July 7, 2010
The Times of india
China will share with Pakistan its plans on the issue of India’s efforts to obtain a seat in the United Nations Security Council. The indication came from Chinese president Hu Jintao when he told the visiting Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari that Beijing will keep Islamabad informed about its plans for reforms in the UN Security Council.
Zardari presided over six agreements signed between Pakistan and China covering areas like agriculture, health care, justice, media, economy and technology. But the agreements did not cover the proposed sale of two nuclear reactors to Pakistan.
Significantly, Zardari sought assistance from Chinese companies for establishing alternative energy projects in the field of solar and wind power. But he did not mention nuclear power projects during his meeting with business leaders of China this morning.
It was not clear whether the two governments were deliberately keeping quite about the issue, which has caused worries in India. Masood Khan, Pakistan’s ambassador in Beijing recently that the issue will be discussed during Zardari’s visit.
A report from Islamabad quoted Zardari’s press adviser Farhatullah Babar as saying that Pakistan and China had already signed an agreement for two nuclear power projects during the president’s visit to China last year. He said the agreement "goes along well with the international non proliferation obligations of China and Pakistan."
Hu and Zardari vowed to jointly fight the "three forces" of extremism, separatism and terrorism during their two-hour meeting on Wednesday.
Zardari is accompanied during this five-day visit by his two daughters, Bakhtawar and Aseefa, besides a some senior ministers like defence minister Chaudhry Ahmad Mukhtar, petroleum minister Naveed Qamar, Minister of State for Water Resources Kamal Majidullah, Minister of State for Finance and Economic Affairs Hina Rabbani Khar and foreign secretary Salman Bashir.
By Saibal Dasgupta
Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/China-to-share-notes-with-Pakistan-on-Indias-efforts-for-UN-Security-Council-seat/articleshow/6139787.cms
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Top UN nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen resigns
July 01, 2010
Associated Press
VIENNA — The International Atomic Energy Agency said Thursday that its senior and key nuclear inspector, Olli Heinonen, will be leaving his post at the end of August.
Heinonen, a deputy director, has headed the U.N. nuclear watchdog's all-important safeguards department, which is responsible, among other things, for making sure that nuclear material is not used for weapons.
As a deputy director, he is perhaps the most high-profile official at the Vienna-based agency after Director General Yukiya Amano, and over the course of his tenure has led sensitive Iran and Syria investigations. Both countries are suspected of hiding weapons-related nuclear activities.
"We confirm that Mr. Heinonen informed the director general of his resignation for personal reasons to take effect at the end of August," IAEA spokeswoman Gill Tudor said. "The director general has decided to respect his intention, with high appreciation for this long contribution to the agency."
She said no decisions have been made on a successor, but that the post would be filled without delay.
Heinonen, a Finnish radiochemist, joined the IAEA in 1983 and was appointed head of safeguards in July 2005.
Top U.N. nuclear watchdog inspector stands down
July 01, 2010
Reuters
The U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Thursday its top investigator Olli Heinonen, head of probes into Iran and Syria, will leave his position for personal reasons after nearly 30 years at the Vienna-based agency.
Heinonen, 63, is head of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) safeguards department, tasked with verifying nations' nuclear programs are not being diverted for military use.
"We confirm that Mr Heinonen informed the director general of his intention to resign as of the end of August for personal reasons," IAEA spokeswoman Gill Tudor said.
(Reporting by Sylvia Westall; editing by Philippa Fletcher)
Monday, June 28, 2010
Iran could have nuclear weapons by 2012, CIA chief warns
June 27, 2010
Telegraph
Iran has enough low-enriched uranium to produce two nuclear weapons, which it could have prepared and ready for delivery as early as 2012, Leon Panetta, the CIA director, said on Sunday.
Tehran would need a year to enrich the uranium fully to produce a bomb and it would take “another year to develop the kind of weapon delivery system in order to make that viable,” Mr Panetta said.
