De retour de Genève, le secrétaire du Conseil suprême de Sécurité nationale, Saïd Jalili a qualifié, devant la presse, « de positives ses négociations » de jeudi avec le groupe 5+1, dans le cadre des propositions auparavant présentées", a déclaré Saïd Jalili.
Evoquant les négociations entre les deux parties, il a précisé que" compte tenu des potentiels dont dispose la République Islamique d’Iran, il a été dit que les questions mondiales nécessitent un nouveau tour de coopération internationale pour dissiper les inquiétudes communes.
"Au cours de la réunion de Genève, la question de la suspension de l'enrichissement d'uranium n'a pas été du tout évoquée", a souligné le secrétaire du Conseil suprême de Sécurité nationale.
L'enrichissement d'uranium, a affirmé Saïd Jalili, relève des droits inaliénables de l'Iran et c'est en ce sens que l’enrichissement d’uranium dans l'usine de Natanz a été mis à l'ordre du jour.
Selon Saïd Jalili, les menaces militaires contre les installations de Natanz où toutes les activités nucléaires et l'enrichissement d'uranium se font conformément au TNP et sous la totale supervision des inspecteurs de l'Agence, a conduit la République Islamique d’Iran à prévoir des mesures nécessaires et adéquates dans la construction de son 2ème complexe d'enrichissement de l'uranium.
L'AIEA est autorisée à visiter le nouveau site nucléaire iranien dans le cadre du TNP et ce sujet a été évoqué, lors des pourparlers de Genève", a poursuivi Saïd Jalili.
La visite des inspecteurs de l'Agence de la nouvelle usine d'enrichissement en Iran doit se faire entre l'Agence viennoise et l'Organisation de l'énergie atomique iranienne", a-t-il souligné. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=Speech&id=20944202 E3+3 discuss Iran nuclear programme (02/10/2009)
Javier Solana, High Representative of the EU(left), shakes hands with Iran's Chief Negotiator for Nuclear Issues, Saeed Jalili, prior to talks in July 2008 in Geneva.
LOCATION Geneva
SPEAKER The High Representative of the EU, Javier Solana
EVENT E3+3 discussions on Iran nuclear programme
DATE 02/10/2009
The High Representative of the EU, Javier Solana, commented on the discussions that took place between the E3+3 countries (Germany, France, the UK, China, Russia and the US) and Iran on Thursday 1 October.
Read the transcript
I’d like to thank all authorities at all the levels and tell them that (indistinct) will be back.
We had a full day of talks with the Iranian delegation led by Doctor Saeed Jalili, the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. As you know the meeting of today took place after fifteen months of (indistinct) in discussions with Iran on the nuclear dossier (indistinct). It represented the start of what we hope will be an intensive process.
I ought to mention here as I stand in line to Doctor Jalili that the significance of this meeting was enhanced by the full participation of the United States of America for the first time. On our side the, we based ourselves on the agreement by the Ministers that we had in New York last week and the framework of the United Nation which are basically on what we call it (indistinct) a dual track.
We put on the table all the issues which we feel need to be discussed and these include the proposal made to Iran last year. I went in to some detail about how the freeze to freeze, the proposal that we made last year, should be taken forward as a way to full negotiations. (Indistinct) from the need for Iran to be fully transparent with the International Atomic Energy Agency on all the elements of its nuclear programme especially following the recent developments that you know.
Let me say that I’ve been during the day also in touch on two occasion with Dr Baradei, the Director of the agency. I and all the representatives of the six countries were united in underlining the importance of full transparency in rebuilding confidence in practical steps. In the course of the day we had the both plenary and bilateral discussions allowing for details, the exchange of informations and more different (indistinct).
We agreed to intensify dialogue in coming weeks and we expect the progress in the following areas. First there will be a second meeting before the end of October, an agenda for that meeting will be worked out through diplomatic channels and it will focus on nuclear issues including proposals (indistinct) put forward by both sides. And it will also deal with some global issues that any of the parties wish to address.
