Iran and West suddenly sanguine about nuke talks
Iran and West suddenly sanguine about nuke talks | The Times of Israel.
( I wish I could believe this optimism. Please leave your feelings about this story in the comments. You too, Renbe. – JW# )
Both sides say progress made in Almaty meeting, signaling hope for breakthrough after years of loggerheads
Officials from Iran and the West are expressing rare optimism after the latest round of nuclear talks wrapped up Wednesday.
Iranian Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi, in Vienna, said the meeting, in which the group of six world powers offered to ease sanctions in return for Iran curbing its nuclear program, was “a milestone,” according to Iranian and Austrian media.
“From the latest information I received, I’m happy to say that the outcome of the meeting was positive. It has been put on the right track and it is moving in the right direction and that is important,” Salehi said. “I would say things are taking a turning point and I think the Almaty meeting will be a milestone.”
Echoing his sanguineness, a senior Western official was quoted by Reuters saying that the talks had seen progress, a rare feat after over a year of fruitless negotiations between the five United Nations Security Council nations plus Germany and Iran.
Iranian parliament head Ali Larijani also called the talks “positive.”
Negotiators had entered the meeting in Kazakhstan on Tuesday with low expectations, but emerged upbeat about the possibility of reaching a breakthrough. British Foreign Secretary William Hague and his American counterpart both termed the talks “useful.”
“This was more constructive and more positive than previous meetings because they were really focusing on the proposal on the table,” the Western diplomat told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
However the diplomat said the world powers would not be able to gauge how serious Iran is taking the talks until the next high-level meeting in April.
In the talks earlier this week, the P5+1 group reportedly offered to allow Iran to keep a limited amount of highly enriched uranium — but not make any more — and offered to remove some trade sanctions that have hurt Iran’s economy.
However, they stopped short of demanding Iran completely shut down the heavily-guarded Fordo nuclear site, in the past a key demand.
Still, a senior US official said, crippling sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial industries would remain in place as negotiations continue. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks more candidly.
The latest offer marked a small but significant shift from earlier, harder-line proposals that prompted Iran to dig in its heels amid fears that an arms race in neighboring states could sow yet more instability in the already turbulent Mideast. Israel has repeatedly hinted its readiness to strike Iranian nuclear facilities — a military venture the United States likely would be dragged into.
The new offer also is expected to force Iran to respond with a reasonable plan of its own — or be seen as a recalcitrant negotiator unwilling to compromise.
The proposal “was more realistic than before and had tried to get closer to the Iranian viewpoint in some cases,” chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili told reporters at the end of two days of negotiations in Kazakhstan’s largest city, Almaty. “We consider this positive — although there is a long distance to reach the suitable point.”
The two-sides will hold low level talks in March to hash out the details of the deal, and then convene another high level meeting in Almaty in early April.
Iran and the P5+1 had previously held several round of talks, with little progress. Israel has characterized the talks as a stalling tactic by Iran and on Thursday, former foreign minister Avigdor Liberman accused the West of backing down in front of Tehran.
“It’s clear to everyone that the Iranians don’t intend to halt their efforts to reach nuclear capability,” he said. “The reactors at Parchin and other locations are working at full steam without any [International Atomic Energy Agency] observer being allowed to visit.”
Iran maintains it has the right under international law to enrich uranium to 20 percent — a level that can quickly be elevated into use for nuclear warheads. Tehran claims it needs that level of enriched uranium for reactor fuel and medical isotopes, and has signaled it does not intend to stop.
UN nuclear inspectors last week confirmed Iran has begun a major upgrade of its program at the country’s main uranium enrichment site.
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
March 1, 2013 at 10:01 AM
A Shiite as a president + a secretary of state with Iranian son-in-law+ a CIA chief converted to Islam+ a defense secretary close to the Islamists lobbies have great potential to appease the fundamentalists at any cost.
It is a matter of chemistry.
March 1, 2013 at 1:47 PM
Today, more than ever, the interests of Europe and Iran are the same. A middle east large conflict will be, for the europeans, the last drop in their cup of bitterness. And Obama will interfere with this profound love story? No, sir. Obama to attack Iran if…? Let us be realistic. No one will throw even a rock at the iranians, with the exception of the Al Nusra fighters / jihadists who are killing iranians troops and Hezbollah fighters in Syria. So, first, we wish good luck to that Al Qaeda offspring, they are apparently serious guys. Wait, what say you? Israel is also in the crosshair of the jihadists? Ok, we understand that. But first, let ’em finish the job in Syria against Iran. We’ll take care of our business with them after the syrian mess.
So, my friends, where are we today? America is in deep sh!t by the courtesy of Obama & comp, Europa is in the eve of a big sh!t bomb explosion right in its face, Iran is in trouble at home and in trouble in Syria and Israel will go to new elections in less than a half of year. Right now, the hypocrites in the world don’t give a dam about the iranian nuke.
March 1, 2013 at 2:32 PM
Well I think the definition of the word ‘sanguine’ says it all:
1
: bloodred
2
a : consisting of or ***relating to blood**
b : **bloodthirsty**, sanguinary
c of the complexion : ruddy
3
: having blood as the predominating bodily humor; also : having the bodily conformation and temperament held characteristic of such predominance and marked by sturdiness, high color, and cheerfulness
4
: confident, optimistic
March 1, 2013 at 6:14 PM
Since you asked us about our feelings …
I feel pessimistic about the outcome of the negotiations.