Sanctions imposed by the United Nations could help weaken Tehran’s government by creating economic problems, but were unlikely to put an end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Mr Panetta told the ABC network’s “This Week” programme.
Iran is under mounting international pressure over its suspect nuclear programme, which the West fears masks a covert weapons drive. Iran denies the charge, insisting that its atomic programme is for peaceful civilian purposes only.
Over the weekend, G8 leaders urged Tehran to hold a “transparent dialogue” over its suspect nuclear programme. Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday that Iran would this week lay down its conditions for talks with the world powers.
The US Congress this week endorsed a sweeping package of tough new energy and financial sanctions on Tehran over the programme.
The Islamic republic has been flexing its military muscle mainly in the strategic Gulf region by staging regular war games and showcasing an array of Iranian-manufactured missiles.
Neither the United States nor its top regional ally Israel, the sole if undeclared nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, has ruled out a military strike to curb Iran’s atomic drive.
The UN Security Council this month slapped a fourth set of sanctions on Iran, targeting financial transactions and travel by senior military figures, to punish Tehran for its refusal to rein in its uranium enrichment programme.
Iran responded by barring two UN nuclear inspectors from returning to the country last week.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Report: Iran smuggling German-made nuclear equipment via Dubai
By Haaretz Service
Sunday Telegraph: Dubai intermediary sells Iran components bought from German manufacturer without its knowledge in violation of UN resolutions. Iran has been able to smuggle advanced technological equipment to its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz via a complex smuggling route based in Dubai, the Sunday Telegraph reported on Sunday.
According to the report, an Iranian company has purchased control systems from one of Germany's leading electronic manufacturers. The deal was negotiated with a Dubai trading company, which in turn sold Iran a range of electronic equipment for use at its enrichment facility, the British website reported. The report comes amid growing concerns that though Iran claims its nuclear program has only peaceful aims, Tehran is in fact working toward manufacturing nuclear weapons.
According to the Sunday Telegraph, Iran has smuggled German computers, controllers, communication cards and cables into Iran. The equipment was sold to Iran via a Dubai intermediary, using false certificates for companies in Asia, without the knowledge of the German manufacturer. Last month, U.S. and United Nations officials launched an investigation into Tehran's acquisition of components restricted for sale to Iran under UN resolutions. The investigation, which covered several Western companies suspected of violating said resolutions has now been expanded to Dubai, already under American pressure to prevent the transfer of technology to Iran.
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/report-iran-smuggling-german-made-nuclear-equipment-via-dubai-1.294483
Sunday Telegraph: Dubai intermediary sells Iran components bought from German manufacturer without its knowledge in violation of UN resolutions. Iran has been able to smuggle advanced technological equipment to its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz via a complex smuggling route based in Dubai, the Sunday Telegraph reported on Sunday.
According to the report, an Iranian company has purchased control systems from one of Germany's leading electronic manufacturers. The deal was negotiated with a Dubai trading company, which in turn sold Iran a range of electronic equipment for use at its enrichment facility, the British website reported. The report comes amid growing concerns that though Iran claims its nuclear program has only peaceful aims, Tehran is in fact working toward manufacturing nuclear weapons.
According to the Sunday Telegraph, Iran has smuggled German computers, controllers, communication cards and cables into Iran. The equipment was sold to Iran via a Dubai intermediary, using false certificates for companies in Asia, without the knowledge of the German manufacturer. Last month, U.S. and United Nations officials launched an investigation into Tehran's acquisition of components restricted for sale to Iran under UN resolutions. The investigation, which covered several Western companies suspected of violating said resolutions has now been expanded to Dubai, already under American pressure to prevent the transfer of technology to Iran.
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/report-iran-smuggling-german-made-nuclear-equipment-via-dubai-1.294483
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
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
France urges rapid adoption of Iran sanctions
June 01, 2010
Reuters
A report by a U.N. watchdog saying Iranis stepping up uranium enrichment measures leaves world powers no alternative but to push for new sanctions, France's Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday.
