Iran-U.S.A

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

حسينی سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه جمهوری اسلامی در نشست هفتگی 20 خرداد86 درباره انتشار برخی اخبار مبنی برگردهمايی اعضای موسوم به جبهه ملی با دختر ديک چنی رئيس جمهور جرج بوش، گفت: , حضور خانم چنی هم در اين گردهمايی نيز نمايانگر سياست های خصمانه آمريکا عليه جمهوری اسلامی است ,
اين اظهارات در پی ادعای روزنامه اعتماد در تارخ 19/3/86 صفحه آخردر ستون پيدا و پنهان داير بر حضور دختر ديک چنی معاون رئيس جمهور آمريکا در , کنگره اعضای سابق جبهه ملی ايران مقيم امريکا و اروپا در آلمان , انجام گرفت.
سازمانهای جبهه ملی ايران در خارج از کشور در گزارش پيشکنگره باطلاع هموطنان ارجمند رسانيده است که پيشکنگره از تاريخ پنجم تا هفتم خردادماه 86 با حضوراعضای جبهه ملی ايران از آمريکا و اروپا در آلمان تشکيل شد. حضور دختر ديک چنی در اين پيشکنگره از اساس بی پايه است و تکذيب ميشود.
رونوشت اين تکذيب نامه به وزارت امور خارجه، روزنامه اعتماد، سايت امروز، ادوار نيوز، ايلنا، ايسنا،ميزان نيوز، سايت ملی مذهبيها درداخل کشور و سايت های معتبر خارج از کشور ارسال ميگردد.
انتظار ميرود طبق قانون مطبوعات در سايت ها و نشريات نامبرده انتشار يابد.

23 خرداد ماه 1386 برابر 13 ژوئن 2007
هيئت اجرائی موقت سازمانهای جبهه ملی ايران در خارج از کشور
دکتر پرويز داورپناه ـ مهندس کامبيز قائم مقام ـ دکتر همايون مهمنش

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

NEWPORT, R.I. - The Navy admiral tapped to become chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Wednesday he favors a diplomatic approach in dealing with Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, yet he offered few clues on how he would handle the war in Iraq.


Adm. Michael Mullen accused Iran, without being more specific, of giving aid to insurgent forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Still he called diplomacy "the right path."

"I'm concerned about what Iran's doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, you know, broadly providing capability to which we are losing American soldiers on the ground and Marines on the ground, and I consider that not to be acceptable," he said.

The Navy must stay in the Persian Gulf to reassure allies and maintain its ability to act quickly in a crisis, he said.

"I think we will be there with a strong presence for a long time," he said, during a question-and-answer session at the Naval War College in Newport.

Mullen, 60, said little about Iraq while at the college and ducked a question about his strategy there during a brief news conference with reporters.

"I'm honored to be recommended to be nominated, and we'll just take it one step at a time," Mullen said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates recommended Mullen for the chairman's seat after key lawmakers warned the Bush administration that Gen. Peter Pace would face a public grilling over the Iraq War if nominated for another term. Pace's departure means a largely new slate of military commanders will be responsible for a war that has killed more than 3,500 U.S. troops.

Democratic leaders in Congress say they want a nominee committed to changing the course of a war now in its fifth year. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) has warned the next chairman cannot be an advocate for a "failed policy."

During the forum, Mullen reiterated his support for the creation of a new strategy for U.S. maritime forces, a project that hasn't happened on a large scale since the end of the Cold War.

He wants to expand the Navy's fleet to more than 300 ships.

"You can't be in as many places in 200 ships that you can with 300 or 400," he said. "You got to be there to have the impact."

With nearly half of its 277 warships supporting missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, Mullen said the Navy faced a "very challenging time" and could not secure international seaways by itself. U.S. naval forces have shrunk 40 percent since the end of the Cold War, he added.

He said U.S. officials are working with allies abroad to create a naval alliance that would be based in ports around the world and respond quickly to problems.

"Nobody can do it alone," he said.

[Rasputin]

While the poppy fields in Afghanistan are thriving in supplying the demands of millions, this White House and their neo-cons accomplices are cultivating their own fix - hate. But in order for them to get their high, their hate must be transferred into people’s fear -- A fear they plan to turn into another bloodbath. Pushing forward with their latest warmongering idea that Iran is planning to extend the reach of its Shahab 3 missiles from 1200 to more than 2500 kilometers in order to reach Rome, the media beats the war drums, hoping the fearful sound will drown out reason and logic.

