2010 Complete Election Coverage: Resolution on Iran seems remote
Tags:
Text Size
- -
- +
- reset
- As Mohamed ElBaradei, the U.N. atomic energy agency’s outgoing chief, tries to rescue a deal that would transfer much of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, the agency has issued a new report on Iran's nuclear program that demonstrates how hard it will be to find any near-term resolution. AP Photo
POLITICO 44
As Mohamed ElBaradei, the U.N. atomic energy agency’s outgoing chief, tries to rescue a deal that would transfer much of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, the agency has issued a new report on Iran’s nuclear program that demonstrates how hard it will be to find any near-term resolution.
In an analysis accompanying the International Atomic Energy Agency report, David Albright and Jacqueline Shire of the Institute for Science and International Security describe a somewhat conflicting picture of the Iranian situation.
On the one hand, Iran is not using the full number of centrifuges it has to enrich uranium, keeping the rate of low-enriched uranium at a steady rate of 2.8 kg per day, which could amount to a kind of undeclared gesture of moderation to the West, though there could be technical reasons or a shortage of uranium hexafluoride preventing Iran from using all the centrifuges it has at Natanz. On the other hand, the report cites evidence for continuing concern about Iran’s lack of transparency and past deceptions about its nuclear program.
ElBaradei, the IAEA director, has been spearheading international efforts to rescue a deal between Iran and the West that would make way for Iran’s own stockpile of LEU to be processed abroad for Iranian nuclear medical use.
When announced after a meeting between Iran and international powers in Geneva last month, the Tehran Research Reactor deal, as it’s known, was seen as a way to put time back on the clock for negotiations to proceed with Iran, since it would remove about 70 percent of Iran’s known stockpile of LEU for several months and thus delay the near-term prospect of it acquiring a breakout capacity for a nuclear weapon.
But prospects for the deal have been cast into doubt by recent Iranian requests that it simultaneously receive nuclear medical fuel rods when it transfers its LEU for the project. ElBaradei has been trying to work out a possible compromise, under which Iran could transfer its LEU stockpile to a country it trusts while the processing is occurring, but according to recent reports, Iran has rejected a bunch of possibilities, including Turkey and South Africa.
Beset by continued internal strife and infighting, Iran does not seem capable of returning a definitive answer on the deal. And with ElBaradei set to retire at the end of the month, its most aggressive advocate and mediator will soon be out of the job.
“Iran can’t yet take ‘yes’ for an answer,” says former weapons inspector George Perkovich of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The “Iranians also should understand that ElBaradei has helped them, this is his deal, and he’s leaving. ... So I suspect they will soon say, ‘yes, but not quite this,’ and prolong more.”
“I think there’s a significant constituency in Tehran that opposes this deal and does want to close it off,” Carnegie’s James Acton said. “But, more importantly, Tehran just seems incapable of making decisions right now. Without a positive decision to proceed, it doesn’t happen.”
The fact that Iran is holding back on its enrichment capacity gives experts some reason for optimism.
“My hunch, and it is just a hunch, is that Iran is comfortable maintaining an LEU output that holds steady at about 2.75-2.8 kg ... per day,” ISIS’s Shire told POLITICO. “This is how it has been for at least the last six months, maybe longer. ... If they started enriching with the other centrifuges [they have], LEU output could increase dramatically, putting them under greater diplomatic pressure.”
Readers' Comments (17)
ANN&MITT; Party: Conservative
Reply #1
Nov. 18, 2009 - 6:10 AM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
J. E. Dundee Party: NA
Reply #2
Nov. 18, 2009 - 8:22 AM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
TuLegit2Quit Party: Independent
Reply #3
Nov. 18, 2009 - 11:08 AM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Willie12345 Party: NA
Reply #4
Nov. 18, 2009 - 11:55 AM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Louis L Party: NA
Reply #5
Nov. 18, 2009 - 12:13 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
zencowboy Party: Independent
Reply #6
Nov. 18, 2009 - 1:19 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
hassani1387 Party: NA
Reply #7
Nov. 18, 2009 - 2:04 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
J. E. Dundee Party: NA
Reply #8
Nov. 18, 2009 - 3:05 PM EST
Usually the Sunday TV talk shows dwell on tangential issues but on 4/26/09 they cut to the core. Jordan's King Abdullah II told David Gregory on NBC's Meet the Press that by connecting the dots we can see that all our major foreign policy problems lead back to the Israeli occupations. Until this core issue is solved there will always be instability in the region. Gregory exclaimed in surprise that most Americans believe the core issue is terrorism and al Qaeda. (Of course that's what most Americans believe since that's what the Israel Lobby-dominated media feed them.)