"In light of the report, the Six (five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany) have no choice but to seek the rapid adoption of a new sanctions resolution," ministry spokesman Bernard Valero told reporters at a regular news briefing.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a report on Monday that Iran was preparing extra equipment to enrich uranium to higher levels and continues to stockpile nuclear material.
The findings follow a deal brokered by Brazil and Turkey earlier this month under which Iran agreed to ship 1.2 tonnes of its low-enriched uranium stockpile abroad in return for fuel for a medical research reactor.
The deal, which resurrected an earlier IAEA proposal brokered by France, Russia and the United States and rejected by Tehran, was designed to allay fears that Iran is developing nuclear weapons capabilities.
Iran denies it is trying to build an atom bomb.
The new IAEA report showed Iran's low-enriched uranium stockpile had grown to 2.4 tonnes, so that even if the 1.2 tonnes were shipped now it would still leave Iran with enough material for a nuclear weapon if enriched to higher levels.
"The (IAEA) report demonstrates a complete lack of progress on the various subjects that are at the core of the international community's concerns over Iran's nuclear programme," France's Foreign Ministry said in a written statement on Tuesday.
The ministry called for Iran to comply immediately with the resolutions of the U.N. security council and the IAEA board of governors and to cooperate with the international community to calm suspicions over its nuclear enrichment activities.
(Reporting by Vicky Buffery; Editing by James Mackenzie)
Monday, May 31, 2010
Israel rejects call to join anti-nuclear treaty
May 29, 2010
Reuters
Israel on Saturday rejected as "flawed and hypocritical" a declaration by signatories of a global anti-nuclear arms treaty that urged it to sign the pact and make its atomic facilities subject to U.N. inspections.
All 189 parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the United States, called on Friday in a declaration that singled out Israel for a conference in 2012 to discuss banning weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.
"As a non-signatory state of the NPT, Israel is not obligated by the decisions of this conference, which has no authority over Israel," the Israeli government said in an emailed statement.
"Given the distorted nature of this resolution, Israel will not be able to take part in its implementation," it said.
The 28-page declaration said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and key states would arrange a conference that would include all nations in the region, by implication including bitter enemies Israel and Iran.
Israel is presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies it. It is the only Middle East state that has not signed the NPT and, like fellow non-members India and Pakistan, did not take part in the review conference.
U.S. officials, irked at efforts to single out Israel, made clear the proposal might go nowhere, saying the Middle East could not be declared WMD-free until broad Arab-Israeli peace prevailed and Iran curbed its uranium enrichment programme.
"HYPOCRITICAL"
Alluding to this point, the Israeli statement said: "This resolution is deeply flawed and hypocritical. It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world."
Iran was not mentioned in the NPT declaration.
Israel and Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability due to its past concealment of nuclear activity from the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency and continued restrictions on IAEA access.
Tehran says it is enriching uranium only to generate electricity and isotopes for agriculture and medical treatment.
The Israeli statement said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would discuss the NPT declaration with President Barack Obama when the two leaders meet on Tuesday at the White House.
Obama welcomed agreements on a range of non-proliferation issues at the NPT meeting but said he would oppose efforts to isolate Israel and any actions to jeopardize its security.
Israel, whose jets bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 and mounted a similar sortie over Syria in 2007, has hinted that it could use force to deny Iran the means to build an atomic bomb.
The Israeli government statement said: "The real problem with WMDs in the Middle East does not relate to Israel but to those countries that have signed the NPT and brazenly violated it: Iraq under Saddam, Libya, Syria and Iran."
Libya in 2003 ended years of international isolation after it promised to give up nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and has followed through on those promises.
(Writing by Joseph Nasr, Editing by Mark Heinrich)
North Korea 'trading nuclear technology' says UN panel
May 28, 2010
BBC News
A United Nations panel has accused North Korea of continuing to export nuclear and missile technology in defiance of a UN ban.