This White House and its foreign policy architects, Dick Cheney and National Security Council (NSC) boss Stephen Hadley accuse Iran of planning to extend its strike ability to one of the major countries that has billions of dollars of commerce with it, Italy. Not only are the Italians involved in oil exploration in defiance of US sanctions, but they also sell Iran high tech equipment and technology [1]. What makes these groundless accusations even more preposterous is that the head of the Roman Catholic Church seated in the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI supports Iran's right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. [2]

Lies and deception come easily to an administration which ‘cooked up’ intelligence in order to invade a sovereign country and cause the death of more than 655,000 people in order to further its agenda. The US, finding itself unable to pressure Iran into abandoning its enrichment program, which is nothing short of a pretext for a regime change, has opted for military strike as sanctions are not delivering the desired outcome, and Iran is making progress towards a full enrichment capability.

Had John Bolton been successful in his quest to push Iran out of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), perhaps the American people would hear less lies. John Bolton had purposefully attempted to have Iran leave NPT by making unreasonable demands. In an address to AIPAC, he was dismayed at not having succeeded in compelling Iran to leave the international treaty thus ‘justifying’ a reaction from the United States, presumably, militarily. [3]

Left without a pretext for a military assault on Iran, the Bush administration finds itself in a position where it needs to prepare the world opinion for mass genocide with a compelling reason. With its control over the media, it is accomplishing this by denouncing Iran as the killer of American troops while causing civil unrest in Iraq. Tragically, the majority of the public has been paralyzed by fear and believes that the letting of blood is the only cure that will rid them of their unfounded panic. Iran’s woes are not limited to the ambitions of the neo-cons.

Reza Pahlavi who thinks that he can in turn dupe Iranians, and peoples of other nations, has sent out a statement to the world from a conference in Prague asking for “solidarity for the people of Iran,”. At this conference he was in good company where he conferred with U.S. hawks, including an all-star contingent from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) consisting of Richard Perle, Michael Rubin, Michael Novak, Joshua Muravchik, and Reuel Marc Gerecht; Herb London, John O’Sullivan, and Bruce Jackson a former director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Names of the Iraq war planners must be noted among the aforementioned. [4]

No doubt Reza Pahlavi’s friends had innovative ideas for giving him the ruins of Iran, but none were as original as Senator Lieberman who 4 days after the Prague conference announced that the U.S. should use military force against Iran based on false allegations. The presence of the group in the conference is a telling sign, for many were the same disingenuous politicians that were accusing Iran of the Khobar Tower bombing in 1993; an accusation rejected last week by William Perry, Clinton’s Secretary Defense at the time, with the assertion that the bombings had been the work of al-Qaeda all along.

It seems that the tragedy of Iran goes beyond the treason of the MEK, all the ‘Chelabis’, and the dangerous ambitions of Reza Pahlavi; she is equally abandoned by Iranian-Americans. While the Iranians take pride in their history, they shun away from defending her from the imminent danger she is in, or contributing to the future in a meaningful way. The movie ‘300’ caused an uproar among the Iranians -- rightly so. The affront caused by this movie, a movie that insulted the history of Iran of 2000 years ago, united Iranian-Americans and caused them to take action. Yet they are insensitive to the threat of war, death of millions of fellow Iranians, and destruction of their country.

If Iran is attacked under false pretense, all those who defend her history have no reason to celebrate their heritage. Making a movie is easy, maintaining a legacy - that takes character, national character.


SOURCES

[1] AlertNet: For Italy, Iran's nuclear hopes carry high price
[2] Big News: Pope supports Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy; MSN: Pope supports Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy
[3] Stop AIPAC: John Bolton in Conference Call with AIPAC Members (transcript)
[4] Jim Lobe: A Neo-Conservative International Targets Iran

[Rasputin]

A year after President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a new strategy toward Iran, a behind-the-scenes debate has broken out within the administration over whether the approach has any hope of reining in Iran’s nuclear program, according to senior administration officials.

The debate has pitted Ms. Rice and her deputies, who appear to be winning so far, against the few remaining hawks inside the administration, especially those in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office who, according to some people familiar with the discussions, are pressing for greater consideration of military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

In the year since Ms. Rice announced the new strategy for the United States to join forces with Europe, Russia and China to press Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment activities, Iran has installed more than a thousand centrifuges to enrich uranium. The International Atomic Energy Agency predicts that 8,000 or so could be spinning by the end of the year, if Iran surmounts its technical problems.

Those hard numbers are at the core of the debate within the administration over whether Mr. Bush should warn Iran’s leaders that he will not allow them to get beyond some yet-undefined milestones, leaving the implication that a military strike on the country’s facilities is still an option.

Even beyond its nuclear program, Iran is emerging as an increasing source of trouble for the Bush administration by inflaming the insurgencies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and in Gaza, where it has provided military and financial support to the militant Islamic group Hamas, which now controls the Gaza Strip.

