Thaw provoking? Iran ‘ready for engagement’ at UN General Assembly as US, Russia talk Syria
Syria and Iran will be the key items on the agenda at the 68th General Assembly that opens in New York on Tuesday. The stakes are high, with world leaders from nearly 200 member states set to tackle challenges and reach agreements over disputed issues.
Among the most anticipated speeches at the General Assembly is the address of Iran’s new President Hassan Rouhani, who is scheduled to deliver his speech a few hours after Barack Obama's welcoming address on September 24.
Rouhani, who will be accompanied on his visit by Iran's only Jewish MP, tweeted that he is "ready for constructive engagement” with the world "to show real image of great Iranian nation."
Experts say, however, that the chances that the first face-to-face encounter between the leaders of the two countries since the 1970s would take place are slim. As things stand now, even a handshake would be regarded a sign of a thaw in relations.
Israel has voiced concern over a potential meeting of the US and Iranian presidents, saying Tehran's conciliatory advances to world leaders in reality conceal an advancement of its disputed nuclear program. Iran denies seeking atomic weapons. Israel claims Iran has centrifuges for quickly turning low-enriched uranium into bomb fuel, and says an Iranian bomb could be six months from production.
Asked if there would be a historic Obama-Rouhani handshake, the cabinet minister representing Israel at the UN forum in New York replied "I hope not. I don't know. But really the important thing is not just words and appearances. The important thing is the actions. The important thing is the resolutions," Yuval Steinitz told Israel's Army Radio.
Meanwhile, a recent poll commissioned by the international civic organization Avaaz showed that 74 percent of Americans and 80 percent of Iranians actually support direct talks between the two states.
“There are always what I guess you would call professional Iran haters around, or the people who find it useful to beat the war drum. But you have to ask yourself, what all of this enmity for the last 34 years has accomplished. If you beat your chest for 34 years what’s the result going to be? A very sore chest,” a veteran US diplomat held captive by revolutionaries in the Iranian hostage crisis between 1979 and 1981, John Limbert, told RT.
Limbert believes that any kind of interaction between the US and Iran will be a beneficial step for all involved.
“We would have been talking to each other years ago, maybe not as friends, but at least as two states with common things to talk about. It does happen. It may just be a handshake, brief encounter, but even that at the symbolic level would represent a huge change. It’s obvious that the US and Iran do have things to talk about over Syria,” he added.
Rouhani, who will be accompanied on his visit by Iran's only Jewish MP, tweeted that he is "ready for constructive engagement” with the world "to show real image of great Iranian nation."
Experts say, however, that the chances that the first face-to-face encounter between the leaders of the two countries since the 1970s would take place are slim. As things stand now, even a handshake would be regarded a sign of a thaw in relations.
Israel has voiced concern over a potential meeting of the US and Iranian presidents, saying Tehran's conciliatory advances to world leaders in reality conceal an advancement of its disputed nuclear program. Iran denies seeking atomic weapons. Israel claims Iran has centrifuges for quickly turning low-enriched uranium into bomb fuel, and says an Iranian bomb could be six months from production.
Asked if there would be a historic Obama-Rouhani handshake, the cabinet minister representing Israel at the UN forum in New York replied "I hope not. I don't know. But really the important thing is not just words and appearances. The important thing is the actions. The important thing is the resolutions," Yuval Steinitz told Israel's Army Radio.
Meanwhile, a recent poll commissioned by the international civic organization Avaaz showed that 74 percent of Americans and 80 percent of Iranians actually support direct talks between the two states.
“There are always what I guess you would call professional Iran haters around, or the people who find it useful to beat the war drum. But you have to ask yourself, what all of this enmity for the last 34 years has accomplished. If you beat your chest for 34 years what’s the result going to be? A very sore chest,” a veteran US diplomat held captive by revolutionaries in the Iranian hostage crisis between 1979 and 1981, John Limbert, told RT.
Limbert believes that any kind of interaction between the US and Iran will be a beneficial step for all involved.
“We would have been talking to each other years ago, maybe not as friends, but at least as two states with common things to talk about. It does happen. It may just be a handshake, brief encounter, but even that at the symbolic level would represent a huge change. It’s obvious that the US and Iran do have things to talk about over Syria,” he added.
Russia, US divided over Syria
In fact, the UN General Assembly is expected to get under way amid a diplomatic battle over Syria between Russia and the US, as RT's Anissa Naouai reports from United Nations Headquarters.
“John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov are set to meet on the sidelines of the Assembly, but just as it seems diplomacy might prevail, the Russian Foreign Minister says that the US is trying to pressure Moscow into approving a UN resolution allowing for military intervention. He adds that the US claims in exchange they would be willing to continue working on Syria’s entry into the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons,” she said.
President Barack Obama is to kick off the Tuesday morning session with a speech on the need for the international community to stand up to the use of chemical weapons by Syrian President Bashar Assad, the White House said.