The experts said North Korea has used front companies and intermediaries to sell weapons and provide illegal assistance to Iran, Syria and Burma.
The preliminary report was compiled by a seven-member group that monitors Pyongyang's compliance with sanctions.
The panel has called for further, urgent investigations.
DevicesThe 47-page report outlined a broad range of techniques used by North Korea to evade sanctions imposed by the UN after the North's nuclear tests of 2006 and 2009, the Associated Press reports.
The report said North Korea had moved quickly to replace banned individuals and entities with others to enable it to continue the nuclear trade.
Among a number of "masking techniques", it said the North describes exports falsely, mislabels shipping container contents, falsifies information about the destinations of goods and uses "multiple layers of intermediaries, shell companies, and financial institutions".
The report said North Korea has a range of legitimate trade offices but also sustains links with international criminal organisations to pursue the banned trades.
An unnamed diplomat told Reuters the findings were "not entirely surprising".
"The point is that North Korea has been providing that kind of aid to Iran, Syria and Burma," he said.
The report comes before a crucial day of talks in New York about the future of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
It also comes at a time of increased tension surrounding what international investigators say was a deadly North Korean torpedo attack on a South Korean warship in March.
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
Britain reveals planned size of nuclear stockpile
May 28, 2010
LONDON - Britain's new coalition government has revealed the planned size of its nuclear weapons stockpile for the first time, saying that it will not exceed 225 warheads.
Officials have said before that the country has 160 warheads that are operational; that is, ready to fire.
In an announcement on Wednesday coinciding with a United Nations Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty conference in New York, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain hopes its disclosure will contribute to efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons worldwide.
"We believe that the time is now right to be more open about the weapons we hold," he told Parliament.
"We judge that this will assist in building a climate of trust between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states."
Countries around the world that do not possess nuclear weapons have long demanded more openness from the nuclear-weapon states about the size and nature of their arsenals.
Earlier this month, the United States disclosed for the first time that it has 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile and "several thousand" more retired warheads awaiting the junk pile.
Source: http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100528-0000074/Britain-reveals-planned-size-of-nuclear-stockpile
LONDON - Britain's new coalition government has revealed the planned size of its nuclear weapons stockpile for the first time, saying that it will not exceed 225 warheads.
Officials have said before that the country has 160 warheads that are operational; that is, ready to fire.
In an announcement on Wednesday coinciding with a United Nations Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty conference in New York, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain hopes its disclosure will contribute to efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons worldwide.
"We believe that the time is now right to be more open about the weapons we hold," he told Parliament.
"We judge that this will assist in building a climate of trust between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states."
Countries around the world that do not possess nuclear weapons have long demanded more openness from the nuclear-weapon states about the size and nature of their arsenals.
Earlier this month, the United States disclosed for the first time that it has 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile and "several thousand" more retired warheads awaiting the junk pile.
Source: http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100528-0000074/Britain-reveals-planned-size-of-nuclear-stockpile
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
UN nuclear conference calls on India to joint NPT, CTBT
May 26, 2010
Press Trust Of India
Breaking the tradition of not naming countries, the first draft of the final document of 2010 Nuclear-Non Proliferation Treaty Review conference has asked India, Pakistan and Israel to join NPT and CTBT.
"The conference calls upon India, Israel and Pakistan to accede to the treaty as non-nuclear weapon States, promptly and without conditions, thereby accepting an internationally legally binding commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices," the first draft of the document said.
"The conference also calls upon India and Pakistan to maintain moratoriums on nuclear testing and calls upon India, Israel and Pakistan to sign and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) without delay and without conditions," it said.
The NPT Review Conference is held every five years to assess the progress in reaching the goals set out in the 1970 treaty to disarm and stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
This year it started on May 3 and would end on May 28 when the final draft is expected.
India, Pakistan and Israel have not signed the treaty and do not attend. The last conference in 2005 ended in failure.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, a Western diplomat said here that there were countries, which had accepted that India and Pakistan were not going to become part of the treaty and suggested a new track to reign them into the non-proliferation regime.