Even so, friends and associates of Ms. Rice who have talked with her recently say she has increasingly moved toward the European position that the diplomatic path she has laid out is the only real option for Mr. Bush, even though it has so far failed to deter Iran from enriching uranium, and that a military strike would be disastrous.

The accounts were provided by officials at the State Department, White House and the Pentagon who are on both sides of the debate, as well as people who have spoken with members of Mr. Cheney’s staff and with Ms. Rice. The officials said they were willing to explain the thinking behind their positions, but would do so only on condition of anonymity.

Mr. Bush has publicly vowed that he would never “tolerate” a nuclear Iran, and the question at the core of the debate within the administration is when and whether it makes sense to shift course.

The issue was raised at a closed-door White House meeting recently when the departing deputy national security adviser, J. D. Crouch, told senior officials that President Bush needed an assessment of how the stalemate over Iran’s nuclear program was likely to play out over the next 18 months, said officials briefed on the meeting.

In response, R. Nicholas Burns, an under secretary of state who is the chief American strategist on Iran, told the group that negotiations with Tehran could still be going on when Mr. Bush leaves office in January 2009. The hawks in the room reported later that they were deeply unhappy — but not surprised — by Mr. Burns’s assessment, which they interpreted as a tacit acknowledgment that the Bush administration had no “red line” beyond which Iran would not be permitted to step.

But conservatives inside the administration have continued in private to press for a tougher line, making arguments that their allies outside government are voicing publicly. “Regime change or the use of force are the only available options to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapons capability, if they want it,” said John R. Bolton, the former United States ambassador to the United Nations.

Only a few weeks ago, one of Mr. Cheney’s top aides, David Wurmser, told conservative research groups and consulting firms in Washington that Mr. Cheney believed that Ms. Rice’s diplomatic strategy was failing, and that by next spring Mr. Bush might have to decide whether to take military action.

The vice president’s office has declined to talk about Mr. Wurmser’s statements, and says Mr. Cheney is fully on board with the president’s strategy. In a June 1 article for Commentary magazine, the neoconservative editor Norman Podhoretz laid out what a headline described as “The Case for Bombing Iran.”

“In short, the plain and brutal truth is that if Iran is to be prevented from developing a nuclear arsenal, there is no alternative to the actual use of military force — any more than there was an alternative to force if Hitler was to be stopped in 1938,” Mr. Podhoretz wrote.

Mr. Burns and officials from the Treasury Department have been trying to use the mounting conservative calls for a military strike to press Europe and Russia to expand economic sanctions against Iran. Just last week, Israel’s transportation minister and former defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, visited Washington and told Ms. Rice that sanctions must be strong enough to get the Iranians to stop enriching uranium by the end of 2007.

While Mr. Mofaz did not threaten a military strike, Israeli officials said he told Ms. Rice that by the end of the year, Israel “would have to reassess where we are.”

The State Department and Treasury officials are pushing for a stronger set of United Nations Security Council sanctions against members of Iran’s government, including an extensive travel ban and further moves to restrict the ability of Iran’s financial institutions to do business outside of Iran. Beyond that, American officials have been trying to get European and Asian banks to take additional steps, outside of the Security Council, against Iran.

“We’re saying to them, ‘Look, you need to help us make the diplomacy succeed, and you guys need to stop business as usual with Iran,’ ” an administration official said. “We’re not just sitting here ignoring reality.”

But the fallout from the Iraq war has severely limited the Bush administration’s ability to maneuver on the Iran nuclear issue and has left many in the administration, and certainly America’s allies and critics in Europe, firmly against military strikes on Iran. On Thursday, Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the international nuclear watchdog agency, warned anew that military action against Iran would “be an act of madness.”

The debate over “red lines” is a familiar one inside the Bush White House that last arose in 2002 over North Korea. When the North Koreans threw out international inspectors on the last day of that year and soon declared that they planned to reprocess 8,000 rods of spent fuel into weapons-grade plutonium, President Bush had to decide whether to declare that if North Korea moved toward weapons, it could face a military strike on its facilities.

The Pentagon had drawn up an extensive plan for taking out those facilities, though with little enthusiasm, because it feared it could not control North Korea’s response, and the administration chose not to delivery any ultimatum. North Korea tested a nuclear weapon last October, and American intelligence officials estimate it now has the fuel for eight or more weapons.

Iran is far behind the North Koreans; it is believed to be three to eight years away from its first weapon, American intelligence officials have told Congress. Conservatives argue that if the administration fails to establish a line over which Iran must not step, the enrichment of uranium will go ahead, eventually giving the Iranians fuel that, with additional enrichment out of the sight of inspectors, it could use for weapons.

To date, however, the administration has been hesitant about saying that it will not permit Iran to produce more than a given amount of fuel, out of concern that Iran’s hard-liners would simply see that figure as a goal.

