-enriched uranium (LEU) out of the country in return for higher grade reactor fuel to be supplied by Russia and France.
When the deal was first offered by the IAEA in October, Iran had less of a stockpile of LEU and would have been shipping out two-thirds of the stockpile.
The US had backed the move in order to guarantee that Iran would not have enough uranium on hand to process further for a first bomb.
Iran would still be left at this point with less than it would need to make a bomb. It has promised to ship out 1,200 kilograms (2,640 pounds) of LEU to Turkey in return for the fuel for a research reactor making medical isotopes.
But Western governments say Iran is still not addressing international concerns about its nuclear program.
And a Western diplomat said Monday that the uranium deal has a key technical flaw as it fails to allocate enough time to make the fuel.
¨Getting this fuel in one year is impossible. It takes at least one and a half years to have this,¨ the diplomat told reporters.
He said that might mean Iran could after one year take its low enriched uranium back ¨and then wait for the fuel to come six months later... There is something tricky there.¨
Washington has pressed ahead at the UN Security Council by circulating a new sanctions resolution.
The to-and-fro over Iran has dominated the conference, even if US President Barack Obama's moves towards disarmament, such as a new strategic weapons agreement with Russia, have given Washington increased credibility.
Non-proliferation analyst Rebecca Johnson said "the review conference has a real chance of being able to adopt a constructively useful -- if not fabulously forward-looking) -- outcome."
Sticking points include whether to set a deadline for disarmament, something nuclear weapons state resist and which is almost certain not to be in any final document.
Another thorny matter is an Egyptian-led proposal to set up a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
US and Egyptian officials have been meeting on this for almost two months and will be seeking a compromise in New York that would allow Israel to take part.
Israel is not against such a zone but says it can only come after a peace agreement for the region.
Egypt is promoting the zone, however, as a way to move towards peace, especially since Israel is allegedly the only nuclear weapons state in the Middle East.
Other major areas of dispute at the NPT conference are whether to make tougher nuclear inspections mandatory for all member states and how to penalize states, such as North Korea, that withdraw from the treaty in order to make the bomb.
The NPT, which went into effect in 1970, is in crisis over these issues.
The previous NPT review in 2005 failed to reach agreement but the atmosphere has been better this time around in the twice-a-decade meetings.
Source: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20100525-271973/Final-week-of-UN-nuclear-conference-has-eyes-on-Iran
Agence France-Presse
UNITED NATIONS--A landmark UN conference on fighting the spread of nuclear weapons opened its final week Monday with eyes on Iran's efforts to avoid fresh UN sanctions against its nuclear program.
Iran is seen as a test case for the 189-nation Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as it claims its nuclear work is peaceful but is under three rounds of UN sanctions to get it to rein in its nuclear program over fears it seeks the bomb.
The NPT conference here was still struggling to formulate a draft final statement, three weeks after opening on May 3.
Committees met Monday on the three pillars of the NPT -- disarmament, monitoring nuclear programs worldwide to make sure they are not used to make weapons, and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The conference is to finalize a draft final statement later Monday and begin a last run of plenary sessions on Tuesday. It closes Friday.
In an effort to avoid new sanctions, Iran struck a last-minute deal with Brazil and Turkey last week on a nuclear fuel swap.
In Vienna Monday, Iran formally notified the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency of this deal.
The bargain is for Iran to ship half of its low-enriched uranium (LEU) out of the country in return for higher grade reactor fuel to be supplied by Russia and France.
When the deal was first offered by the IAEA in October, Iran had less of a stockpile of LEU and would have been shipping out two-thirds of the stockpile.
The US had backed the move in order to guarantee that Iran would not have enough uranium on hand to process further for a first bomb.
Iran would still be left at this point with less than it would need to make a bomb. It has promised to ship out 1,200 kilograms (2,640 pounds) of LEU to Turkey in return for the fuel for a research reactor making medical isotopes.
But Western governments say Iran is still not addressing international concerns about its nuclear program.