Second Iran has told us that it plans to cooperate fully and immediately with the International Atomic Energy Agency on the new enrichment facility near Qom or near Qom and will invite the agency, experts from the agency to visit the facility soon. We expect within the next couple of weeks. Of that issue, of that issue I also talked on the phone to the Director of the agency Mohamed ElBaradei.
Third, in consultation with agency and on the margins of today’s meeting it was agreed in principle that the low enriched uranium produced in Iran would be transported to a third country for further enrichment and fabrication in to fuel, assembled for the Tehran research reactor which, as you know, produce isotopes for medical applications. Details on this point, this technical one, will be worked out in a meeting of experts from the agency and countries interested, in particular the United States, the Russian Federation and France in Vienna on the 18th of October so that implementation can begin as soon as possible.
In conclusion I’ve should say that this is only a start and we shall need to see progress from some of the practical steps we have discussed today but in any case it has been a day in which I hope that we continue as I’ve said before with the process, intensive process in order to solve the many problems that have still to be resolved. Thank you very much. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
The most widely touted outcome of last week's Geneva talks with Iran was the "agreement in principle" to send approximately one nuclear-weapon's worth of Iran's low enriched uranium (LEU) to Russia for enrichment to 19.75% and fabrication into fuel rods for Tehran's research reactor. President Barack Obama says the deal represents progress, a significant confidence-building measure.
In fact, the agreement constitutes another in the long string of Iranian negotiating victories over the West. Any momentum toward stricter sanctions has been dissipated, and Iran's fraudulent, repressive regime again hobnobs with the U.N. Security Council's permanent members. Consider the following problems:
• Is there a deal or isn't there? Diplomacy's three slipperiest words are "agreement in principle." Iran's Ambassador to Britain exclaimed after the talks in Geneva, "No, no!" when asked if his country had agreed to ship LEU to Russia; it had "not been discussed yet." An unnamed Iranian official said that the Geneva deal "is just based on principles. We have not agreed on any amount or any numbers." Bargaining over the deal's specifics could stretch out indefinitely.
Other issues include whether Iran will have "observers" at Russian enrichment facilities. If so, what new technologies might those observers glean? And, since Tehran's reactor is purportedly for medical purposes, will Mr. Obama deny what Iran pretends to need to refuel it in 2010?
• The "agreement" undercuts Security Council resolutions forbidding Iranian uranium enrichment. No U.S. president has been more enamored of international law and the Security Council than Mr. Obama. Yet here he is undermining the foundation of the multilateral campaign against Tehran's nuclear weapons program. In Resolution 1696, adopted July 31, 2006, the Security Council required Iran to "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development." Uranium enriched thereafter—the overwhelming bulk of Iran's admitted LEU—thus violates 1696 and later sanctions resolutions. Moreover, considering Iran's utter lack of credibility, we have no idea whether its declared LEU constitutes anything near its entire stockpile.
By endorsing Iran's use of its illegitimately enriched uranium, Mr. Obama weakens his argument that Iran must comply with its "international obligations." Indeed, the Geneva deal undercuts Mr. Obama's proposal to withhold more sanctions if Iran does not enhance its nuclear program by allowing Iran to argue that continued enrichment for all peaceful purposes should be permissible. Now Iran will oppose new sanctions and argue for repealing existing restrictions. Every other aspiring proliferator is watching how violating Security Council resolutions not only carries no penalty but provides a shortcut to international redemption.
• Raising Iran's LEU to higher enrichment levels is a step backwards. Two-thirds of the work to get 90% enriched uranium, the most efficient weapons grade, is accomplished when U235 isotope levels in natural uranium are enriched to Iran's current level of approximately 3%-5%. Further enrichment of Iran's LEU to 19.75% is a significant step in the wrong direction. This is barely under the 20% definition of weapons-grade, highly enriched uranium (HEU). Ironically, Resolution 1887, adopted while Mr. Obama presided over the Security Council last week, calls for converting HEU-based reactors like Iran's to LEU fuel precisely to lower such proliferation risks. We should be converting the Tehran reactor, not refueling it at 19.75% enrichment.