In the year since the United States made its last offer to Iran, the Iranians have gone from having a few dozen centrifuges in operation to building a facility that at last count, a month ago, had more than 1,300. “The pace of negotiations have lagged behind the pace of the Iranian nuclear program,” said Robert Joseph, the former under secretary of state for international security, who left his post partly over his opposition to the administration’s recent deal with North Korea.

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

وزارت امور خارجه آمريكا اعلام كرد اين كشور و ديگر كشورهاى درگير در مسئله هسته*اى ايران بحث*هاى اوليه درباره قطعنامه جديد عليه اين كشور را آغاز كرده*اند.
به گزارش خبرگزارى رويترز، شون مك*كورمك، سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا گفت نمي*داند چه زمانى ممكن است قطعنامه سوم عليه ايران به شوراى امنيت سازمان ملل ارائه شود اما ,ما اكنون در حال بحث درباره مفاد آن هستيم.,
وى افزود اين بخشى از بحث*هايى است كه نيكلاس برنز، معاون وزير خارجه آمريكا هنگام ديدار از اروپا در هفته گذشته درباره آن با مقامات اروپايى بحث كرد.
مك*كورمك به جزئيات بيشترى اشاره نكرد.
شوراى امنيت سازمان ملل تاكنون دو قطعنامه را عليه ايران صادر كرده است.
اين در حالى است كه على لاريجانى دبير شوراى عالى امنيت ملى كه در جمع هاديان سياسى سپاه سخن مي*گفت، با اشاره به صدور دو قطعنامه از سوى شوراى امنيت تصريح كرد: ,در صدور قطعنامه*ها، حرف اصلى آنان اين بود كه اولاً قطعنامه برگشت*پذير است، به اين معنا كه اگر ايران از فن*آورى هسته*اى دست بردارد، قطعنامه برگشت*پذير است اما اين بهانه*اى است، چون از ما مي*خواهند كه از فن*آورى اتمى دست *برداريم.,
وى با اشاره به اينكه بخشى از قطعنامه*ها در حوزه مسائل موشكى ايران، چه ساخت موشك و چه قطعات و لوازم يدكى است و ربطى به هسته*اى ندارد، گفت: ,آنها علت اين را كه چرا وارد اين حوزه* شده*اند، توضيح نمي*دهند و تنها مي*گويند چون قدرتش را داريم، اقدام مي*كنيم.,
لاريجانى قرار است شنبه آينده در ليسبون پايتخت پرتغال بار ديگر با خاوير سولانا، هماهنگ*كننده سياست خارجى اتحاديه اروپا درباره مسئله هسته*اى ايران ديدار كند.
مك*كورمك نيز در كنفرانس خبرى خود وقوع چنين ديدارى را تاييد كرد.
وى گفت منطقى كه در پس ديدار بعدى اين دو قرار دارد اين است كه ,اميدواريم دولت ايران و حكومت ايران تحليل مفيد متفاوتى را انجام دهد. روشن است آنها نسبت به يك سال پيش بسيار منزوي*تر شده*اند.,
سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا تاكيد كرد: ,بنابراين ايده ما اين است كه قصد داريم از طريق آقاى سولانا صحبت با دولت ايران را ادامه دهيم و آنها را به يافتن راهى براى بله گفتن ترغيب كنيم. و اين به طور ساده*اى شامل يافتن راهى براى تعليق فعاليت*هاى غني*سازى و بازفرآورى ايران به منظور آوردن آنها به پاى ميز مذاكره مي*شود.,
از سوى ديگر يك مقام ارشد آمريكايى مدعى شد انتظار نمي*رود ديدار بعدى لاريجانى و سولانا پيشرفت خاصى حاصل كند.

[Rasputin]

While there are those who believe that the Bush administration is "high on hate", some of the facts surrounding possible military action against Iran are being obscured just for the sake of inciting intense and primitive emotional reactions, which will serve to cloud the truth behind the issue even further.

It is without a shred of doubt that the current administration has enthusiastically engaged in games of Russian roulette when it comes to bending and breaking the rules both domestically and globally. However, engaging in military action against Iran using the same deeply flawed Iraq strategy would amount to certain political suicide, thus, the likelihood of a first strike against Iran is extremely low.

It is also important to remember that The War on Terror, which has turned into The War on Saving Face and Trying Not To Get Upstaged, Embarrassed or Killed by Arabs has already depleted resources to levels so low that virtually all of the Reagan-era military buildup has been wiped out. Weapons and materiel continue to be produced, albeit slowly, but the most vital military resource, personnel, is about to be named as an endangered species.

W may be a "lame duck", barred from re-election by the Constitution, but it is a sure bet that no one in the Republican Party will do anything that will give an already formidable Democratic Party a further advantage in 2008's elections. As Iranians, Iranian-Americans, or whatever label you wish to affix to your lapel, we should be recognize that a November 2008 victory for the party whose symbol is appropriately the jackass would set back any efforts to undermine the IRI and initiate any real regime change.

Recent commentary posted by "intellectuals" on this website that a military strike against Iran would be under false pretenses qualifies as utterly laughable. I will be the very first person to assert Iran's absolute unquestionable right to utilize available technology to build and maintain nuclear powerplants for civilian electrical generation purposes. But if this were truly the sole use of this technology, then complete transparency is required.

But as with all issues where the West, and specifically the United States is involved, the IRI's singular agenda is to stir up trouble and cause Washington more embarrassment in the Middle East. Washington has been Tehran's proverbial bitch since February 1979 and have held on to the championship belt ever since. The two capitals are likened to a pair of former spouses who harbor deep seated feelings and passion for one another long after the divorce was finalized. They can't live with each other, and they can't live without each other, just like Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton.

However, should things escalate, or deteriorate, to the point of military action, before jumping on the bandwagon that it is entirely Washington's fault, remember the IRI's role in current events. Tehran's bilaakh to Washington over the nuclear issue notwithstanding, Hamas and Fatah are now at war with each other, with Hamas having virtually total control of Gaza, and Fatah having an increasingly fragile hold on the West Bank. Hamas, whose goal is to establish a so-called "Islamic government" is financed by the IRI.

The false pretense, as it is being called, is the simple fact that the IRI is bankrolling Arab criminals in Iraq, Lebanon, with increasing evidence of involvement with the Taliban in Afghanistan as well. These facts do not qualify as false pretenses. Questioning the patriotism and nationalist loyalty we have for our motherland because we are not denouncing the possibility of U.S. action is absurd, as well as insulting.

None of us wants to see or hear about bombs being dropped on Iran. We still have families there, we have ties that will never be severed. But don't confuse defending the IRI with defending Iran. Iran will always be Iran. The IRI's days are numbered. (We can hope)

The statement that Iran has been abandoned by Iranian-Americans is equally flawed, as the fact is that we cannot abandon a country that has shunned us. Some of us cannot go home without being harassed, detained, or worse. I am not only referring to those who were involved in some way, shape, or form with the monarchy. There are those who have been here since the days of the White Revolution who risk being subjected to the same treatment. But we are all Iranian or Persian. It is in our DNA.

Maintaining a legacy takes character, yes. But if want the IRI to be your legacy, you can have it. Even though I hope for a regime change from within, I think we should be grateful and take it any way it may come, however unlikely that may be.

[Rasputin]

U.S. Refuses to Free 5 Captured Iranians Until at Least October

The United States will not release five Iranians detained in a U.S. military raid in northern Iraq until at least October, despite entreaties from the Iraqi government and pressure from Iran, U.S. officials said. The delay is as much due to a communication and procedural foul-up within the U.S. government as a policy decision, they added.

During his Washington visit this week, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari appealed to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to free the Iranians, who were arrested in Irbil in January, U.S. and Arab officials said.

Zebari told U.S. officials that the release would help the new U.S.-Iran dialogue on Iraq, which brought diplomats from the two nations together last month in Baghdad at their first public meeting in almost three decades. Iran has become pivotal to U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq because Tehran exerts great influence in Iraq with a wide cross-section of parties and has armed and trained many militant groups. Zebari also warned that Tehran might not attend a second session unless the Iranians are released, the sources said.

The U.S. raid on Iran's northern liaison office Jan. 11 was designed to detain two senior Iranian officials who were visiting Iraq, U.S. officials said. The two escaped arrest, but U.S. commandos did detain five mid-level operatives working with Iran's elite Quds Force, which is the foreign operations wing of Iran's Revolutionary Guards and is tied to arming, training and funding militants in Iraq.

The detention of the Iranians followed President Bush's vow to break up Tehran's networks in Iraq. The fate of the five men has reached the highest levels of the White House, with Bush's top foreign policy advisers meeting to discuss the issue in the spring. They agreed to hold the men as they do other foreign fighters captured in Iraq, with their status reviewed every six months.

They were originally due for review six months after their detention -- or by mid-July. Instead, the Multinational Force headquarters reviewed their status in April, meaning they are not eligible for another review until October, U.S. officials said. Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker were unaware that a review had occurred until last week, the officials noted.

Zebari was not told of the new timeframe during his talks in Washington, U.S. and Arab officials said.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki warned June 13 that the United States would face consequences for its January raid. "We will make the U.S. regret its repulsive, illegal action against Iran's consulate and its officials," Mottaki told reporters in Tehran.

The same day, Iran filed a complaint with the United Nations. "U.S. military forces, in violation of the most basic provisions governing diplomatic and consulate affairs and in a flagrant contempt for the most fundamental principles of international law, attacked the Iranian Consulate General in Irbil and abducted five Iranian consular officers after disarming the guards of the premises, breaking the doors into the building and beating and injuring the personnel of the Consulate General," the letter said.

[Rasputin]

رایس توقف بخشی از غنی سازی را رد کرد


سخنان خانم رایس نوعی هشدار به متحدان اروپایی آمریکا محسوب می شود
کاندولیزارایس، وزیر خارجه آمریکا، روز یکشنبه با رد بحثهایی که در مورد توقف بخشی از فعالیت های غنی سازی اورانیوم ایران مطرح است، گفت آمریکا و هم پیمانانش همچنان برتوقف کامل غنی سازی در ایران تاکید دراند.
خانم رایس گفت از نظر او تعلیق تنها بخشی از فعالیت های مربوط به غنی سازی، بی معنی است و نه او و نه هیچ کدام از همتایان اروپایی اش تمایلی به کاستن از مطالبات پیشین خود از ایران ندارند.

روز جمعه خبرگزاری آسوشیتدپرس به نقل از دیپلماتها در وین گزارش داده بود که بریتانیا، فرانسه و آلمان بحث بر سر این موضوع را که آیا می توان حد معینی از فعالیت غنی سازی را در ایران تحمل کرد، آغاز کرده اند.

به گفته این دیپلماتها آلمان با این پیشنهاد موافق است، فرانسه با آن مخالف است، و بریتانیا با محافظه کاری با آن برخورد کرده است. این دیپلماتها تاکید کرده اند که هنوز تصمیمی دراین مورد گرفته نشده است.

به گفته ناظران سخنان خانم رایس، که در سفر دو روزه اش به فرانسه برای آشنایی با دولت جدید این کشور، بیان شد نوعی هشدار به متحدان اروپایی آمریکا محسوب می شود.

ایران: "بحث تعلیق زمانش گذشته است"

سخنان خانم رایس در حالی بیان می شود که محمد علی حسینی، سخنگوی وزارت خارجه ایران، روز یکشنبه بار دیگر تاکید کرده است که ایران از بحث غنی سازی اورانیوم عبور کرده است.

آقای حسینی که در جلسه هفتگی خود با خبرنگاران درباره گفتگوهای علی لاریجانی، دبیر شورای عالی امنیت ملی ایران، و خاویر سولانا، مسئول سیاست خارجی اتحادیه اروپا، سخن می گفت، در پاسخ به این سوال که آیا بحث تعلیق غنی سازی ایران در گفتگوهای آقای لاریجانی با آقای سولانا مطرح شده، گفت: "بحث تعلیق زمانش گذشته است و اکنون بحث شناسایی حق ایران در زمینه غنی سازی مطرح است."

آقای حسینی همچنین گفت اگر نتایج مذاکرات علی لاریجانی و خاویر سولانا مثبت باشد، ایران ظرف دو ماه به سوالات باقی مانده آژانس بین المللی انرژی اتمی درباره برنامه اتمی اش پاسخ خواهد داد.


گفتگوی لاریجانی و سولانا روز شنبه برگزار شد و دور بعدی آن سه هفته بعد برگزار می شود

گفتگوهای آقای لاریجانی با آقای سولانا روز شنبه و در ساختمان وزارت خارجه پرتغال در لیسبون برگزار شد.

در پایان این گفتگوها که چهار ساعت به طول انجامید، هر دو طرف گفتگوها را "خوب و سازنده" توصیف کردند، و سولانا اعلام کرد که دور بعدی این گفتگوها سه هفته بعد برگزار خواهد شد.

هدف از اين گفتگوها اين است که مذاکرات ميان ايران و اتحاديه اروپا برای حل اختلافی که طرفين بر سر فعاليت اتمی ايران دارند از سرگرفته شود.

اين مذاکرات از دو سال پيش که ايران روند دستيابی به فناوری غنی سازی اورانيوم را از سرگرفت متوقف شد و دولتهای بريتانيا، آلمان و فرانسه که به نمايندگی از اتحاديه اروپا مذاکره با ايران را پيش می بردند اعلام کردند که تنها در صورتی حاضر به بازگشت به مذاکراتند که ايران کليه فعاليتهای مرتبط با غنی سازی اورانيوم را دست کم تا زمانی که مذاکرات طرفين به نتيجه برسد متوقف کند.

خواست اين دولتها بعداً در قالب قطعنامه هايی که به تصويب شورای امنيت سازمان ملل متحد رسيد تبديل به تصميم گيری الزام آور جامعه جهانی شد.