And a Western diplomat said Monday that the uranium deal has a key technical flaw as it fails to allocate enough time to make the fuel.
¨Getting this fuel in one year is impossible. It takes at least one and a half years to have this,¨ the diplomat told reporters.
He said that might mean Iran could after one year take its low enriched uranium back ¨and then wait for the fuel to come six months later... There is something tricky there.¨
Washington has pressed ahead at the UN Security Council by circulating a new sanctions resolution.
The to-and-fro over Iran has dominated the conference, even if US President Barack Obama's moves towards disarmament, such as a new strategic weapons agreement with Russia, have given Washington increased credibility.
Non-proliferation analyst Rebecca Johnson said "the review conference has a real chance of being able to adopt a constructively useful -- if not fabulously forward-looking) -- outcome."
Sticking points include whether to set a deadline for disarmament, something nuclear weapons state resist and which is almost certain not to be in any final document.
Another thorny matter is an Egyptian-led proposal to set up a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
US and Egyptian officials have been meeting on this for almost two months and will be seeking a compromise in New York that would allow Israel to take part.
Israel is not against such a zone but says it can only come after a peace agreement for the region.
Egypt is promoting the zone, however, as a way to move towards peace, especially since Israel is allegedly the only nuclear weapons state in the Middle East.
Other major areas of dispute at the NPT conference are whether to make tougher nuclear inspections mandatory for all member states and how to penalize states, such as North Korea, that withdraw from the treaty in order to make the bomb.
The NPT, which went into effect in 1970, is in crisis over these issues.
The previous NPT review in 2005 failed to reach agreement but the atmosphere has been better this time around in the twice-a-decade meetings.
Source: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20100525-271973/Final-week-of-UN-nuclear-conference-has-eyes-on-Iran
Iran ready for new chapter of co-operation' - UN envoy
May 25, 2010
Barbara Plett
BBC UN correspondent
Iran says its nuclear fuel deal proves it is ready to open a new chapter of cooperation with the West. In an interview Tehran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) urged the UN Security Council to respond positively. Ali Asghar Soltanieh was speaking to the BBC on the day that Iran officially outlined the details of the fuel exchange to the the UN's nuclear watchdog.
So far Western powers have said the agreement is too little too late, and are pursuing sanctions against the Islamic state.
Removing stockpile
The fuel swap was first proposed last October as a confidence building measure by the IAEA along with America, France and Russia (the so-called Vienna Group) on behalf of six world powers who believe Iran's trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
The West suspects Iran would have nuclear material left over. It involves exchanging 1,200 kilograms of Iran's low enriched uranium for special nuclear fuel rods needed to power its medical research reactor. For the six powers the advantage was in removing Tehran's stockpile of fissile material, thus slowing down any possible moves to build a bomb.
Iran sought amendments for eight months and then finally agreed to the transfer, following a high level intervention from Turkey and Brazil. The new element is that the low enriched uranium (LEU) would be deposited in Turkey as a guarantee that Iran would get the promised fuel rods.
'Maximum concession'
"We are not sure unless this fuel is in the core of the reactor that such a thing will actually happen," Mr Soltanieh said, indicating that deep suspicions linger from America's failure to honour nuclear contracts after the 1979 Iranian revolution.
Once the rods materialise, the LEU "deposit" will go to whichever state supplies the uranium to make them, possibly Russia, he said. He called this a "maximum concession" and urged the Vienna Group to "seize this unique opportunity" to negotiate the technical details of the deal.
"I'm sure if they will take the right course of action and change gear from confrontations, resolutions and sanctions…then I think we will open a new chapter of cooperation," he said.
Western suspicions
But Western states say the exchange has lost its value as a confidence-building measure, because Tehran's stockpile of fissile material has expanded since October, and because it decided in February to escalate uranium enrichment to 20%.
They've tabled a draft sanctions resolution in the Security Council, and see the fuel deal as a manoeuvre by Iran to avoid the tougher measures.
