US to up pressure if Iran does not address nuclear concerns
Israel Hayom | US to up pressure if Iran does not address nuclear concerns.
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland brushes off Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s rejection of direct talks with the U.S., saying, “The ball is in the Iranians’ own court” • Nuland urges Iran to show up at P5+1 talks in Kazakhstan “prepared to discuss real substance.”
|
U.S. says Iran’s failure to address concerns about its nuclear program will lead to more pressure being applied on Iran.
|
Photo credit: AP
|
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland on Thursday brushed off Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s rejection of direct talks with the U.S. and said that Iran’s failure to address concerns about its nuclear program would lead to more pressure being applied on Iran.
“As the Iranians well know, the ball is in the Iranians’ own court,” she told reporters in Washington.
“We’ve always said that action on the Iranian side would be matched by action on our side, so it’s really up to Iran to engage if it wants to see sanctions eased,” said Nuland.
Nuland urged Iran to arrive at P5+1 talks with world powers, which are set to be held in Kazakhstan later this month, “prepared to discuss real substance” either in a group setting or in bilateral talks.
Earlier on Thursday, Khamenei rebuffed an offer of direct talks made by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden last week, with Khamenei saying such talks would not solve the issues between the two countries.
“Some naive people like the idea of negotiating with America, however, negotiations will not solve the problem,” Khamenei said in a speech to officials and members of Iran’s air force carried on his official website.
“If some people want American rule to be established again in Iran, the nation will rise up to face them,” he said.
“American policy in the Middle East has been destroyed and Americans now need to play a new card. That card is dragging Iran into negotiations.”
Khamenei made his comments just days after Biden said the United States was prepared to meet bilaterally with the Iranian leadership. “That offer stands but it must be real and tangible,” Biden said in Munich on Saturday.
With traditional fiery rhetoric, Khamenei lambasted Biden’s offer, saying that since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 the United States had gravely insulted Iran and continued to do so with its threat of military action.
“You take up arms against the nation of Iran and say: ‘negotiate or we fire.’ But you should know that pressure and negotiations are not compatible and our nation will not be intimidated by these actions,” he added.
Relations between Iran and the United States were severed after the overthrow of Iran’s pro-Western monarchy in 1979 and diplomatic meetings between officials have since been very rare.
Currently, U.S.-Iran contact is limited to talks between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers on Iran’s disputed nuclear program. Those talks are set to resume on Feb. 26 in Kazakhstan.
Israeli Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Dan Meridor (Likud) said on Thursday he was skeptical the negotiations in Kazakhstan could yield a result, telling Israel Radio that the United States needed to demonstrate to Iran that “all options were still on the table.”
Israel, widely thought to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, has warned it could mount a preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear sites. Israel says the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran threatens its existence, given Iran’s refusal to recognize Israel.
“The final option, this is the phrasing we have used, should remain in place and be serious,” said Meridor.
“The fact that the Iranians have not yet come down from the path they are on means that talks … are liable to bring about only a stalling for time,” he said.
Iran maintains its nuclear program is entirely peaceful but Western powers are concerned it is intent on developing a weapons program.
Many believe a deal on settling the nuclear issue is impossible without a U.S.-Iranian thaw. But any rapprochement would require direct talks addressing many sources of mutual mistrust that have lingered since the 1979 revolution and the subsequent U.S. Embassy hostage crisis in Tehran.
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
February 8, 2013 at 4:46 PM
What’s the point of the P5 + 1 talks when Ahmadinejad already declared Iran an nuclear power? Victoria Nuland never mentioned Ahmadinejads claim, but now, two days later, the issue has finally hit the papers:
Consequences of a nuclear Iran
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2013/02/consequences-of-nuclear-iran.html
February 8, 2013 at 5:04 PM
Iran is pretending to negotiate, the west is pretending that still is a chance. The show will be over when Israel will blow up the scene.
February 8, 2013 at 10:20 PM
A few days ago Amos Yadlin in an article in the Jerusalem Post said that ” Iran is currently four to six months away from nuclear breakout stage”. However if “breakout” means the decision to acquire and action on acquiring all the necessary components for a bomb, then after Ahmadinejad’s statement we see that the nuclear breakout has already happened even if Ahmadinejad is bluffing that they already have the bomb. . So this county has to form a government ASAP! In order to launch an attack on Iran you need the new government.
February 9, 2013 at 12:28 AM
What i am hearing is the the millitery option is at the head of the table in the white house now,and the various internal us agency’s are preparing for it.
February 8, 2013 at 10:23 PM
Mladen…
We’ve got the time, we’ve got the ability. All we need is the will.
February 9, 2013 at 12:28 AM
The implications of the Ahmadinejad’s statement are enormous, yet there was to my knowledge no official government nor serious media response to it yet. I do not know how much time we have. I just hope that from stuxnet, duqu, mahdi and flame Israel has a clear picture whether Ahmdinejad’s statement is a bluff. It is quite possible that after Fordo Iran believed that it the only way to prevent an attack is to clam that they already have the bomb. As for the will, when you do not have any other choice except to be incinerated, you act.
February 8, 2013 at 10:42 PM
The new government won’t launch any operation in Iran and will wait till ”the last moment”. Netanyahu’s political position in 2013 is not so strong like it was in the precedent years and to make a decision for sending in the IAF needs a very strong PM, a very strong case or both.
For operating in Syria there is a green lantern permanently lighting from Obama, but for operating openly in Iran, that lantern is still not lighting.
February 9, 2013 at 12:36 AM
I think Netanyahus wait is morally right,considering the potential loss of life if it goes wrong and not just in iran,i must say that in real terms we are now at that point,It is very distressing the repercussions are already playing out elsewhere ,i suspect were on the verge of a cataclysm if a party miscalculates.
February 8, 2013 at 10:51 PM
…And regarding the general conception on security issues by Obama, we found this interesting article : http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-08/syria-not-benghazi-is-obama-s-big-security-failure.html
February 8, 2013 at 11:40 PM
Obama will launch massive cruise Missile attacks on any nuclear sites above ground. If Frodow has indeed been taken out, these two acts would effectively nueter Iran. Obama has no choice, failure to do so would mean a nuclear arms race in the Middle East which would be a dissaster for humanity!
February 9, 2013 at 1:31 AM
A lot more than just the nuke sites will need to be hit and it will go beyond the use of just cruise missiles imo.
February 9, 2013 at 6:08 AM
Something better happen soon. We got 5 carriers docked in Norfolk for maintenance and refueling. The Abraham Lincoln may not get it’s fuel rods. Seems the budget is shrinking thanks to Obama and a benign congress.
February 9, 2013 at 6:57 AM
Gentlemen, cruise missiles can be fired quite nicely from submarines, and it will be enough to cripple the Iranian program for years.