Trust Us
There are differences, and they appear unbridgeable, but neither side publicly states anything of the kind. "Some issues remain to be resolved" in the talks, commented European Union spokeswoman Maja Kocijanic, whose sentiments were echoed by Iran's Foreign Ministry. The meeting in Vienna, following up on previous meets held to hammer out mutually agreeable terms of management of the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear aspirations that will be acceptable to the international community under the IAEA in the wake of the nuclear agreement singed seven weeks earlier was now "under validation at political level in capitals", according to the EU's External Action Service.
On behalf of the six world powers representing the G5+1, EU senior negotiator Helga Schmid and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met in formal talks. Senior U.S. negotiator Wendy Sherman was slated for attendance. Anticipating a deal they could enthusiastically laud and take credit for, making the world a safer place. Iran came to the bargaining table demanding that a facility used for research and the development of uranium enrichment be exempted from the curbs on its enrichment in direct opposition to the deal authorized by the six powers on November 24, 2013.
Iran consistently insists it has no interest whatever in nuclear weapons, its aim is toward achieving nuclear power. Enriched uranium at levels above 90% is useful for the fissile core of a nuclear warhead. But Iran's aspirations start and stop at the civil use of nuclear power, certainly not the decidedly uncivil use of nuclear destructive power. To repeat a quote of a recent statement from a member of Ayatollah Khamenei's inner circle earlier in the week:
"We had a few sessions on the nuclear issue at the Majlis with [Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad] Zarif, [Deputy Foreign Minister, Abbas] Araqchi, [Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht] Ravanchi and [Foreign Ministry spokeswoman] Marzieh Afkham, and one session in which President [Hassan Rohani] personally participated…This, courtesy of Majlis representative Mohammad Nabavian, honourable member of Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Vazdi's faction; Iran is disinterested in a bomb, Iran has no need of nuclear arms other than its investment in creating a balance of terror within the Middle East, expressed by its tetchy relations with Sunni Muslim nations therein, and for the additional and most important purpose of carrying through on its promise to destroy Israel. That's the devil in those particular details. The achievement of which led Iran to the tactic of 'taqqiya'; dissembling, creating a false impression, outright lying.
"...The [nuclear] agreement [with the P5+1] contains five clauses: a preamble, first step, interim step, final step and final conclusion. The first part determined from the outset that the objective of the negotiations was to reach a plan that would guarantee to both sides that Iran's nuclear program is purely civilian… The U.S. says: 'Never before did we succeed in ensuring Israel's security like we did today [by means of the agreement]. If a certain country has 270 kg [of enriched uranium at a level of] 20% and 10 tons [of enriched uranium at a level of] 5%, and 20,000 centrifuges, it will be in a breakout position and could manufacture a nuclear bomb on the uranium [track] within two weeks.' We don't aspire to obtain a nuclear bomb, but it is necessary so we can put Israel in its place…"
Taqiyya is known as a form of dispensation with religious principles when people are under threat or persecution. That's the charitable, Islamic view. The other view is that it is a valuable tactic used to mislead, to lead to an advantage. To throw one's interlocutor, challenger, competitor, or perceived enemy off the track of one's true intention to buy the advantage of time, trust or whatever else it takes to pursue an original goal, or a goal that will disadvantage the enemy. And this is precisely what Iraq undertook to achieve when it bargained with the G5+1 and ended up believing itself given the international blessing to proceed -- with caution.
As part of the deal, inspectors from the UN's nuclear agency visited Iran's Arak heavy water production plant last month
Limiting uranium enrichment represents one of the core issues of the six-month interim deal. The agreement that was meant to act as a precedent to introduce a permanent accord on Iran's nuclear program. Iran agreed to limit its uranium enrichment to five percent, the grade used to power reactors, when it signed onto that November agreement. An agreement that committed the country to halt its production of 20 percent enriched uranium; a technical step away from weapons-grade.
And to furthermore neutralize its 20 percent stockpile. Tehran read the agreement as permissive of the continuation of enrichment research and development. Iran argues that this incidental loophole permits it to continue its production of 20 percent uranium at the research and development site at Natanz. Any 20 percent material made at the site is to be neutralized, so accumulation will not occur, countered officials representing member countries of the International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring Tehran's atomic activities.
Representatives of the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany argue even more stringently that the preliminary Geneva deal actually and without any prevarication prohibits all enrichment above five percent, inclusive of for research and development purposes. Tehran will mull this over and conclude that, in the words of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at a recent gathering in Iran's theological centre of the holy city of Qom:
“We had announced previously that on certain issues, if we feel it is expedient, we would negotiate with the Satan to deter its evil. The nuclear talks showed the enmity of America against Iran, Iranians, Islam and Muslims.”
Labels: G5+1, Iran, Negotiations, Nuclear Technology, Sanctions
posted by Pieface @ Friday, January 10, 2014
<< Home