The core issue, say Western diplomats, is that Iran continues to enrich uranium in defiance of United Nations resolutions.
They point to IAEA statements that Iran's lack of cooperation prevents the agency from confirming Tehran's intentions are entirely peaceful, as claimed. Mr Soltanieh made clear that suspending enrichment was a non-starter.
Such UN resolutions are "not possible, not implementable," he said, fiercely defending what he said was Iran's right as a member of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty to produce nuclear fuel, and suggesting that the Iranian government might reconsider the exchange deal if the Security Council eventually votes for sanctions.
He urged instead that both sides "open a new avenue for mutual confidence building," noting that "there's been a serious trust deficit for the last 30 years".
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10151507.stm
Barbara Plett
BBC UN correspondent
Iran says its nuclear fuel deal proves it is ready to open a new chapter of cooperation with the West. In an interview Tehran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) urged the UN Security Council to respond positively. Ali Asghar Soltanieh was speaking to the BBC on the day that Iran officially outlined the details of the fuel exchange to the the UN's nuclear watchdog.
So far Western powers have said the agreement is too little too late, and are pursuing sanctions against the Islamic state.
Removing stockpile
The fuel swap was first proposed last October as a confidence building measure by the IAEA along with America, France and Russia (the so-called Vienna Group) on behalf of six world powers who believe Iran's trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
The West suspects Iran would have nuclear material left over. It involves exchanging 1,200 kilograms of Iran's low enriched uranium for special nuclear fuel rods needed to power its medical research reactor. For the six powers the advantage was in removing Tehran's stockpile of fissile material, thus slowing down any possible moves to build a bomb.
Iran sought amendments for eight months and then finally agreed to the transfer, following a high level intervention from Turkey and Brazil. The new element is that the low enriched uranium (LEU) would be deposited in Turkey as a guarantee that Iran would get the promised fuel rods.
'Maximum concession'
"We are not sure unless this fuel is in the core of the reactor that such a thing will actually happen," Mr Soltanieh said, indicating that deep suspicions linger from America's failure to honour nuclear contracts after the 1979 Iranian revolution.
Once the rods materialise, the LEU "deposit" will go to whichever state supplies the uranium to make them, possibly Russia, he said. He called this a "maximum concession" and urged the Vienna Group to "seize this unique opportunity" to negotiate the technical details of the deal.
"I'm sure if they will take the right course of action and change gear from confrontations, resolutions and sanctions…then I think we will open a new chapter of cooperation," he said.
Western suspicions
But Western states say the exchange has lost its value as a confidence-building measure, because Tehran's stockpile of fissile material has expanded since October, and because it decided in February to escalate uranium enrichment to 20%.
They've tabled a draft sanctions resolution in the Security Council, and see the fuel deal as a manoeuvre by Iran to avoid the tougher measures.
The core issue, say Western diplomats, is that Iran continues to enrich uranium in defiance of United Nations resolutions.
They point to IAEA statements that Iran's lack of cooperation prevents the agency from confirming Tehran's intentions are entirely peaceful, as claimed. Mr Soltanieh made clear that suspending enrichment was a non-starter.
Such UN resolutions are "not possible, not implementable," he said, fiercely defending what he said was Iran's right as a member of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty to produce nuclear fuel, and suggesting that the Iranian government might reconsider the exchange deal if the Security Council eventually votes for sanctions.
He urged instead that both sides "open a new avenue for mutual confidence building," noting that "there's been a serious trust deficit for the last 30 years".
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10151507.stm
Monday, May 24, 2010
Text of Iran letter on nuclear fuel swap offer
May 24, 2010
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran notified the U.N. nuclear watchdog in writing on Monday that it accepted a plan to part with 1.2 tonnes of its low-enriched uranium in exchange for special nuclear fuel to run its medical research reactor.