Nuclear deals with Iran are as elusive as the famous ‘red lines’.
Based on what has been going on for a decade I see no good reason to be optimistic.
Based on the players involved I see no good reason to think that even if they strike a deal it will be in the best interests of Israel or the real interests of the US and Europe (not talking about the traitors in our elites).
How I’d love to be proven wrong …
Why should the Iranians agree?
As I see it, they won’t give up their goal of getting nukes. Only a temporary slowdown or a deal which leaves so much loopholes that they can continue their nuke development quietly is acceptable for them.
Unless the negotiators speak softly in public to allow the Iranians to safe face but carry a big stick in the meetings I see no reason to be optimistic.
This stick does not necessarily has to be the threat of direct and open military attack but anything else that is a credible threat to the survival of the mullah regime or to the existence of their nuclear program.
I don’t believe that US and Europe carry this kind of stick.
Anyway. What is different this time?
The West is willing to offer the Iranians a little more than before.
There is another one carrying a stick and that is Israel.
Netanyahu has set a clear red line which will be crossed this year if everything stays the same.
The Iranians know, that he will be under immense pressure to act either overtly or covertly.
Whether the explosion in Fordow happened or not does not change that pressure.
Only if the explosion is publicly confirmed then can Netanyahu justify to wait a little bit longer.
And so the demand to shut down or suspend operation in Fordow offers the Iranians a convenient exit.
If that explosion in Fordow did really happen it would be bad for the Iranians to admit it because it would put pressure on them to retaliate.
Why Fordow?
Other than that is buried deeper underground there is no difference between Fordow and the enrichment plant at Natanz.
ISIS has done an analysis based on the latest IAEA-report.
This analysis shows that from Feb. 2012 to Feb. 2013 the number of centrifges which were operating remained constant (about 700 centrifuges).
Up to now none of the newly installed centrifuges has been operating.
The total number of centrifuges is about 2700.
According to the analysis 15 of the 16 new cascades have been vacuum tested and are likely ready to enrich Uranium soon.
The important thing to consider is, that according to the IAEA all centrifuges installed at Fordow are IR-1 centrifuges.
These first generation centrifuges are enriching much slower than the newer IR-2 centrifuges that Iran wants to install at Natanz.
The question then is, why is the West demanding specifically the halt of operations at Fordow when these centrifuges are the same as the ones in Natanz and the IAEA has the same access to both sites?
Why not demanding a general reduction of enrichment?
Answer: It takes the pressure off from Netanyahu while it takes away from the Iranians the need to retaliate and it is easy to accept because the whole damned is blown up anyway.
Am I absolutely 100% sure? Hell no, but the latest IAEA-report did not mention any inspections after 21. Jan. 2013.
And so, while I am pessimistic about the final outcome of the negotiations, I am cautiously optimistic, that Iran agrees to shut down Fordow as a sign of good will and a first step.
They are not going to stop their nuclear program but it will buy time for all players. And what better way is there for Obavez to enter Jerusalem as the Second Coming on Nssan 9?
Click to access ISIS_Analysis_IAEA_safeguards_Report_21Feb2013.pdf
As I said at the beginning of this year. 2013 will be the year of decision.
So at the end of 2013 one of the following will have happened:
a) Iran and the West strike a deal (not necessarily a final one) that makes an attack at least this year unnecessary.
b) We hear of ‘mysterious accidents’ that slow the Iranian program further down.
c) The Israeli goverment gives a plausible explanation why the Iranian nuclear program is
not as advanced as prevously thought and why there is still time so that an attack is not
necessary. This could be a result of unconfirmed ‘mysterious accidents’.
d) The US or Israel attack Iran.
e) The Iranians are enriching like crazy and they have enough material to build a nuke.
f) Nothing. Everything stays the same. Except that the Iranians have now enough material for a nuke.
March 1, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Correction:
And so, while I am pessimistic about the final outcome of the negotiations, I am cautiously optimistic, that Iran agrees to SUSPEND ENRICHMENT at Fordow as a sign of good will and a first step
March 1, 2013 at 9:25 PM
March sees us crossing the Israeli red line.
March 1, 2013 at 10:46 PM
My thoughts are we’ve seen this movie over and over and over again. We’ve been talking with Iran and North Korea for decades. The only thing “useful” about these talks is the time it gives our enemies to build their nuclear arsenals. 😦
March 1, 2013 at 11:24 PM
JW,
I would be interested if you would run a poll on how much time the readers here think we still have before Israel strikes Iran.
With the Fordo explosion reports I’m pretty confused on the timetable now.
Do we expect Netanyahu’s Spring/Summer deadline set before the UN last Fall to hold?
March 1, 2013 at 11:39 PM
I give them 90 days…tops. I’d even bet Luis’ beard on it.
March 2, 2013 at 8:43 AM
Don’t bet on somebody’s else beard.
March 2, 2013 at 1:29 AM
June boys and girls, June. or sooner 🙂
March 2, 2013 at 10:29 AM
After stalling (negotiating) for over ten years, I think China, Russia and the West are just really frustrated. I mean, just how long do these dumb Iranians need to make one stupid nuclear weapon? Perhaps now they see the light at the end of the tunnel.