Washington and Moscow are divided over how to tackle the Syrian crisis. The civil war, which has already raged for over two years, has left over 100,000 people dead. A chemical attack near Damascus on August 21, which killed some 1,426 people, including women and children, prompted the US to threaten military action. The experts were sent to investigate several cases of alleged use of chemical weapons, but their work was disrupted by the August 21 attack. Russia says UN chemical weaponsinspectors are to return to Syria on Wednesday to continue their mission.
“US officials compromised on chemical weapons, but they continue talking about how ‘the Syrian regime’, as they call it, is guilty of the use of chemical weapons without providing comprehensive proof. They constantly voice reservations that the plan to punish Damascus up to a military intervention is still in power,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told the Duma on Tuesday.
On September 14, Lavrov together finally coordinated a plan to secure Syrian chemical weapons by mid-2014 with the US State Secretary John Kerry, following a suggestion from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Moscow managed to convince Washington of the need to work out an agreement on a plan to contain and destroy Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles. Moscow argues that any discrepancies and disputes should only be resolved through consultation with the UN Security Council, while the United States suggests that any suspected violations are dealt with by military force.
Latin American leaders outraged by Obama
Another sensitive issue likely to be brought up at the General Assembly is the NSA leak fallout, which implicated the US in wide-range surveillance of its own citizens, but also on foreign governments and institutions.
Particularly, US relations with Latin America have recently soured, and the speeches of some leaders at the General Assembly might reflect recent rifts.
Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, who is schedule to open the Tuesday session, has postponed her state visit to Washington in response to the US spying on her communications with top aides.
Rousseff, as well as former President Lula da Silva, said that Obama should "personally apologize to the world."
Documents leaked by Edward Snowden and reported by the US journalist Glenn Greenwald caused a furor in Brazil. Earlier this month, TV Globo revealed in a report that the NSA monitored the content of phone calls, emails, and mobile phone messages belonging to President Rousseff and undefined "key advisers" of the Brazilian government.
The NSA also spied on Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto and nine members of his office. A document dated June 2012 showed that the Mexican President's emails were read through one month before he was elected. In his communications, the then-presidential candidate indicated who he would like to appoint to several government posts.
The Brazilian government denounced the NSA surveillance as “impermissible and unacceptable” and a violation of Brazilian sovereignty.
Among those unhappy with the US foreign policies is Venezuela which on September 20 sent a letter to the UN chief asking him to take measures against the United States over the denial of visas for some members of its delegation who are scheduled to attend the UN General Assembly. Venezuela also requested that the UN “demand that the government of the US abide by its international obligations” as host of the Assembly. President Maduro said members of his country’s delegation “are not traveling to New York as tourists on vacation…we are going to a UN function.”
Tension between the countries spiked when Venezuela’s foreign minister told media outlets that the US denied a plane carrying Maduro entrance into its airspace. The aircraft was en route to China. Washington later granted the approval, stating that Venezuela’s request had not been properly submitted. Elias Jaua had denounced the move as “an act of aggression.”
Citing the incident, Bolivian President Evo Morales said he will file a lawsuit against the US government for crimes against humanity. He lashed out at the US after the Venezuelan presidential jet was blocked from entering US airspace.
“I would like to announce that we are preparing a lawsuit against Barack Obama to condemn him for crimes against humanity,” said President Morales at a press conference in the Bolivian city of Santa Cruz. He branded the US president as a “criminal” who violates international law.
In early July the plane carrying Bolivian President from Moscow to La Paz was grounded for 13 hours in Austria after it was banned from European airspace because of suspicion it carried fugitive Edward Snowden. Bolivia accused the US of trying to "kidnap" Morales, after his plane was denied permission to fly over Portugal and France.
Is Iran Ready to do a Deal with Obama over its Nuclear Program?
Posted on 09/24/2013 by Juan Cole
The United States, France, Germany, the UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE form a bloc that are convinced that Iran’s nuclear enrichment program is intended ultimately to produce a bomb. Iran maintains that the program is solely intended to produce fuel for nuclear reactors, which will allow it to avoid using its petroleum for domestic energy and earn the kind of foreign exchange with it that will allow the country to remain independent.
Iran is demonstrating that it wants to reduce tensions with the West over its nuclear enrichment program, which it insists is meant for solely peaceful purposes. President Hassan Rouhani will address the UN today, and John Kerry will meet with Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the highest-level contact the two countries have had since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.
One sticking point was Iran’s stockpile of nuclear material, which it is reducing by turning it into fuel rods that can only be used to power its medical reactor.
Iran has a medical reactor that uses plates enriched to 19.75%, the highest grade of Low Enriched Uranium (LEU). The medical reactor produces isotopes for treating cancer. Iran had purchased fuel for it from Argentina, which has since mothballed its enrichment program, and when Iran ran out, it began enriching to that level itself. It accumulated 240 kilograms (550 pounds) of high grade LEU, which made the West nervous. It is marginally easier to turn uranium enriched to 19.75% into bomb grade, or 90% enriched.