Following is the main text of a letter from Iranian nuclear energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi to International Atomic Energy Agency head Yukiya Amano summarizing Iran's position on the deal it reached last week with the help of Turkey and Brazil.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran, as an active member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has always been committed to its obligations under the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and has had wide-ranging cooperation with the IAEA.
"Such cooperation and extended interaction with the agency is an indication of the importance attached to this international organ and the attention devoted to the significance of the NPT.
"Reciprocally, the Islamic Republic of Iran expects that the inalienable rights enshrined in the IAEA Statute and the Article IV of the NPT, as well as the statutory mandate of the agency in providing services to the member states, be recognised and respected, and as a result to benefit from such assistance and services of the agency without discrimination.
"The supply of the fuel for Tehran Research Reactor is among the issues which certainly fit within the framework of the agency's statutory function, and the responsibility of the agency in this respect is crystal clear.
"Regretfully, despite the elapse of about one year since the submission of the request by the Islamic Republic of Iran (2 June 2009) for fuel supply for Tehran Research Reactor, (which is) devoted to produc(ing) radioisotopes for medical purposes and providing medical services to about one million people, not only has the fuel not been delivered to my country, but the pursued path in this regard has faced stalemate due to unjustified conditions imposed by other parties.
"At this juncture, I seize this opportunity to announce that in the course of the recent trilateral summit meeting held in Tehran with the presence of the presidents of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Federative Republic of Brazil as well as the Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey --...the latter two countries at present happen to be members of the Board of Governors of the IAEA -- we had constructive talks with respect to nuclear cooperation leading to the 'Joint Declaration by Iran, Turkey and Brazil on 17 May 2010'.
"I, hereby officially present to Your Excellency a copy of the Joint Declaration. The Islamic Republic of Iran reconfirms its agreement with the content of the Joint Declaration and its individual interrelated paragraphs, each bearing a particular importance of its own.
"In order to implement the Joint Declaration, in accordance with its Paragraph 6, the Islamic Republic of Iran hereby officially declares its agreement with the content of the Declaration, in particular with its first five paragraphs as follows:
"1. We reaffirm our commitment to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in accordance with the related articles of the NPT, recall the right of all state parties, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities) for peaceful purposes without discrimination.
"2. We express our strong conviction that we have the opportunity now to begin a forward-looking process that will create a positive, constructive, non-confrontational atmosphere leading to an era of interaction and cooperation.
"3. We believe that the nuclear fuel exchange is instrumental in initiating cooperation in different areas, especially with regard to peaceful nuclear cooperation including nuclear power plant and research reactor construction.
"4. Based on this point, the nuclear fuel exchange is a starting point to begin cooperation and a positive constructive move forward among nations. Such a move should lead to positive interaction and cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, replacing and avoiding all kinds of confrontation through refraining from measures, actions and rhetorical statements that would jeopardize Iran's rights and obligations under the NPT.
"5. Based on the above, in order to facilitate the nuclear cooperation mentioned above, the Islamic Republic of Iran agrees to deposit 1200 kg LEU in Turkey. While in Turkey the LEU will continue to be the property of Iran. Iran and the IAEA may station observers to monitor the safekeeping of the LEU in Turkey.
"In return, we expect the Agency, also in accordance with paragraph 6 of this declaration, to notify the Vienna Group (USA, Russia, France and the IAEA) of its content, and consequently inform us of the Group's positive response.
"Such action, according to this declaration, will pave the wave to commence negotiation for elaboration on further details of the exchange leading to conclusion of a written agreement and as well as making proper arrangements between Iran and the Vienna Group.
"We look forward to receive Your Excellency's response in an expedited way.
(Editing by Mark Heinrich)
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64N3FA20100524
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran notified the U.N. nuclear watchdog in writing on Monday that it accepted a plan to part with 1.2 tonnes of its low-enriched uranium in exchange for special nuclear fuel to run its medical research reactor.