After Geneva, the administration misleadingly stated that once fashioned into fuel rods, the uranium involved could not be enriched further. This is flatly untrue. The 19.75% enriched uranium could be reconverted into uranium hexafluoride gas and quickly enriched to 90%. Iran could also "burn" its uranium fuel (including the Russian LEU available for the Bushehr reactor) and then chemically extract plutonium from the spent fuel to produce nuclear weapons.
The more sophisticated Iran's nuclear skills become, the more paths it has to manufacture nuclear weapons. The research-reactor bait-and-switch demonstrates convincingly why it cannot be trusted with fissile material under any peaceful guise. Proceeding otherwise would be winking at two decades of Iranian deception, which, unfortunately, Mr. Obama seems perfectly prepared to do.
The president also said last week that international access to the Qom nuclear site must occur within two weeks, but an administration spokesman retreated the next day, saying there was no "hard and fast deadline," and "we don't have like a drop-dead date." Of course, neither does Iran. Once again, Washington has entered the morass of negotiations with Tehran, giving Iran precious time to refine and expand its nuclear program. We are now even further from eliminating Iran's threat than before Geneva. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
By David Blair in Beirut
Published: 6:30AM GMT 26 Oct 2009
Bernard Kouchner stressed the urgency of reaching agreement with Iran over its nuclear programme and removing the risk of a pre-emptive strike by Israel.
During an official visit to Lebanon's capital, Beirut, the minister told The Daily Telegraph that time was running out.
"They [the Israelis] will not tolerate an Iranian bomb. We know that, all of us. So that is an additional risk and that is why we must decrease the tension and solve the problem. Hopefully we are going to stop this race to a confrontation," said Mr Kouchner.
"There is the time that Israel will offer us before reacting, because Israel will react as soon as they know clearly that there is a threat."
Six world powers, including France and Britain, met Iranian officials in Geneva on Oct 1. They want the Islamic Republic to obey five United Nations resolutions and stop enriching uranium, a process which could produce the essential material for nuclear weapons.
So far, Iran has adamantly refused. Its officials agreed to another meeting before the end of this month but declined to fix a date.
France, Britain and America have pledged to review their policy at the end of this year. If there is no agreement, they will probably urge the UN to impose more economic sanctions on Iran.
But Mr Kouchner made clear his personal scepticism. He fears that tightening the existing sanctions would simply impoverish ordinary Iranians, weaken the opposition and fail to influence the regime.
"Certainly, the upper people in the Iranian government, they will not suffer from sanctions. But the people of the bazaar and the people on the street, the women and the youngsters, they will certainly suffer from that," said Mr Kouchner.
"So this is a problem. It is not a discovery. I have witnessed sanctions all over the world and it's always targeting the poor people more than the rich people."
Mr Kouchner said the priority was still "dialogue". More sanctions might become necessary "in the coming months", but he would be reluctant to impose them.
"We are not looking for sanctions and as I said my personal experience is not to look for sanctions targeted on people. There is an opposition, people are demonstrating, very courageously they were in the streets. Why are we targeting them? I don't know. We are not for the time being looking for sanctions."
Iran has blamed Britain for the mass protests against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's supposed re-election in June. Mr Kouchner said these accusations were designed to divide the West.
"They are targeting the Brits and all the time they are trying to separate the French and the Brits. We cannot fall for such a simple tactic," he said.
Iran has not given a clear answer to a proposal that would allow the renewal of a civilian reactor in Tehran. The idea is that Iran would export about 80 per cent of its low-enriched uranium to Russia and then France for processing into new fuel rods.
Iran first said "yes" in principle, but declined to agree any practicalities and ignored a deadline of last Friday set by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Tehran now promises a reply on Wednesday.
White House officials have said that a rejection of what they called a "bona fide" offer would signal that Iran had no intention of pursuing a negotiated settlement. There is growing pessimism that the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad no longer considers the proposed deal "in a favourable light", as Iranian negotiators suggested last week, and his regime is seeking to test the mettle of President Barack Obama.
Meanwhile, IAEA inspectors visited a previously undeclared nuclear plant outside the holy city of Qom on Sunday. Iran had kept this enrichment facility secret until America, Britain and France disclosed its existence last month.