It isn’t an entirely rational nervousness. Iran does not have the capacity to enrich to bomb grade, and anyway couldn’t carry out such an operation while being actively inspected by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency. The Western press often reported that Iran’s stock of uranium enriched to 19.75% could be made into a bomb in only a year. But they neglected to report that there is nada, zilch, zero evidence of Iran being anywhere near able to pull such a thing off technically. Moreover, Iran’s nuclear facilities are under international inspection, and no country being actively inspected has ever developed a nuclear weapon.
Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, has confirmed that Iran has turned 40% of its stock of high-grade LEU into fuel rods for the medical reactor. Once made into fuel rods, the material cannot be weaponized. So Iran only has 140 kilograms left of the 19.75% enriched uranium left. That isn’t enough for a bomb even if Iran knew how to make one and had the facilities to do so, which it doesn’t. Salehi says that Tehran intends to turn the rest of the stock into fuel rods, as well. Iran has in fact been feeding these fuel rods into the medical reactor and not stockpiling the high grade LEU, which is how you would expect them to act if they were in fact only interested in fuel, not bombs. Long time readers know that I have held since the middle of the last decade that Iran does not want an actual bomb, but rather only wants a breakout capacity like that of Japan– the ability to construct a bomb in short order if they faced an imminent existential threat. Such a breakout capacity would be almost impossible to forestall, since it mainly depends on know-how, which is widespread. But if Iran and give solid evidence that it has no active weapons program, that might be enough for a deal.
President Hassan Rouhani, elected this summer, has wrested control of the civilian nuclear enrichment program from the clerical establishment, allowing him to order the fashioning of the fuel rods so as to reassure the West (and Israel) about Iran’s intentions.
One of the breakthroughs that could allow a deal with Iran over its enrichment program would be for Tehran to give up producing its own fuel for the medical reactor, and stick to producing only very low grade LEU suitable to fuel the Russian-built reactors at Bushehr, which have just been turned over to Iran by Russian technicians. And this proposal seems in fact to be on the table. The USG Open Source Center translated the following item from Persian:
“Iranian Atomic Chief Says Iran Willing To Discuss Enrichment Grade At Talks
Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA)
Monday, September 23, 2013
Document Type: OSC SummaryTehran Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) in Persian at 1435 GMT on 23 September reported that Ali Akbar Salehi, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi has said the Islamic Republic would by no means relinquish its right to enrichment but the grade of enrichment could be negotiated.Speaking to reporters on the sideline of a ceremony for Iran’s takeover of the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Salehi was asked about whether Iran would exercise flexibility regarding its enrichment program if the other party lifted international sanctions.“The right to enrichment is a sovereign right which we will not relinquish. However, the grade and extent of enrichment can be discussed at the (upcoming) talks,” Salehi replied.(Description of Source: Tehran Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) in Persian — Official state-run online news agency, headed as of January 2013 by Majid Omid Shahraki, former director general for political and security affairs of President Mahmud Ahmadinezhad’s office. URL: http://www.irna.ir)”
Another step Iran needs to take is to expand the scope of the IAEA inspections. The inspections can verify that no nuclear material has been diverted to military use. But the inspectors want more transparency. Iran should be willing to let them go anywhere, even military bases. It should share the blueprints for the centrifuges. I have a sense that Iran has sometimes been prickly out of nationalism and given itself an image of duplicity or uncooperativeness without intending to or needing to. Tehran should take the lesson of its old enemy Saddam Hussein, who actually was compliant with UN demands and had nothing to hide, but managed to appear as though he were hiding WMD and got his country invaded and himself overthrown and executed.
The UN Security Council has been convinced to place sanctions on Iran over the nuclear enrichment program. In addition, the US Congress and the Department of the Treasury have erected what amounts to a financial blockade on Iranian petroleum sales, twisting customers’ arms not to buy from Iran. This blockade has been only partially successful, and Iran has been finding ways around it. China refused to join in, and Iranian exports to that country were up nearly 10% in August over the previous month, and China’s thirst for oil is growing rapidly. Given US sanctions, Iran has had to develop its own fleet of tankers and has had to ensure them itself, and putting that transportation infrastructure in place is taking time. But the likelihood is that a world in ever increasing need of energy will be unwilling to cooperate with the US blockade, as Reuters points out.
While Iran likely cannot be brought to its knees by the US sanctions, its new leadership would certainly like to get back on the international bank exchanges and wants to do a deal. The Israeli insistence that Iran give up enrichment altogether is a non-starter (and the Israelis, with their nuclear arsenal, should talk). But if what is wanted is assurance that Iran’s program is peaceful, that probably can be arranged with good will on both sides.
The Obama administration for its part should take a reasonable deal from Iran if it is offered. The severe sanctions crafted by AIPAC and passed by Congress are so severe that they could easily provoke a violent incident and even a war if the Iranians become convinced that they are here to stay and there is no escaping them. That might make Washington’s small but powerful coterie of hawks happy but it would bankrupt and demoralize the United States.
and....
No comments:
Post a Comment