Following is the main text of a letter from Iranian nuclear energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi to International Atomic Energy Agency head Yukiya Amano summarizing Iran's position on the deal it reached last week with the help of Turkey and Brazil.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran, as an active member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has always been committed to its obligations under the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and has had wide-ranging cooperation with the IAEA.
"Such cooperation and extended interaction with the agency is an indication of the importance attached to this international organ and the attention devoted to the significance of the NPT.
"Reciprocally, the Islamic Republic of Iran expects that the inalienable rights enshrined in the IAEA Statute and the Article IV of the NPT, as well as the statutory mandate of the agency in providing services to the member states, be recognised and respected, and as a result to benefit from such assistance and services of the agency without discrimination.
"The supply of the fuel for Tehran Research Reactor is among the issues which certainly fit within the framework of the agency's statutory function, and the responsibility of the agency in this respect is crystal clear.
"Regretfully, despite the elapse of about one year since the submission of the request by the Islamic Republic of Iran (2 June 2009) for fuel supply for Tehran Research Reactor, (which is) devoted to produc(ing) radioisotopes for medical purposes and providing medical services to about one million people, not only has the fuel not been delivered to my country, but the pursued path in this regard has faced stalemate due to unjustified conditions imposed by other parties.
"At this juncture, I seize this opportunity to announce that in the course of the recent trilateral summit meeting held in Tehran with the presence of the presidents of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Federative Republic of Brazil as well as the Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey --...the latter two countries at present happen to be members of the Board of Governors of the IAEA -- we had constructive talks with respect to nuclear cooperation leading to the 'Joint Declaration by Iran, Turkey and Brazil on 17 May 2010'.
"I, hereby officially present to Your Excellency a copy of the Joint Declaration. The Islamic Republic of Iran reconfirms its agreement with the content of the Joint Declaration and its individual interrelated paragraphs, each bearing a particular importance of its own.
"In order to implement the Joint Declaration, in accordance with its Paragraph 6, the Islamic Republic of Iran hereby officially declares its agreement with the content of the Declaration, in particular with its first five paragraphs as follows:
"1. We reaffirm our commitment to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in accordance with the related articles of the NPT, recall the right of all state parties, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities) for peaceful purposes without discrimination.
"2. We express our strong conviction that we have the opportunity now to begin a forward-looking process that will create a positive, constructive, non-confrontational atmosphere leading to an era of interaction and cooperation.
"3. We believe that the nuclear fuel exchange is instrumental in initiating cooperation in different areas, especially with regard to peaceful nuclear cooperation including nuclear power plant and research reactor construction.
"4. Based on this point, the nuclear fuel exchange is a starting point to begin cooperation and a positive constructive move forward among nations. Such a move should lead to positive interaction and cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, replacing and avoiding all kinds of confrontation through refraining from measures, actions and rhetorical statements that would jeopardize Iran's rights and obligations under the NPT.
"5. Based on the above, in order to facilitate the nuclear cooperation mentioned above, the Islamic Republic of Iran agrees to deposit 1200 kg LEU in Turkey. While in Turkey the LEU will continue to be the property of Iran. Iran and the IAEA may station observers to monitor the safekeeping of the LEU in Turkey.
"In return, we expect the Agency, also in accordance with paragraph 6 of this declaration, to notify the Vienna Group (USA, Russia, France and the IAEA) of its content, and consequently inform us of the Group's positive response.
"Such action, according to this declaration, will pave the wave to commence negotiation for elaboration on further details of the exchange leading to conclusion of a written agreement and as well as making proper arrangements between Iran and the Vienna Group.
"We look forward to receive Your Excellency's response in an expedited way.
(Editing by Mark Heinrich)
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64N3FA20100524
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Iran's nuclear move may derail U.S. efforts on sanctions
May 18, 2010
An agreement by Iran to send much of its nuclear fuel abroad clouded prospects for U.S.-led plans to impose further economic sanctions on Tehran over its controversial nuclear development program.
The proposal, brokered by leaders of Brazil and Turkey during an 18-hour session in Tehran and announced late Sunday, drew a reaction of cautious skepticism from the United States and its Western allies, who questioned whether it goes far enough to address longstanding concerns over the goal of the Iranian nuclear program. Iran says its effort is for civilian energy purposes only, but Western powers believe Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
U.S., French, German and Russian officials all raised questions about the announcement, noting that Iran would still keep more than a ton of its nuclear stockpile and would continue enriching uranium in its centrifuges. But Western leaders also called for further study of the plan, saying it should not be dismissed out of hand.
The agreement appeared to sap some of the momentum for a new round of United Nations Security Council sanctions, which looked to include restrictions on Iranian government financial transactions. Officials from Turkey and Brazil said the deal removed any need for further U.N. sanctions. The two countries currently sit on the 15-member Security Council, though neither has the power to veto a sanctions resolution.
It remains to be seen whether Tehran was merely trying to avert imminent sanctions or whether the pact could form the basis of a wider accord. In making the uranium transfer abroad, Iran would drop its previous insistence that any swaps should take place on Iranian soil.
U.S. officials face a choice of rejecting the deal and appearing intransigent, or accepting it, potentially allowing Iran to defuse mounting international pressures through an indefinite delay.
The plan calls for Iran to ship 2,640 pounds of its low-enriched uranium to Turkey under the supervision of both Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, in Vienna. In return, Iran would receive 265 pounds of uranium from France and Russia within a year for use in a small nuclear reactor that produces medical isotopes to treat the ill.
The low-enriched uranium in Iran's stockpile is calculated at 3.5% pure, while the more highly enriched fuel plates are 20% pure. Experts have said uranium must be enriched to a far higher level to produce weapons.
The offer described Monday is a variation of one proposed in October by the United States and its allies as a means of slowing down Iran's nuclear enrichment operation.
But diplomats and nuclear experts on Monday quickly pointed to the unanswered questions and said the new plan falls far short, from the Western viewpoint, of the deal that was first proposed Oct. 1.
Under both deals, the same amount of low-enriched uranium would be transferred out of Iran. Last year, that quantity represented about 70% of Iran's stockpile. But since then, Iran has accumulated a substantial new quantity of uranium, so that removal of 2,640 pounds, or 1,200 kilograms, would account for only about half of the stockpile.
The deal last year failed to gain traction in part because many Iranian politicians said they suspected that the West was trying to hoodwink the Islamic Republic.
In addition, Iran embarked in February on a new program of enriching its uranium to higher levels, about 20%, making the proposal less important from the Western perspective.
The head of Iran's nuclear program, Ali Akbar Salehi, insisted in an interview with Reuters on Monday that the new proposal did not mean a halt to Iran's enrichment program.
"This agreement may not be as much of a priority for Barack Obama as it was some months ago," said Michel Makinsky, an Iran specialist at the Poitiers School of Business and Management in France. "What we have to see is whether there could be other topics related to this matter on the agenda that could give some ground for an agreement."
The White House said that the plan to ship the uranium was a "positive step," but that the continuation of the higher enrichment "is a direct violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions."
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the United States and other countries "continue to have serious concerns," and would work through the U.N. to show Iran that it must meet its international obligations "or face consequences, including sanctions."
U.S. Adm. James Stavridis, the top NATO commander, called the deal a "potentially good development" but also cautioned that there are a "million miles to go" in negotiations.
U.S. officials had been predicting that the Security Council could approve a new package of economic sanctions — its fourth set of strictures against Iran in recent years — next month. But on Monday, officials refrained from making any predictions.
"With this agreement reached, the issue of planned sanctions by the West no longer has any basis," said Celso Amorim, foreign minister of Brazil.
Deepti Choubey, a proliferation specialist at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said it was "troubling" that Brazil and Turkey could not persuade Iran to give up the 20% enrichment activities. The two countries, which have been seeking greater international influence, "have assisted, perhaps unwittingly, Iran's bid to derail the current sanctions effort," Choubey said.
Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, cited the concern that Iran would continue to enrich uranium to 20% levels, and called for an exploration of Iran's intentions. There should be "urgent consultations between all of the interested parties, including Iran," he said at a news conference in Moscow, according to the official Interfax news service.
Chinese officials had no immediate official comment. But in the past, the Chinese government, which has U.N. veto power, has strongly resisted efforts to sanction Iran, especially in ways that might affect the burgeoning economic ties between the two countries. Analysts speculated that China would urge a thorough study of the new opportunities for diplomacy.
» Don't miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.
European officials reacted coolly to the deal. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said any pact must be approved by the IAEA, while European Union foreign affairs coordinator Catherine Ashton said the agreement did not address "all of the concerns" about Iran's nuclear program.
"The key thing is whether this is going to lead to negotiations on the future of Iran's nuclear enrichment program, whether the red lines of the U.S. can be rendered acceptable to the Iranians and vice versa," said Richard Dalton, Britain's former ambassador to Iran.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has been lobbying to delay the new round of U.N. sanctions, said Monday that nations which have been conducting negotiations with Iran — the U.S., France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany — should now come back to the negotiating table.
Still, analysts warned that this deal could still fall apart within Iran because of the same domestic political infighting that stalled previous proposals. In 2005, a Western effort spearheaded by Russia to have Iran send its nuclear material there for processing never took hold. And last year, Iranian opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi accused Ahmadinejad of moving to sell out his nation by giving up its hard-earned enriched uranium stockpile.
"There is a permanent inability of the Iranian side to take any decision whatsoever," said Makinsky. "The street paralyzes the top political management."
By Paul Richter, Christi Parsons and Borzou Daragahi
Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-nukes-20100518,0,5953517.story?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed:%20latimes/middleeast%20(L.A.%20Times%20-%20Middle%20East)&utm_source=feedburner
An agreement by Iran to send much of its nuclear fuel abroad clouded prospects for U.S.-led plans to impose further economic sanctions on Tehran over its controversial nuclear development program.
The proposal, brokered by leaders of Brazil and Turkey during an 18-hour session in Tehran and announced late Sunday, drew a reaction of cautious skepticism from the United States and its Western allies, who questioned whether it goes far enough to address longstanding concerns over the goal of the Iranian nuclear program. Iran says its effort is for civilian energy purposes only, but Western powers believe Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
U.S., French, German and Russian officials all raised questions about the announcement, noting that Iran would still keep more than a ton of its nuclear stockpile and would continue enriching uranium in its centrifuges. But Western leaders also called for further study of the plan, saying it should not be dismissed out of hand.
The agreement appeared to sap some of the momentum for a new round of United Nations Security Council sanctions, which looked to include restrictions on Iranian government financial transactions. Officials from Turkey and Brazil said the deal removed any need for further U.N. sanctions. The two countries currently sit on the 15-member Security Council, though neither has the power to veto a sanctions resolution.
It remains to be seen whether Tehran was merely trying to avert imminent sanctions or whether the pact could form the basis of a wider accord. In making the uranium transfer abroad, Iran would drop its previous insistence that any swaps should take place on Iranian soil.
U.S. officials face a choice of rejecting the deal and appearing intransigent, or accepting it, potentially allowing Iran to defuse mounting international pressures through an indefinite delay.
The plan calls for Iran to ship 2,640 pounds of its low-enriched uranium to Turkey under the supervision of both Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, in Vienna. In return, Iran would receive 265 pounds of uranium from France and Russia within a year for use in a small nuclear reactor that produces medical isotopes to treat the ill.
The low-enriched uranium in Iran's stockpile is calculated at 3.5% pure, while the more highly enriched fuel plates are 20% pure. Experts have said uranium must be enriched to a far higher level to produce weapons.
The offer described Monday is a variation of one proposed in October by the United States and its allies as a means of slowing down Iran's nuclear enrichment operation.