"We are going to try and put them in a cooperation system with obligations so that they would have the same obligations that NPT countries without being in the NPT," he said, noting that such an agreement was better than doing nothing.
Several experts, however, have pointed out that by the time the final document was prepared the names of the countries may be replaced by a more general call for the universal acceptance of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Officials noted that naming Israel, for instance, would lead to the country not cooperating with the Arab nations on a plan to have a Middle East free nuclear weapons free zone.
"We want something so that all countries come to the table," the Western diplomat said. "But it's so fragile, it's so difficult."
Mark Hibbs, an expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who had attended the meetings noted that there seemed to be a "tacit agreement" not to retain the names by the end of the conference.
Source: http://www.hindustantimes.com/UN-nuclear-conference-calls-on-India-to-joint-NPT-CTBT/Article1-548632.aspx
Press Trust Of India
Breaking the tradition of not naming countries, the first draft of the final document of 2010 Nuclear-Non Proliferation Treaty Review conference has asked India, Pakistan and Israel to join NPT and CTBT.
"The conference calls upon India, Israel and Pakistan to accede to the treaty as non-nuclear weapon States, promptly and without conditions, thereby accepting an internationally legally binding commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices," the first draft of the document said.
"The conference also calls upon India and Pakistan to maintain moratoriums on nuclear testing and calls upon India, Israel and Pakistan to sign and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) without delay and without conditions," it said.
The NPT Review Conference is held every five years to assess the progress in reaching the goals set out in the 1970 treaty to disarm and stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
This year it started on May 3 and would end on May 28 when the final draft is expected.
India, Pakistan and Israel have not signed the treaty and do not attend. The last conference in 2005 ended in failure.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, a Western diplomat said here that there were countries, which had accepted that India and Pakistan were not going to become part of the treaty and suggested a new track to reign them into the non-proliferation regime.
"We are going to try and put them in a cooperation system with obligations so that they would have the same obligations that NPT countries without being in the NPT," he said, noting that such an agreement was better than doing nothing.
Several experts, however, have pointed out that by the time the final document was prepared the names of the countries may be replaced by a more general call for the universal acceptance of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Officials noted that naming Israel, for instance, would lead to the country not cooperating with the Arab nations on a plan to have a Middle East free nuclear weapons free zone.
"We want something so that all countries come to the table," the Western diplomat said. "But it's so fragile, it's so difficult."
Mark Hibbs, an expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who had attended the meetings noted that there seemed to be a "tacit agreement" not to retain the names by the end of the conference.
Source: http://www.hindustantimes.com/UN-nuclear-conference-calls-on-India-to-joint-NPT-CTBT/Article1-548632.aspx
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Diplomat says Iran deal flawed
May 25, 2010
ASSOCIATED PRESS AND JPOST.COM STAFF
A Western diplomat speaking anonymously has referred to the proposed uranium fuel agreement between Iran, Turkey and Brazil as technically flawed.
AFP is reporting that the diplomat said, "Getting this fuel in one year is impossible. It takes at least one and a half years to have this." He added, "There is something tricky there, but we will see in a year. It is still too early."
The anonymous diplomat's comments came after Iran formally submitted the fuel swap deal to the International Atomic Energy Agency on Monday.
Seeking to evade new UN sanctions, Iran submitted its plan on Monday to swap some of its enriched uranium for reactor fuel and said the onus was on world powers to defuse tensions by accepting the deal.
The proposal, which was shared with The Associated Press, did not go beyond generalities already outlined last week. Thus, it was unlikely to deter the US, Russia, China, Britain and France — the five permanent UN Security Council members — which have agreed on a draft fourth set of sanctions against Iran for refusing to give up uranium enrichment.
The deal would commit Iran to ship 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium to Turkey, where it would be stored. In exchange, Iran would receive, within one year, higher-enriched fuel rods to be used in a US-built medical research reactor.