اما ايران تاکنون اصرار ورزيده که به عنوان امضاکننده پيمان بين المللی منع گسترش جنگ افزارهای اتمی و عضو آژانس بين المللی انرژی اتمی، غنی سازی اورانيوم را حق خود می داند و حاضر به توقف آن نيست.

آژانس بين المللی انرژی اتمی تأييد کرده که ایران در حال حاضر به توانایی غنی سازی اورانیوم در مقیاس صنعتی دست یافته است.

این آژانس همچنين اعلام کرده که اگر ایران به برخی پرسشهایی که هنوز در مورد فعالیت اتمی ایران مطرح است پاسخ دهد می تواند با اطمینان نظر دهد که آیا ايران به دنبال دستیابی به سلاح اتمی است یا نه.

[Rasputin]

The United States dismissed on Sunday the idea of a partial suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran, saying that Washington and its allies still insisted on a full suspension.


"My counterparts, when I talk with them, are not interested in lowering the bar," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters as she flew to Paris for talks with the new French government on issues including Sudan, Iran and Iraq.

"I don't know what partial suspension means," she added. "It doesn't seem to me to be a very wise course."

The United Nations Security Council last July demanded that Iran suspend all uranium enrichment activities, a process that can produce material for a nuclear weapon. Iran has refused to do so and in December the Security Council imposed sanctions on Iranian trade in sensitive nuclear materials and technology.

Western nations suspect that Iran is seeking to develop an atomic bomb under the cover of its civilian nuclear program. Iran has said its nuclear program aims to generate electricity so that it can export more of its valuable oil and gas.

Asked about reports in recent weeks that suggested the West might settle for a partial suspension, Rice said: "I don't know where that's coming from because I will tell you that, in my conversations with my counterparts, everybody understands the importance of and believes strongly in the importance of carrying out the ... Security Council mandate for suspension."

Describing such reports as "chatter," she said "people are looking, obviously, for ways that Iran might be able to suspend but suspension remains the core of the effort."

Six world powers have insisted that Tehran stop enriching uranium as a precondition for formal negotiations on trade and other incentives offered last year in return for Iran giving up sensitive nuclear work.

European foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who has been asked by the six to conduct talks with Iran, said he had constructive discussions with Iran's top nuclear negotiators in Lisbon on Saturday and hoped for another round in three weeks.

Rice said the United States fully supported his efforts but would continue to pursue the possibility of a fresh Security Council resolution against Iran. She said she expected to speak to Solana in Paris about his recent talks with Iran.

"There always need to be parallel paths, one to continue down the Security Council path and the other to give a chance for negotiations," she said. "But I think Javier will have to help us judge how much life is left on the dialogue side."

A report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last month said Iran was accelerating a campaign to install 3,000 enrichment centrifuges by mid-summer, laying a basis for "industrial-scale" fuel production.

The United States has argued that if it began negotiations with Iran before it suspended uranium enrichment, Tehran could conceivably keep pursuing an atomic bomb as talks dragged on.

[Rasputin]

The United States dismissed on Sunday the idea of a partial suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran, saying that Washington and its allies still insisted on a full suspension.


"My counterparts, when I talk with them, are not interested in lowering the bar," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters as she flew to Paris for talks with the new French government on issues including Sudan, Iran and Iraq.

"I don't know what partial suspension means," she added. "It doesn't seem to me to be a very wise course."

The United Nations Security Council last July demanded that Iran suspend all uranium enrichment activities, a process that can produce material for a nuclear weapon. Iran has refused to do so and in December the Security Council imposed sanctions on Iranian trade in sensitive nuclear materials and technology.

Western nations suspect that Iran is seeking to develop an atomic bomb under the cover of its civilian nuclear program. Iran has said its nuclear program aims to generate electricity so that it can export more of its valuable oil and gas.

Asked about reports in recent weeks that suggested the West might settle for a partial suspension, Rice said: "I don't know where that's coming from because I will tell you that, in my conversations with my counterparts, everybody understands the importance of and believes strongly in the importance of carrying out the ... Security Council mandate for suspension."

Describing such reports as "chatter," she said "people are looking, obviously, for ways that Iran might be able to suspend but suspension remains the core of the effort."

Six world powers have insisted that Tehran stop enriching uranium as a precondition for formal negotiations on trade and other incentives offered last year in return for Iran giving up sensitive nuclear work.

European foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who has been asked by the six to conduct talks with Iran, said he had constructive discussions with Iran's top nuclear negotiators in Lisbon on Saturday and hoped for another round in three weeks.

Rice said the United States fully supported his efforts but would continue to pursue the possibility of a fresh Security Council resolution against Iran. She said she expected to speak to Solana in Paris about his recent talks with Iran.