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Paul in NH Party: Libertarian
Reply #9
Nov. 18, 2009 - 5:49 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
liven4freedom Party: N/A
Reply #10
Nov. 18, 2009 - 8:35 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Shawn SB Party: Libertarian
Reply #11
Nov. 18, 2009 - 9:19 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
J. E. Dundee Party: NA
Reply #12
Nov. 18, 2009 - 10:11 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Shawn SB Party: Libertarian
Reply #13
Nov. 18, 2009 - 10:20 PM EST
J.E. Dundee: Fortunately for Iranians, China would never allow for that to happen. It will actually be the end of the world, as in WWIII, or at least the end of Israel as we know it. Remember, the world still demands and depends on oil. I actually don't think that Israel has the ba--ls to nuke Iran. Not to mention that Saudi Arabia, as corrupt as they are, would also get involved.
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Shawn SB Party: Libertarian
Reply #14
Nov. 18, 2009 - 10:28 PM EST
Meanwhile Obama turns a blind eye to the freedom seeking youth in Iran, 5 of whom are about to be executed for speaking against the NUTSYS. That's 5 on top of hundreds that were killed on the streets of Iran, not to mention thousands that were tortured and raped... Great going Obama, hope you have a nice dinner with the Indian PM. Enjoy yourself on your next date or the next time you enjoy yellow tail tuna at your favorite sushi spot.
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Dr.Dan Party: Independent
Reply #15
Nov. 18, 2009 - 11:54 PM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
J. E. Dundee Party: NA
Reply #16
Nov. 19, 2009 - 7:40 AM EST
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Shawn SB Party: Libertarian
Reply #17
Nov. 19, 2009 - 10:27 AM EST
China has zero control over Israel? Israel has been playing all sides. During the Cold War, many of their bombs and missiles were purchased from the USSR, unbeknownst to us. They were double agents of the USSR. Bush I was unto them and years later when he demanded for Israel to pull out of the occupied territory, he lost the elections. Clinton and Bush Boy, learned from his mistake and sided with Israel. Meanwhile, China has a lot to lose if Iran is bombed, just as Russia does. They depend on its oil and not to mention that Venezuela and N. Korea are also going to side with Iran. Trust me when I tell you that I smell WWIII and I hope that Obama is not the one pushing for it by staying mum on the Iran's and Israel's separate domestic issues. By purposely turning a blind eye, he is encouraging hostilities between the two countries. If Iran is bombed by Israel, it is only because they had the go ahead by the US. What Carter didn't finish in Iran, Obama will.
- Reply
- Quote
- Report Abuse
Read all 17 comments in our forum* * * * * * * * * * * * *
A M A D - G E N O C I D E * P L A Y S * N U C L E A R * P O K E R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Iran calls Obama naive and not a nuclear expert . Obama says that
he will spank them the next time for the 22nd time . The Dobermans
in this dog eat dog world see Obama as a TOY POODLE .
Amad - genocide is a psyco religious Jihadist that's bent on destroying
Israel and the United States of America .
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sanctions on Israel, not Iran
September 17, 2009
http://www.dundeesblog.blog...
A strong case can be made for imposing sanctions on Israel rather than Iran. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons, and its clandestine program has never been under UN oversight. Israel even jailed in solitary confinement Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu who blew the whistle on the covert nuclear weapons program.