Source: http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=176405
ASSOCIATED PRESS AND JPOST.COM STAFF
A Western diplomat speaking anonymously has referred to the proposed uranium fuel agreement between Iran, Turkey and Brazil as technically flawed.
AFP is reporting that the diplomat said, "Getting this fuel in one year is impossible. It takes at least one and a half years to have this." He added, "There is something tricky there, but we will see in a year. It is still too early."
The anonymous diplomat's comments came after Iran formally submitted the fuel swap deal to the International Atomic Energy Agency on Monday.
Seeking to evade new UN sanctions, Iran submitted its plan on Monday to swap some of its enriched uranium for reactor fuel and said the onus was on world powers to defuse tensions by accepting the deal.
The proposal, which was shared with The Associated Press, did not go beyond generalities already outlined last week. Thus, it was unlikely to deter the US, Russia, China, Britain and France — the five permanent UN Security Council members — which have agreed on a draft fourth set of sanctions against Iran for refusing to give up uranium enrichment.
The deal would commit Iran to ship 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium to Turkey, where it would be stored. In exchange, Iran would receive, within one year, higher-enriched fuel rods to be used in a US-built medical research reactor.
Source: http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=176405
Friday, May 21, 2010
Iran nuclear deadline looms
May 21, 2010
Al Jazeera
Iran has less than 24 hours to sign a nuclear swap deal brokered by Turkey and Brazil.
If Iran signs the deal , US plans for a new round of sanctions against Tehran at the UN Security Council will suffer a setback.
Iran must write and deliver a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to kick start the fuel swap agreement reached on Monday.
Under the proposed deal, Iran agreed to ship much of its stockpile of low enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for fuel for a research reactor for medical isotopes - something that the US had proposed in 2009.
But the deal notwithstanding, the US has been pushing for fresh sanctions.
"The US announced a deal with China and Russia for new sanctions right after Turkey and Brazil brokered a deal with Iran," Al Jazeera's Anita Mcnaught said, reporting from Ankara, Turkey's capital.
"Turkey saw that as a slap in the face.
"US officials never believed the Turkish-Brazilian brokered deal would succeed.
"No one [in the US administration] thought Iran was amenible to anything other than sanctions." she said.
US displeasure
The US is unhappy with the deal because it does not include a commitment from Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment activities.
"There are American officials who think Iran just used the Brazil-Turkey deal to slow down sanctions," our correspondent said.
The controversy over Iran's nuclear programme has dragged on for years with the US and its allies accusing Tehran of seeking to covertly develop atomic weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is for generating electricity for civilian use.
Brazil and Turkey have growing ambitions in international affairs. Both countries are non-permanent members of the UN Security council who do not have veto power.
Turkish officials had been in touch with their US counterparts thoughout negotiations with Iran, a Turkish foreign ministry spokesman said. The US and Turkey are strategic allies.
"Hillary Clinton [the US Secretary of State] did not want them [Brazil and Turkey] to fail but she never thought they would suceed. So the US went ahead with the sanctions draft," our correspondent said. "If Iran signs the letter, then sanctions may not be an option. China might want to give the Brazil-Turkey deal a chance."
By Al Jazeera and Agencies
Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/05/201052183017311861.html
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Sanctions Effort May Open Door to Press Iran Central Bank
May 19, 2010
UNITED NATIONS — Buried in the sanctions resolution now being debated in the United Nations Security Council lies the possibility of a new effort to press Iran over its nuclear program: a call for countries to “exercise vigilance” in dealing with Iran’s central bank.
The New york Times
UNITED NATIONS — Buried in the sanctions resolution now being debated in the United Nations Security Council lies the possibility of a new effort to press Iran over its nuclear program: a call for countries to “exercise vigilance” in dealing with Iran’s central bank.
American and European officials said Wednesday that the reference, passing though it is, could give them a legal basis in the future for choking off financial transactions between Iran and banking centers in Europe and elsewhere. Previous sanctions have taken aim at specific banks suspected of financing proscribed nuclear activity, but never anything as pivotal as dealings with the central bank itself.