The inspection of the facility, likely to last three days, is expected to be one of the most intrusive ever mounted in Iran, despite insistence in Tehran that the IAEA mission is purely "routine".
The monitors are expected to demand to see engineering drawings of the plant and to seek permission to interview scientists, engineers and architects involved with the site. Iran has denied similar requests in the past, but is under much greater pressure now after having been caught out in an apparent attempt to cover up the existence of the Qom plant.
The inspectors will also ask Iranian officials whether there are other hidden plants that feed the Qom facility with nuclear material. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Iran will not exchange its domestically low-enriched uranium with the West to supply Tehran's reactor fuel, the Chief of Iran's Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Commission said on Saturday.
"Iran is not to give any of its 1,200 kilograms fuel to the other party to receive 20 percent [enriched] fuel and whether gradually or at once, this will not be done and is called off," Alaeddin Boroujerdi told the ISNA news agency.
The Iranian official was referring to a recently drafted UN proposal that calls for Iran to transfer 1.2 tons of low-enriched uranium produced in its nuclear site Natanz to Russia, where it would be enriched to 20 percent, then to be transferred to France for industrial processing, after which it would be returned to the Tehran Research Reactor, which produces medical isotopes.
Advertisement
Boroujerdi also stated that Iran and fuel supplier countries must find a new way to provide Tehran's reactor fuel.
"Presently, Mr. Soltanieh is in talks to find an approach for the issue," Boroujerdi added, referring to Tehran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ali Asghar Soltanieh.
Referring to remarks by some Western officials that Iran must respond to the IAEA brokered deal regarding purchase of fuel in two days, Boroujerdi said, "The West cannot see a deadline and we are not committed to their remarks."
Also on Saturday, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signaled that Moscow could back sanctions against Iran if it fails to take a constructive stance in international talks over its nuclear program.
Medvedev said in an interview with Germany's Der Spiegel magazine that Iran must abide by the international rules and not try to hide its nuclear facilities. His comments were released by the Kremlin Saturday.
Medvedev said it would be better to avoid sanctions, but they can't be excluded if there is no progress in the talks. The comments follow up on Medvedev's statement in September that sanctions are sometimes inevitable.
Medvedev's remarks contrast with the words of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who has warned that the threat of sanctions could thwart talks with Iran.
On Friday, a hardline Iranian cleric told worshippers that the United Nations nuclear watchdog is legally obliged to provide Iran with nuclear fuel for its research reactor without setting any conditions.
Ahmad Khatami, a member of a powerful clerical body that can appoint or dismiss Iran's supreme leader, said in a sermon broadcast on state radio that Iran was prepared to produce fuel for its Tehran reactor if world powers insisted on the deal.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency is legally obliged to provide fuel...if you want to play games with us then I can assure you that we will produce it by ourselves," Khatami told worshippers at Tehran University. "The Iranian nation is wise and will not be deceived by the nuclear deal."
"Why should we send our low enriched uranium abroad?... Who can guarantee that you will then provide us with the needed fuel?" said Khatami.
The United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China have tried for years to persuade Iran to suspend uranium enrichment activities in return for economic and political incentives.
Tehran has so far refused to halt its enrichment.
Katami said Iran had no intention of yielding to the West's pressure over its nuclear program.
"No one has traded over the Iranian nation's legitimate nuclear right," said the cleric in the sermon, which was broadcast live.
The West's priority is to reduce Iran's LEU stockpile to prevent any danger that the Islamic Republic might turn it into the highly enriched uranium needed for a nuclear bomb. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Ðàíåå Áîðóäæåðè ïîòðåáîâàë îò Ðîññèè âûïîëíèòü ñâîè îáÿçàòåëüñòâà ïî ïîñòàâêå çåíèòíî-ðàêåòíûõ êîìïëåêñîâ Ñ-300. Ñî ñõîæèì çàÿâëåíèåì âûñòóïèë ìèíèñòð îáîðîíû Èñëàìñêîé ðåñïóáëèêè Àõìåä Âàõèäè. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
U.S. Senate approves sanctions on Iran's fuel suppliers
By Reuters
Tags: Israel news, Iran nuclear
The U.S. Senate on Thursday approved legislation that would let President Barack Obama impose sanctions on Iran's gasoline suppliers and penalize some of Tehran's elites, a move aimed at pressuring Tehran to give up its nuclear program.