It is Israel which threatens Iran, not vice versa. The Wall Street Journal (7/8/09) reported that "an Israeli submarine believed to be carrying nuclear-tipped missiles" had moved towards Iran. Whereas Iran has not invaded another country since the late 18th century and occupies no one, Israel invades and attacks at will and illegally occupies Palestine and parts of Syria and Lebanon. Iranian President Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University 9/24/07 and elsewhere on American TV stated that he did not seek the destruction of the Israeli people but only wished for a change in their leadership so as to end their illegal occupations. Ahmadinejad said he would agree to any peace with Israel endorsed by the Palestinian people. He also explained that he did not deny that the Nazi Holocaust happened, he only wanted more research into the details and stressed that the German atrocities against the Jews should not be used to try to excuse Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians.
Many groups including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and even Israeli veterans have reported that Israel committed war crimes during its Gaza massacre in January. More than 1400 Palestinians were killed including at least 900 civilians according to human rights groups. Three Israeli civilians were killed. (The Boston Globe 7/16/09)
A 9/15/09 report by the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict found Israel guilty of numerous war crimes against innocent civilians. Israelis used disproportionate force and deliberately attacked civilian targets, such as schools and hospitals, with heavy artillery and precision missiles from drones. They shot in cold blood civilians who were waving white flags and following Israeli instructions. They wantonly destroyed food, water, and sewerage facilities and rained down incendiary deadly white phosphorus on civilians. They shelled mosques during evening prayers and a UN relief compound which they knew was sheltering 700 civilians and which contained stored fuel.
Meanwhile, despite US objections, illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank keep expanding. The New York Times 9/14/09 reports that the Jewish settlers plunk down their settlements between Palestinian villagers and their farmlands. The Israelis then block their way so that the Palestinians can not get to their land at which time the settlers seize the Palestinian farmland claiming that it was "abandoned." Another favorite settler trick is setting fire to the Palestinian farms and orchards. It is not surprising that Israel's brutal occupations breeds the expected response from resistance groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
Israel's crimes must end. It is time for sanctions.
The Princess Bride ... Vizzini: Inconceivable
"
"Resolution on Iran seems remote" - No surprise. The UN and Obama have a lot in common. All they do is talk and talk. They never accomplish anything.Maybe the Pres should go there, bow to the Grand Mullah, & apologize again for 1953...
And he better go soon, before Iran executes those 5 participants in the protests he ignored...
How's that diplomacy and charm working out for the administration! Did they think that personality could carry them through? Iran's stall tactic continues to work and we keep falling for it.
News Release from AP:
Iran rejects UN-proposed nuclear deal. By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press Writer – 16 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's foreign minister on Wednesday said his country would not export its enriched uranium for further processing, effectively rejecting the latest U.N. plan aimed at preventing Tehran from building nuclear weapons.
"ISIS also expresses doubt about the rationale for a facility with capacity for only 3,000 centrifuges, far too few for powering a nuclear energy facility. "
And this is precisely why ISIS is not a reliable source: The Iranians have repeatedly and consistently made it clear that this is PILOT "semi-industrial" facility intended to protect centrifuges in case of a bombing, and NOT intended for "powering a nuclear energy facility."
See http://www.IranAffairs.com for the FACTS
The Israel Lobby is trying to push us into another unnecessary war.
The Sunday Talks
April 30, 2009
http://www.dundeesblog.blog...
Abdullah pointed out that al Qaeda extremists are able to recruit and expand their numbers primarily because of the Israeli occupation and plight of the Palestinians. (Of course there will always be a few power-hungry radicals, but their power depends on their ability to recruit adherents. Timothy McVeigh, for instance, would have been much harder to isolate and capture if he had been able to recruit an army of followers. We did not need to launch an all-out military offensive to bring him to justice.)
Asked about Iran, Abdullah again said "connect the dots." It all leads to the Israeli occupation of Palestine and occupation of Jerusalem. He noted that 57 nations (one-third of the UN) do not recognize Israel for this reason. If this core issue were resolved, Iran would no longer be a problem. He of course opposes an Israeli attack on Iran.
Meanwhile on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Iranian President Ahmadinejad again said that whatever the Palestinians decide in the way of a peace agreement with Israel "is fine with us." Iran would accept a two-state solution that was supported by the Palestinian people. (So all the scare tactics the Israel Lobby uses to push us to war with Iran are lies. Iran and the rest of the 57 nations which do not recognize Israel would do so if Israel would abide by UN Security Council resolutions and end the illegal occupations. The Israel Lobby prefers war with 57 nations.)
