| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iran rejects EU offers on nuclear program |
| 2005-02-14 |
| Iran rejected a European offer aimed at limiting its nuclear fuel activities and warned Washington against "playing with fire" in an increasingly bellicose standoff between Tehran and the West. Iran would not give up construction of a heavy-water reactor, which can be used to make nuclear weapons material, in exchange for a light-water reactor offered by the Europeans, foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi insisted. "We welcome such proposals but we will not under any circumstances replace our heavy-water research reactor," Asefi told a news conference. "We will continue working on our heavy-water reactor," under construction at Arak southwest of Tehran. German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer warned Iran it would be referred to the UN Security Council if Tehran resumed nuclear enrichment. "If Iran behaves in an unreasonable way, if for example it restarts enrichment... then that would lead to the Security Council," Fischer told an international security conference in Germany. Asefi was unimpressed. "We have told the Europeans to tell their American allies not to play with fire and the Europeans received that message perfectly well," he said. The conservative-controlled parliament has muddied the waters, drawing up draft legislation requiring Iran to produce some of its own nuclear fuel. Key decisions on Iran's nuclear programme are taken at the highest levels of the regime, but MPs have approved legislation to make a symbolic point. Last October, they passed a bill advocating continued uranium enrichment. Britain, France and Germany are trying to convince Iran it should dismantle an enrichment programme, which the United States says is part of a covert atomic weapons development, in return for economic and political rewards. Diplomats said EU negotiators have offered to send a mission to help Tehran obtain a light-water research reactor in what would be the first concrete move towards rewarding it for abandoning uranium enrichment. But Tehran's stance on the Arak reactor is likely to complicate the European task amid an escalating war of words between Iran and the United States over the clerical regime's nuclear activities. Iran insists its nuclear programme is purely for civilian energy needs, but the United States -- less than two years after its invasion of Iraq (news - web sites) in March 2003 -- has hinted at the possible use of military force. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) has said an attack is not on the agenda for the time being but has urged Europe to take a tough line with Iran. "We don't take Rice's threats seriously," Asefi declared. "Rice and US officials know well Iran's capabilities (of responding)," he added. The Washington Post reported Sunday that the United States has been flying drones over Iran since April 2004, seeking evidence of nuclear weapons programmes and probing for weaknesses in Iran's air defenses. The revelation came after the US National Intelligence Council launched a broad review of its classified data on Iran to assess its alleged weapons drive, and its impact on regional and global security. Tehran insists its talks with the so-called EU3 which began in mid-December, must have concrete results within three months if they are to continue. Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, has acknowledged that if Tehran is referred to the UN Security Council, Iran cannot bank on avoiding sanctions. "It is unlikely one of the permanent members would use their veto in favor of Iran," he said. Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States are the council's five permanent members. Iran agreed last November to suspend uranium enrichment but as a member of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it has the right to enrich for peaceful purposes. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #8 Joschka Fischer warned Iran it would be referred to the UN Security Council if Tehran resumed nuclear enrichment . . . Asefi was unimpressed. Hey, what do you know? Asefi and I agree on something. We are both unimpressed with Fischer's UNSC threats. Hey, we've made a start on understanding. We both agree that the EU's negotiations will go nowhere. Something to build on. [/moron optimist rant] |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-02-14 9:45:08 PM |
| #7 ... and those resolutions were enforced,.. Surely not at the behest of the SC. At least, not intentionally. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-02-14 9:03:03 PM |
| #6 Yea, well.. Saddam got referred to the Security Council, it diddled, passed some resolutions... ... and those resolutions were enforced, now Saddam's sons are dead and he awaits trial, with his execution appearing likely. I'm not crediting the UNSC, mind you. Just pointing out how well it worked for Saddam. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2005-02-14 5:27:52 PM |
| #5 "If Iran behaves in an unreasonable way, if for example it restarts enrichment... then that would lead to the Security Council," Fischer told an international security conference in Germany. Asefi was unimpressed. Yep, they saw what happened to ol' Saddy when the Security Council got together. More debating, more resolutions, none of which amounted to anything. There's no reason to believe this time will be any different. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-02-14 1:06:09 PM |
| #4 JerseyMike-yep, and more. If the European strategy with Iran fails, the consequences are HUGE and we won't let it lie. Every one of us should keep shining the spotlight on our conflicting strategies because they apply to more than Iran. So much of the current foreign policy rift between the US and Europe grew out of our different approaches in how to handle deadly impasses with malignant Islamic foreign powers. We moved pre-emptively on Iraq because we were unwilling to wait for catastrophe to land on us via Saddam; Europe and the much of the int'l community were willing to wait it out, just as they are now, by favoring soft power strategies. Should the outcome of Iranian nuclear ambition be a nuked-up Iran and the Islamicists remain in power, boasts about soft power working will go straight into the scrap heap of history and responsibility for the increased insecurity of the world will land straight in the lap of the "international community". Those powers that put the people of the whole world at risk because they were too sophisticated to believe in such things as good and evil are going to sound one collective gulp and face more than ridicule from Americans. |
| Posted by: Jules 187 2005-02-14 11:54:09 AM |
| #3 Joschka Fischer warned Iran it would be referred to the UN Security Council if Tehran resumed nuclear enrichment . . . Asefi was unimpressed. Come on, I'm sure they're shaking in their sandals over there in Tehran! I mean, it's the Security Council, man! The Security Council! |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2005-02-14 11:28:37 AM |
| #2 The administration is expecting that, by late spring or summer, the European track will fail The is no way that the Euro solution/bribe/beg/plead/whine or whatever you care to call it can be considered anything but failed right now. The mullahs are playing for time and the Euro's don't appear to understand that. Then what? A security council resolution or sanctions? ooooohhhhh.....how very scary for Iran. At least the rest of the world will end up with another demonstration of how utterly useless and the UN is. Oh, I forgot, a nuclear armed Iran as well. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2005-02-14 10:29:13 AM |
| #1 So, we are "playing with fire?" That's getting close to "sea of fire." Maybe the Norks have shipped other things to Iran. |
| Posted by: jackal 2005-02-14 9:17:46 AM |