The sanctions, approved on a voice vote, would target companies that export gasoline to Iran or help expand the country's oil-refining capacity by, in part, denying them loans and other assistance from U.S. financial institutions.
The House of Representatives has already passed similar legislation. Differences between the two bills will have to be worked out before the measure becomes law.
Advertisement
Lawmakers and the Obama administration fear Iran's uranium enrichment program will be used to develop weapons, while Tehran says it is for peaceful purposes such as generating electricity.
Many in Congress want to give Obama more tools to pressure Iran. Cutting off gasoline supplies would hurt Tehran's economy; while Iran has the world's third biggest oil reserves, it must import 40 percent of its gasoline to meet domestic demand because of a lack of refining capacity.
In his State of the Union address on Wednesday, Obama warned Tehran aced "growing consequences" over its nuclear program. The administration has been working with several other major powers to build a consensus on new sanctions to be imposed jointly.
But U.S. business groups have warned the White House that the lawmakers' approach threatens to undercut this joint strategy. The critics say broad-based sanctions sought by lawmakers would upset U.S. allies whose companies would be affected, and frustrate joint action with other countries against Iran.
The sanctions in the Senate bill would extend to companies that build oil and gas pipelines in Iran and provide tankers to move Iran's petroleum.
The measure also prohibits the U.S. government from purchasing goods from foreign companies that do business in Iran's energy sector.
The Senate acted on the same day that Iran hanged two men convicted in the wake of political unrest in the country. "The situation in Iran is terrible and it's worsening. People are dying in Iran as we speak," said Senator John McCain just before the Senate vote.
Other provisions in the bill would:
* Impose a broad ban on direct imports from Iran to the
United States and exports from the United States to Iran,
exempting food and medicines
* Require the Obama administration to freeze the assets of
Iranians, including Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, who are
active in weapons proliferation or terrorism
* Allow state and local governments and private asset fund
managers to easily divest from energy firms doing business with
Iran
* Strengthen export controls to stop the illegal black
market export of sensitive technology to Iran through other
countries and impose tough new licensing requirements on those
who refuse to cooperate _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
"Ïîä "ïàðàëèçóþùèìè" ñàíêöèÿìè ÿ ïîäðàçóìåâàþ ïðåêðàùåíèå èìïîðòà â Èðàí î÷èùåííîé íåôòè, ÷òî â ïåðâóþ î÷åðåäü îçíà÷àåò áåíçèí, à òàêæå ïðåêðàùåíèå ýêñïîðòà íåôòè, ò.ê. ýêîíîìèêà Èðàíà çàâèñèò è îò òîãî, è îò äðóãîãî è áþäæåò Èðàíà â êðàéíåé ñòåïåíè çàâèñèò è îò èìïîðòà è îò ýêñïîðòà", - ãîâîðèë íåäàâíî èçðàèëüñêèé ïðåìüåð.
Ïðè ýòîì íà âîïðîñû î âîçìîæíîì âîåííîì óäàðå ïî Èðàíó îí îòâå÷àåò óêëîí÷èâî. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
- "Wars, aggressions and above all the shadow of threat and stockpiling of nuclear armaments, and worse than all, the policies applied by few expansionist States, have obscured the prospect of international security for every one. Nowadays, the communities' mindset is largely affected by a sense of intimidation and insecurity. Nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation have not come true, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been successful in discharging its mandate. During the past four decades, some, including the Zionist regime, have been equipped with nuclear arms."
- "There are reportedly more than 20,000 nuclear warheads worldwide half of which belongs to the United States. The other competing party also continues the development of nuclear weapon under the pretext of deterrence. Both of them constitute violation of obligations under the NPT."
- "Regrettably, the government of the United States has not only used nuclear weapons, but also continues to threaten to use such weapons against other countries, including Iran."
- "Enjoying especial privileges in the highest global security decision-making bodies and in the IAEA, certain nuclear weapon States widely exploit these platforms against the non-nuclear weapon States, contrary to the spirit of the NPT. This unjust practice, repeated over and over, has turned into a pattern."
- "So far, none of the non-nuclear weapon States has ever been able to exercise their inalienable and legal rights for peaceful use of nuclear energy without facing pressures and threats. While despite clear provisions of article VI of the Treaty and the Statute of the IAEA, no single report has been issued by the IAEA inspectors on the nuclear weapons facilities of the United States and its allies, nor is there any plan for their disarmament, resolutions have been adopted against non-nuclear weapon
States under the pressure of the same States and under false pretext and with the clear intention of denying them their recognized legal rights."
- "While the Zionist regime which has stockpiled hundreds of nuclear warheads, has waged many wars in the region and continues to threaten the people and nations of the region with terror and invasion, enjoys the unconditional support of the United States government and its allies and receives, as well, the necessary assistance to develop its nuclear weapon program. The same States impose various kinds of pressures on the members of the IAEA on the false pretext of probable diversions in their peaceful nuclear activities without providing even a single credible proof to substantiate their allegation."
- "One of the gravest injustices committed by the nuclear weapon States is equating nuclear arms with nuclear energy. As a matter of fact, they want to monopolize both the nuclear weapons and the peaceful nuclear energy, and by doing so to impose their will on the international community. The aforementioned issues are all against the spirit of the NPT and in flagrant violation of its provisions." _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 6, 2010
UNITED NATIONS -- The chief U.N. nuclear official said Wednesday he is launching a new effort to resolve questions about alleged atomic weapons research by Iranian scientists, hinting at a firmer stance by the U.N. watchdog agency in seeking answers from Iran about its nuclear intentions.
Yukiya Amano, who became director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency in December, said he is also pressing Iran for more robust monitoring of a nuclear facility that began producing a higher grade of enriched uranium this year. U.S. officials fear that the facility could shorten Iran's path to nuclear weapons if the country's leaders choose to make them.
In his first interview with a U.S. news outlet since taking office, Amano asserted that he is not sure whether Iran intends to acquire the bomb. But the Japanese diplomat repeatedly stressed the need for Iran to be transparent about its nuclear activities. That, he said, would include a full accounting of dozens of scientific papers and databases -- most of them obtained by Western spy agencies in the past decade -- that appear to show secret research on nuclear warheads.
"What we want to do is to sit down with our Iranian partners and jointly clarify these activities," said Amano, who is in New York to attend a nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference. "If the concerns are removed, that will be very nice. If not, we need to ask for measures to remedy the situation."
Longtime observers of the IAEA have credited Amano with taking a harder line toward Iran and other countries accused of failing to comply with commitments under the 189-nation Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In February, the first IAEA inspection report on Iran under Amano's leadership used uncharacteristically blunt language in calling for Iran to clear up questions about past -- and possibly ongoing -- weapons research.
Amano, whose soft-spoken style contrasts sharply with that of his predecessor, Egyptian diplomat Mohamed ElBaradei, dismissed suggestions that he is being tougher with Iran.
"It is not a question of being tough, or not," he said. As IAEA chief, Amano said, he is "bound by IAEA statutes" and must "stick with principles." He added that he has met with senior Iranian nuclear officials, and he pledged to continue to engage in a respectful diplomacy, which he says means "to talk quietly and listen."
But on the question of the possible weapons research, he chided Iran for failing for years to respond to serious allegations that he said were based on "very extensive information . . . from multiple sources." He said the agency was reopening the issue and would press Iranian leaders to provide explanations.
Iran says it has no interest in nuclear weapons, and it contends that many of the papers in dispute are forgeries. Iranian nuclear officials have consistently rebuffed attempts by IAEA officials to interview key scientists involved in the alleged research.
ad_icon
Click here!