Didn't we have it on good authority that Iran was tamed and we would have peace in our time? That must have been the Bush administration echos rattling from State and the WH a month or so ago. Isn't that what we paid the Russians for? Must be time to pay North Korea and the Chinese again. Russia won't come due until it is colder in Europe. How many times will be play Uncle Sucker?
Israel will take care of Business..This is a Man's job.
Need I say more.
I only wished I knew where Israel really stood on the Iranian issue. Are they supporting these lice infested, ancient garb wearing characters or are they against them? Whatever it takes to get these dirty minded and soulless men off of the back of the Iranians, is fine with me. If Israel wants to protect its own, that's fine with me but we, as Americans should allow Israel to fight its own war. Iranians would rather go to war and get rid of this infestation than live the way they are living now. 8000 years of civilization has been wiped away from the Iranians in only 30 years. I can't imagine what another 30 years of this regime would do to them. May the Iranian young men and women live long to see their country taken back to what it once was, a civilized and beautiful country with happy and thriving citizens.
Fat chance. Once Israel is through with your fatherland, it will resemble Gaza except that there will be radiation all over the place.
POTUS Obama now becomes Commander-in-Chief Obama. He has a military decision to make since diplomatic channels have failed. Gerald Yonas, director of the SDI program, once suggested calling Saddam Hussein on the phone and sending an ICBM to the house across the street. It doesn't take a nuclear warhead to make an impact when a projectile is falling from outer space.
Ahmadinejad has challenged President Obama once too often and Obama's international standing may now be on the line. The leaders of Russia and China will not make it easy for President Obama but they will not stand in his way. Standing on the Great Wall and in the Forbidden City President Obama showed- in the photos- the loneliness of leadership and power.
Remember the surprise factor Barack Obama called upon in his masterful political campaign? He has consolidated his position this year with the power brokers in government and finance. He has the authority to act. Does he perceive the need to act on behalf of US interests? The Saudis are now beset by Iranian-supported Shi'a tribes. Saudi Arabia and Israel are impatient for US action. But is it in our interest to act? Is denouncing the death sentences for Iranian protesters going to be enough? Or is it time to back up words with action?
If he looks at military options what technology does he have to choose from? Can he run a military campaign the way he ran a political campaign? Is military action a necessity? Will it harm his domestic and international agenda? Or will it facilitate his leadership if he puts Iranian fanaticism out of the way? Compare Iran to Afghanistan; experts agree there is no chance to "win" in Afghanistan; is there a chance to "win" in Iran?
It took only one man, Kermit Roosevelt, to topple the government of Iran in 1953. Can Obama put together a plan for military action that will take down Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollahs without harming the aspirations of the forward-looking population of Iran? The mountain outside Qom - where there is not yet nuclear material- has been offered by Iran as a target: "Make a deeper hole for us there, if you please."
Uranium enrichment in Natanz and the reactor in Bushehr are well-known sites. But how can you close a nuclear facility without contaminating its surroundings? Not with bombs. A naval blockade is the less-aggressive military option to be weighed. Iran's arms shipments in violation of UN resolutions give the rationale for the blockade.
Does General McCrystal have the counter-insurgency expertise that is needed for special forces to support insurgency? Does Obama have the genius of strategy? Will the POTUS divert the proposed 40,000 troops from Afghanistan to Iran? Will he move the army in Iraq to the Syrian border? Does he know the right distance to station the fleet?
Is there really such a thing as "peace through strength"? Is it better to wait till Iran mounts nuclear weapons on its long-range missiles? Or to hope that their military nuclear program is just a fantasy? Move the forces into place around Iran. Remote thoughts on the options of intensified conflict.
China has zero control over Israel, and Israel says they're going to bomb Iran who has said they will retaliate, which will bring in our country. On CNN Wolf Blitzer was showing off our huge new bombs. So if you really love Iran and its people, you should not be pushing for regime change by means of war.