But diplomats and nuclear experts on Monday quickly pointed to the unanswered questions and said the new plan falls far short, from the Western viewpoint, of the deal that was first proposed Oct. 1.
Under both deals, the same amount of low-enriched uranium would be transferred out of Iran. Last year, that quantity represented about 70% of Iran's stockpile. But since then, Iran has accumulated a substantial new quantity of uranium, so that removal of 2,640 pounds, or 1,200 kilograms, would account for only about half of the stockpile.
The deal last year failed to gain traction in part because many Iranian politicians said they suspected that the West was trying to hoodwink the Islamic Republic.
In addition, Iran embarked in February on a new program of enriching its uranium to higher levels, about 20%, making the proposal less important from the Western perspective.
The head of Iran's nuclear program, Ali Akbar Salehi, insisted in an interview with Reuters on Monday that the new proposal did not mean a halt to Iran's enrichment program.
"This agreement may not be as much of a priority for Barack Obama as it was some months ago," said Michel Makinsky, an Iran specialist at the Poitiers School of Business and Management in France. "What we have to see is whether there could be other topics related to this matter on the agenda that could give some ground for an agreement."
The White House said that the plan to ship the uranium was a "positive step," but that the continuation of the higher enrichment "is a direct violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions."
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the United States and other countries "continue to have serious concerns," and would work through the U.N. to show Iran that it must meet its international obligations "or face consequences, including sanctions."
U.S. Adm. James Stavridis, the top NATO commander, called the deal a "potentially good development" but also cautioned that there are a "million miles to go" in negotiations.
U.S. officials had been predicting that the Security Council could approve a new package of economic sanctions — its fourth set of strictures against Iran in recent years — next month. But on Monday, officials refrained from making any predictions.
"With this agreement reached, the issue of planned sanctions by the West no longer has any basis," said Celso Amorim, foreign minister of Brazil.
Deepti Choubey, a proliferation specialist at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said it was "troubling" that Brazil and Turkey could not persuade Iran to give up the 20% enrichment activities. The two countries, which have been seeking greater international influence, "have assisted, perhaps unwittingly, Iran's bid to derail the current sanctions effort," Choubey said.
Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, cited the concern that Iran would continue to enrich uranium to 20% levels, and called for an exploration of Iran's intentions. There should be "urgent consultations between all of the interested parties, including Iran," he said at a news conference in Moscow, according to the official Interfax news service.
Chinese officials had no immediate official comment. But in the past, the Chinese government, which has U.N. veto power, has strongly resisted efforts to sanction Iran, especially in ways that might affect the burgeoning economic ties between the two countries. Analysts speculated that China would urge a thorough study of the new opportunities for diplomacy.
» Don't miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.
European officials reacted coolly to the deal. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said any pact must be approved by the IAEA, while European Union foreign affairs coordinator Catherine Ashton said the agreement did not address "all of the concerns" about Iran's nuclear program.
"The key thing is whether this is going to lead to negotiations on the future of Iran's nuclear enrichment program, whether the red lines of the U.S. can be rendered acceptable to the Iranians and vice versa," said Richard Dalton, Britain's former ambassador to Iran.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has been lobbying to delay the new round of U.N. sanctions, said Monday that nations which have been conducting negotiations with Iran — the U.S., France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany — should now come back to the negotiating table.
Still, analysts warned that this deal could still fall apart within Iran because of the same domestic political infighting that stalled previous proposals. In 2005, a Western effort spearheaded by Russia to have Iran send its nuclear material there for processing never took hold. And last year, Iranian opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi accused Ahmadinejad of moving to sell out his nation by giving up its hard-earned enriched uranium stockpile.
"There is a permanent inability of the Iranian side to take any decision whatsoever," said Makinsky. "The street paralyzes the top political management."
By Paul Richter, Christi Parsons and Borzou Daragahi
Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-nukes-20100518,0,5953517.story?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed:%20latimes/middleeast%20(L.A.%20Times%20-%20Middle%20East)&utm_source=feedburner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)