Iran's refusal to disclose nuclear activities resulted in two major clashes with the U.N. watchdog in the past year. Iran was criticized in September after being forced to reveal the existence of a uranium enrichment plant built in a mountain tunnel near the city of Qom. And in February, Iran unilaterally decided to begin making a higher grade of enriched uranium at a plant near the city of Natanz, without giving IAEA officials time to put a monitoring system in place. Until this year, Iran's nuclear program produced only uranium with an enrichment level of less than 5 percent, the level needed for commercial nuclear reactor fuel. But now Iran is also churning out uranium enriched to 20 percent, saying the higher-grade product is needed to fuel a reactor that makes medical isotopes. Ninety percent enrichment is needed for nuclear weapons.
Amano said in the interview that Iran has not yet agreed to IAEA requests for a special monitoring regime for its fuel enriched to 20 percent. The agency typically seeks to install cameras and other technical systems to ensure that a country is not cheating on its enrichment program or diverting uranium for possible use in weapons.
Talks with Iranian officials in recent days have yielded "some good progress, but we have not had a resolution," Amano said.
"If this continues for a long time, we may have a problem," he said. He said that the IAEA is monitoring the site but that "our arrangement is not proper as of today."
Separately, during an NPT conference session on Wednesday, Amano asked for international input on how to persuade Israel to join the treaty, a move that could add to pressure on the Jewish state to disclose its unacknowledged nuclear arsenal. In a letter made available to the Associated Press, Amano asked foreign ministers of the IAEA's 151 member states to share views on how to implement a resolution demanding that Israel "accede to the" treaty and open its nuclear facilities to IAEA oversight.
The letter comes amid renewed Arab criticism of Israel during the New York conference. On Tuesday, Muslim nations made repeated calls for a nuclear-free Middle East, while criticizing Israel for not divulging its nuclear capabilities and refusing to sign the nonproliferation pact. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Israel is unlikely to attack Iran's nuclear reactor in Bushehr, which will soon be online, former U.S. envoy to the United Nations John Bolton told the Fox Business Network on Monday, adding that the Russian-built facility represents a major step forward for Iran's nuclear weapons aspirations.
Russia said Friday that it will begin loading nuclear fuel into the Bushehr reactor, Iran's first atomic power station, on August 21; this is an irreversible step toward the launch of the Bushehr plant after years of delays.
Russia agreed in 1995 to build the Bushehr plant on the site of a project begun in the 1970s by German company Siemens, but delays have haunted the $1 billion project and diplomats say Moscow has used it as a lever in relations with Tehran.
The United States has criticized Moscow for pushing ahead with the Bushehr project at a time when major powers including Russia are pressing Tehran to allay fears that its nuclear energy program may be geared to develop weapons.
But Western fears that the Bushehr project could help Iran develop a nuclear weapon were lessened when Moscow reached an agreement with Tehran obliging it to return spent fuel to Russia. Weapons-grade plutonium can be derived from spent fuel rods.
Speaking to Fox on Monday, Bolton said that Israel was unlikely to attack the Bushehr reactor, saying that "Israel's got a problem."
"Once the fuel rods are inserted into the reactor and attack on the reactor would almost certainly release radiation into the atmosphere, given where Bushehr is located right on the Persian Gulf possibly into the water as well," Bolton said, adding that "from Israel's point of view if they were going to do anything militarily about Bushehr you got a few days until the fuel rods are inserted."
The former UN envoy also said Israel would not attack the reactor since it was interested in the bigger picture of Iran's nuclear aspirations, saying that Israel has "the rest of Iran's nuclear program, the Iranian enrichment facility and so on to worry about too and I don't think Israel has the luxury to attack in the next few days, wait a few months and attack again."
In the interview, Bolton also said that the completion of the reactor was a "significant victory for Iran."
"They will be beginning the process of brining online a 1000 megawatt reactor. When it becomes fully operational the spent fuel coming out of the reactor will be plutonium which could be reprocessed chemically and used for nuclear weapons," Bolton said.
The former ambassador to the UN added that Iran was "on the verge of achieving something that Saddam Hussein was not ale to achieve, Bashar al-Assad in Syria was not able to achieve and that's getting a second route to nuclear weapons."