"There always need to be parallel paths, one to continue down the Security Council path and the other to give a chance for negotiations," she said. "But I think Javier will have to help us judge how much life is left on the dialogue side."

A report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last month said Iran was accelerating a campaign to install 3,000 enrichment centrifuges by mid-summer, laying a basis for "industrial-scale" fuel production.

The United States has argued that if it began negotiations with Iran before it suspended uranium enrichment, Tehran could conceivably keep pursuing an atomic bomb as talks dragged on.

[Rasputin]

The recent arrests of Ali Shakeri, Kian Tajbakhsh, Haleh Esfandiari, the barring of Parnaz Azima to leave Iran have been present in articles and discussions within the Iranian community. But the average American still has a limited understanding of the relationship between Iran and the United States -- these arrests, though unfortunate, may just be the tool with which Americans can finally bridge this gap.

Tension between Iran and the United States is nothing new; here are some brief highlights...

+ The US funded a coup d'etat in 53 based on the UK's pleading, and a nationalist minister was prompty replaced by a American friendly Shah. In the late seventies, following intense anger about Western influences from both the Marxists and the Islamists, the Iranian Revolution occured. Crazy shit ensued.
+ The US sends Saddam Hussein chemical weapons to be used on Iranians during the Iraq-Iran war
+ The blowing up of an Iranian passenger jet
+ The Lockerbie incident, partially blamed on Iran by the US.
+ Iran = Axis of Evil, according to Bushie
+ The holding of 5 Iranian officials by US govt officials in Iraq
+ The recent capture of British navy soldiers who had allegedly entered Iranian waters
+ Oh, and that that whole nuclear thang...

The US govt is dramatically increasing their budget to bring democracy and liberty to Iran, naturally upsetting Iranian officials. So the jerks who run Iran get really pissed at the jerks who run the United States, and they start engaging in these arrests of the other, trying to wittingly paw over a really serious issue.

The Iranian govt sees these Iranian-Americans as puppets for the American goverment -- fearing a people's uprising, they attempt to squelch the revolution. This party uses words to describe the Americans like corrupt, western imperialists, christian fundamentalists, immoral, racist, stubborn, ignorant, and waging a psychological war. The American govt sees the Iranians as crazy Islamists, and start yelling words back like Al Qaida, terrorist, nuclear bomb, and sand nigger.

It's hard to find good articles that actually explore the issues between Iran and the United States in western media, so I was thoroughly surprised by a recent article in the NYTIMES Sunday Magazine. I was so entrenched within Negar Azimi's article, the "Hard Realities of Soft Power" that the rice I was boiling was burned black by the time I smelled it 30 minutes later.

Azimi, a Harvard grad student, is the senior editor of Bidoun, an artsy, socio-political magazine that covers the Mid East. Azimi talks about the $75 million that the US govt is spending to pump democracy into Iran (pun intended).

The United States has dedicated tens of millions of dollars to promoting democracy in Iran. But for Iranian democrats and America alike, the effort may be more trouble than it's worth.

[Rasputin]

آمريكا با درخواست از ايران براى عمل به تعهداتش براى ايجاد عراقى باثبات تاكيد كرد: ازسرگيرى گفت*وگو با تهران درباره امنيت عراق مهم است.

به گزارش خبرگزارى فرانسه، شون مك*كورمك، سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا به خبرنگاران گفت: "ما بايد ببينيم چه زمانى براى اين نشست مناسب است اما مهم است كه ايران به آنچه اعلام كرده و آن هم ايجاد عراقى باثبات *تر است، عمل كند اما امروز فعاليت*هايشان مغاير با هدف اعلام*شده*شان است."
وى افزود: "اگرچه واشنگتن هيچ معيارهاى سختى را براى ازسرگيرى گفت*وگوها تعيين نكرده اما اين تصميمى است كه سياستمداران درباره زمان مناسب آن تصميم*گيرى خواهند كرد."
سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا تصريح كرد: "همانطور كه گفتم ايرانيها واقعا به اندازه*اى كه اظهار داشتند، واقعا عمل نكردند."
وى مدعى شد: "ايران بايد از ارائه فناورى و پول و همچنين آموزش گروههايى كه تلاش دارند نيروهاى آمريكايى را در عراق بكشند و تامين مالى گروههايى كه تنش*هاى قومى را در اين كشور جنگ*زده ايجاد مي*كنند، خوددارى كند."
وى اين اظهارات را در پاسخ به درخواست* عراقيها براى ازسرگيرى گفت*وگوها بين ايران و عراق بيان كرد كه اولين بار در ماه مه برگزار شد.
ايران اعلام كرده در انتظار پاسخ آمريكا براى ازسرگيرى اين گفت*وگوهاست.