Nuke Deal with Iran Delays Talks
EmailABC News' Kirit Radia and Lara Setrakian report:
A recent deal with Iran, hailed just last week as the key to reducing the country’s nuclear threat, now threatens to delay talks with Tehran over its nuclear program.
US and foreign leaders had praised a draft agreement reached last week with Iran that would send some of its uranium stockpile abroad to be converted for use in a medical research reactor outside Tehran saying such a deal would reduce Iran’s ability to enrich it for military purposes.
But some officials now complain that the agreement has delayed a second round of talks between Iran and a group of world powers that are negotiating to curb Tehran’s nuclear capability.
The so-called P5+1, the five permanent members of the UN Security council plus Germany, had hoped to meet this week with Iran’s delegation for the second time this month, but officials indicated they will not do so until the uranium transfer deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency is finalized. Today Iran told the IAEA it would like some changes to the deal.
European diplomats close to the Iran negotiations say today’s response to the nuclear deal – an agreement in principle but with significant amendments – represents a “substantial change to the basics” of the proposal, ones not likely to go over well with the US and France.
Today State Department spokesman Ian Kelly made it clear the US does not want any changes to the deal, saying “this is a sound agreement, that it's balanced and answers the needs and concerns of all parties.”
One diplomat says that a new set of P5+1 talks with Iran are “not on the horizon.” The group will hold a conference call tomorrow to discuss a way forward.
“At this point we have not yet been able to reach that basic agreement on the agenda. If there is no agenda then it’s very difficult to enter into a new round,” said the diplomat, who is close to the P5+1 negotiations.
Another official says Iran wants to broaden the talks to discuss the global affairs while EU foreign policy chief, who has headed the talks with Iran, is trying to keep the agenda to Iran’s nuclear program.
One official, who is normally bullish on engagement with Iran, described the current situation around continuing diplomacy as “pretty, pretty grave.”
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Remember the euphoria when the goofballs read the tea-leaves and concluded that the Russians were going to join us in sanctions?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | October 29, 2009, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
It’s almost as if Iran is determined not to be straight with us.
Posted by: MayBee | October 29, 2009, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
“It’s almost as if Iran is determined not to be straight with us.”
_________________________________
I don’t think Iran trusts the United States. Still, they are negotiating.
Posted by: tierra | October 29, 2009, 9:49 pm 9:49 pm
Iran is just buying time,Obama is dithering on this problem also.We can only hope that the US stays out of the way of Israel if push comes to shove, the Obama administration thinks it can negotiate with terrorist who have proved over and over again they cannot be trusted.
Posted by: Johnny L | October 30, 2009, 7:47 am 7:47 am
I don’t think Iran trusts the United States. Still, they are negotiating.
Posted by: tierra |
Right you are…if by negotiating you mean stalling for time.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | October 30, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
I don’t think Iran trusts the United States. Still, they are negotiating.
Posted by: tierra |
Right you are…if by negotiating you mean stalling for time.
________________________________________
No, I meant negotiating. It’s you right wingers who are into the ‘bomb first ask questions later’ mentality.
That is your solution right?
Posted by: tierra | October 30, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
Any prospect for a non-belligerent foreign policy toward Iran is not expected. The U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday passed the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, a bill targeting Tehran and the firms conducting energy business with Iran. The recent bill, part of a larger effort to hurt Iranian people, was instigated to force Iran to abandon her nuclear enrichment program. Those who voted for the bill assumed that they were giving the Obama administration stronger powers to sanction companies that provide Iranian people gasoline, diesel and other refined petroleum fuels.
The bill would give a legitimate reason to Iran to fear US-France governments sincerity to fair play.
I suggest the following three steps to correct our failed foreign policy with respect to the Middle East:
1. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Iranian Consortium:
USA should join the consortium among others Japan, Germany, France and England to actively monitor the Iranian fuel cycle activity too. IAEA has consistently asserted that the agency could not find any indications that Iran is diverting the fuel cycle for nuclear bomb development. Iran has asserted that their activities are limited to development of fuel for nuclear reactor. The action of an international consortium in Iran for enrichment of nuclear fuel is to quell those who fear Iran may develop nuclear bomb. The other nuclear fuel cycle states, such as Japan, Brazil, and Germany, have not burdened themselves with joint operations with other nations.
2. Nuclear Shield
An international nuclear shield for all nations in the Middle East, including Iran, from nuclear bomb states;
3. A nuclear- bomb-free Middle East
This action will remove any pressure from Iran to develop nuclear bomb in the future for deterrence against nuclear bomb Israeli state.
President Harry Truman in 1946 gave this statement about nuclear bomb:
“It is a terrible weapon, and it should not be used on innocent men, women and children who have nothing whatever to do with this military aggression. That happens when it is used.” He was referring to using the bomb on Japan.
Posted by: Saint Michael Traveler | October 30, 2009, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm