Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,191
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8494939.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8497459.stm
Didn't see anything on either of these, so I figured I would share them. (This is my first news thread! )
My thoughts are that maybe, just maybe, the Iranians have stopped being foolish and have decided that working with the West has far more benefits than being enemies with it. I do, however, think that any leader should be skeptical - all leaders are humans, after all, and all humans have motives and agendas - and I'm glad most of those involved around the nuclear deal are.
I also applaud Australia for taking the necessary action to protect not only it's own citizens, but all the world's citizens, from possible harm. Good to see the Aussies are being fairly responsible world police in this regard.
What are your thoughts on all of this? Has Iran finally decided to stop being so stubborn and finally agree to work with the West? Or is it just an attempt to buy time? What about Australia's unilateral behavior?
Spoiler :
The US and key allies have called on Iran to match its words with actions after it appeared to accept a deal to swap enriched uranium for nuclear fuel.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran would have "no problem" if most of its stock was held for several months before being returned as fuel rods.
The US said that if this was a new offer, it was "prepared to listen".
Germany's foreign minister said "only actions" counted and his French counterpart said he was "perplexed".
Soon after the Iranian statement, state TV announced the successful launch of a satellite rocket carrying an "experimental capsule".
The White House described the rocket launch as "a provocative act".
"But the president believes that it is not too late for Iran to do the right thing - come to the table with the international community and live up to its international obligations", White House spokesman Bill Burton was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency.
The West is concerned about Iran's growing missile technology and possible links to its nuclear programme.
Iran insists its nuclear development and rocket programme are entirely peaceful.
A deal struck in October between Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the so-called P5+1 - the US, Russia, China, UK, France plus Germany - envisaged Iran sending about 70% of its low-enriched uranium to Russia and France where it would be processed into fuel for a research reactor.
But last month, diplomats said Iran had told the IAEA that it did not accept the terms of the deal and had instead demanded a simultaneous exchange on its territory.
Then, in a state TV interview on Tuesday, President Ahmadinejad dismissed the concerns of his "colleagues" that the West would retain the uranium.
"We have no problem sending our enriched uranium abroad," he said.
"We say, 'We will give you our 3.5% enriched uranium,' and will get the fuel. It may take four to five months until we get the fuel."
BBC Tehran correspondent Jon Leyne, reporting from London, says there will still be scepticism about whether President Ahmadinejad's offer is anything more than a delaying tactic designed to fend off fresh sanctions.
'A bit pessimistic'
A White House official told the BBC: "If Mr Ahmadinejad's comments reflect an updated Iranian position, we look forward to Iran informing the IAEA."
The official added: "If Iran has something new to say, we are prepared to listen."
The British Foreign Office also said that it "looked forward" to Tehran notifying the IAEA.
A spokesman at the IAEA in Vienna told AFP news agency it had nothing to add to its earlier statements.
Moscow gave a guarded response to the Iranian offer, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov saying it would welcome Iran's return to the scheme
But the French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, suggested the Iranians were stalling and said he was "perplexed and even a bit pessimistic" about Tehran's offer.
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle told reporters that Iran had to be "measured by its actions, not by what it says" and that it was up to Iran to "show an end to its refusal to negotiate".
Mr Ahmadinejad also said there were negotiations about a possible prisoner swap for several Iranians jailed in the US for the three American hikers currently being held in Iran.
"There are some talks under way to have an exchange, if it is possible," he said. "We are hopeful that all prisoners will be released."
Mr Ahmadinejad did not go into detail, but in December Tehran released a list of 11 Iranians it says are being held in US prisons, including a nuclear scientist who disappeared in Saudi Arabia and a former defence ministry official who vanished in Turkey.
The US has denied any knowledge of their whereabouts.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8497459.stm
Spoiler :
Australia has blocked three shipments to Iran because of fears the contents could have been for Tehran's nuclear programme, PM Kevin Rudd has said.
Mr Rudd told Australian radio Defence Minister John Faulkner had used powers under the Weapons of Mass Destruction Act to block the shipments.
But he declined to say when this happened or what the cargos were.
Mr Rudd defended Australia's actions, saying continuing strong international pressure on Tehran was essential.
"If you look at the threat to regional and global peace which Iran poses in its current nuclear weapons programme, there is no alternative other than robust international action including in areas such as this," Mr Rudd told public broadcaster ABC.
"We believe that national security, the national security interests of Australia, also demand this course of action," he added.
He said that Australia had acted "because we believe we must play the role of a responsible international citizen".
The Australian newspaper reported at least one of the banning orders, all made in recent months, had blocked a cargo of pumps that could have been used to cool nuclear power plants.
"If you look at the status of Iran's nuclear weapons programme and their consistent thumbing of the nose to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the international community more broadly... there are no alternatives other than to maintain a hard line," Mr Rudd said.
On Wednesday the United States circulated a discussion paper on possible further UN sanctions on Iran because of Tehran's nuclear programme.
This came as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad apparently accepted a UN-brokered deal allowing Iran to send most of its low-enriched uranium abroad in return for research reactor fuel rods.
The US and its allies fear Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.
Didn't see anything on either of these, so I figured I would share them. (This is my first news thread! )
My thoughts are that maybe, just maybe, the Iranians have stopped being foolish and have decided that working with the West has far more benefits than being enemies with it. I do, however, think that any leader should be skeptical - all leaders are humans, after all, and all humans have motives and agendas - and I'm glad most of those involved around the nuclear deal are.
I also applaud Australia for taking the necessary action to protect not only it's own citizens, but all the world's citizens, from possible harm. Good to see the Aussies are being fairly responsible world police in this regard.
What are your thoughts on all of this? Has Iran finally decided to stop being so stubborn and finally agree to work with the West? Or is it just an attempt to buy time? What about Australia's unilateral behavior?