"It’s a very very significant step forward for the Iranian nuclear program," Bolton said. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
First fact: Neither the West nor Israel can accept a nuclear Iran. A nuclear Iran would make the Middle East nuclear, threaten Western sources of energy, paralyze Israel with fear, cause Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt to go nuclear and the world order to collapse. A nuclear Iran would make our lives hell.
Second fact: Neither the West nor Israel has to act militarily at present against Iranian nuclearization. A military attack against Iran would incite a disastrous regional war, which would cost the lives of thousands of Israelis. A military attack against Iran would turn it into a great vengeful power that would sanctify eternal war against the Jewish State. A military attack against Iran would cause a world financial crisis and isolate Israel from the family of nations.
Third fact: Out of a profound understanding of these two basic facts, the West and Israel have developed a joint strategy that can best be described as the third way. The third way has two dimensions: (covert ) activities and economic sanctions. Surprising even to those who have formulated this strategy, the third way is achieving results. It is not eliminating the Iranian threat, but it is postponing and weakening it. Britain, France and Israel, working in close alliance, are spearheading the effort. The United States is also doing its part. Germany and Italy are trailing behind. But the bottom line is that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is under pressure. The still waters of the West and Israel run deep.
Fourth fact: A key element of the third way is the threat of a military attack against Iran. This threat is crucial for scaring the Iranians and for goading on the Americans and the Europeans. It is also crucial for spurring on the Chinese and the Russians. Israel must not behave like an insane country. Rather, it must create the fear that if it is pushed into a corner it will behave insanely. To ensure that Israel is not forced to bomb Iran, it must maintain the impression that it is about to bomb Iran.
Fifth fact: In order to conduct a sophisticated strategy vis-a-vis Iran, there must be total trust between the political and security leadership in Israel. That trust does not exist. Therefore, when the leaders of this country initiate certain moves, they create panic among their subordinates. Sometimes it seems to the subordinates that the leaders have gone crazy. What is meant to frighten the Iranians, Americans and Europeans frightens Israelis as well. Instead of the Israeli establishment conducting the policy of ambiguity in a disciplined manner, it becomes giddy. Everyone suspects everyone else, and the necessary cloud of ambiguity evaporates.
Sixth fact: Neither former Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, nor former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, nor former Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin led the drive to restrain Israeli foolhardiness over the past two years. It was led by Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe (Bogie ) Ya'alon. Ya'alon is calm now. If Ya'alon is calm, Israeli citizens can be calm. There is no immediate danger at the moment that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will behave like Samson in Iran. The fact is that the prime minister - as of now - is behaving seriously and wisely toward the Iranians. If only he would behave the same way toward the Palestinians and the Israelis. Seventh fact: The success is partial, relative and temporary. True, Iran did not arrive in 2011 at the place where it had planned to be, but in 2011 Iran is in a place where it wasn't supposed to be. Therefore the dilemma is still with us. Therefore the discussion of the dilemma must be conducted clear minds and good judgment. Whichever way it goes, the final decision about Iranian nuclearization will be the most important decision of our generation. Eight fact: What is really disturbing about Iran is not what is hidden from the eye, but what is exposed. It is not clear why the West has so far failed to impose draconian sanctions on Iran that would lead to the fall of the regime. It is not clear why Israel is not preparing all its systems for a moment of truth that even if delayed, will certainly arrive. The real fault of the American, European and Israeli leadership is not related do what it is doing in secret. The real fault is related to what it is failing to do in the open political and diplomatic spaces. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Ïî ñëîâàì ãëàâû Èðàíñêîãî êîñìè÷åñêîãî àãåíòñòâà Õàìèäà Ôàçåëè, ñïóòíèê "Íàâèä" âåñèò îêîëî 50 êã è ðàññ÷èòàí íà ðàáîòó â êîñìîñå â òå÷åíèå ïîëóòîðà ëåò.
Èðàíñêèå ÑÌÈ ñîîáùàþò, ÷òî çà çàïóñêîì ñïóòíèêà ñëåäèë ïðåçèäåíò Èðàíà Ìàõìóä Àõìàäèíåäæàä. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
FAQ