What is notably absent from the draft resolution, however, is any binding restriction on transactions with Iran’s central bank. Among the many compromises that the United States accepted to get China and Russia to back new sanctions against Iran was an agreement to limit any reference to the bank — or Iran’s entire energy sector, for that matter — to the introductory paragraphs, rather than including it in the sanctions themselves, according to American officials and other diplomats, yielding a weaker resolution than the United States would have liked.
The haggling over the central bank illustrates both the opportunities and the frustrations that American and European officials see in the resolution. On the one hand, it provides an opportunity to expand the range of financial activity that the West can try to impede. On the other, it provides a loophole for any nation that wants to continue relations with Iran, allowing it to argue that a cutoff is not mandatory.
The standoff between Washington and Beijing over what economic measures to include in the final resolution consumed the last 10 days of the negotiations, diplomats said. China expressed concern that if the central bank was singled out for sanctions, the entire Iranian economy would be paralyzed, they said. Even so, both Obama administration officials and diplomats underscored the mention of the central bank as an important tool to try to limit any trade with Iran that contributes to nuclear proliferation.
Security Council diplomats expressed confidence that they had at least 10 votes on the 15-member Council, and maybe more depending on how negotiations unroll. Turkey and Brazil, both current members, have said they will not engage in talks on the draft, and Lebanon is also expected to sit out the vote. The positions of other members, especially Nigeria and Uganda, remain unclear.
Iran reacted with outrage on Wednesday to the proposed new sanctions, particularly since the agreement was announced just a day after the Islamic republic had been trumpeting a compromise agreement, worked out with Brazil and Turkey, on nuclear enrichment for an experimental reactor in Tehran.
Iran’s foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said, “There was no chance that the resolution would be approved,” given that Tehran had agreed to ship a chunk of its enriched uranium to Turkey, the Fars news agency reported.
Mojtaba Samareh-Hashemi, an adviser to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, dismissed the draft as having “no legitimacy,” the news agency reported. All of the new sanctions come under the umbrella of limiting activity linked to nuclear proliferation. Iran maintains that its program is peaceful, but it is suspected of trying to develop a nuclear bomb.
The carefully worded compromise emerged after the United States said it would not support the passage of any resolution that did not at least mention the central bank and Iran’s lucrative energy sector, while the Chinese were equally adamant that no economic targets be singled out.
In the end, both the energy sector and the central bank were mentioned with somewhat tortured wording in the preamble, with the draft noting the “potential connection between Iran’s revenues derived from its energy sector” and possible financing for its nuclear program.
That is enough to pursue companies dealing with either the banks or the energy sector, American officials said. Susan E. Rice, the American ambassador to the United Nations, warned the Chinese that any measures passed by Congress in the absence of a United Nations resolution would probably have much greater consequences for Chinese banks and China’s trade relations with the United States, one United Nations diplomat said.
Russia generally supported the Chinese position, although Moscow focused on the arms embargo. The United States and its European allies in the talks —Britain, France and Germany — had proposed a total arms embargo, which Russia rejected.
The final compromise required a telephone call from President Obama to President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia to break the deadlock, one United Nations diplomat said. Russia then accepted the wording in the resolution, which bans the sale of all heavy combat equipment to Iran, namely battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, missiles or missile systems.
That would seem to include the S-300 surface-to-air missiles that Russia sold to the Islamic republic in 2005 but has repeatedly delayed delivering.
Among the hardest remaining issues is the list of Iranian companies and individuals to be subject to an asset freeze and travel ban. A Western list that runs to about 10 pages has been circulating for months, one diplomat noted. But many of the listings refer to multiple names of a single organization, switching names being a favorite tactic in avoiding sanctions.
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR & DAVID E. SANGER
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/world/middleeast/20nuke.html
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/world/middleeast/20nuke.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)