Nuclear Crisis

[Rasputin]

Solana: Iran dialogue can't last forever

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana said Wednesday Iran must decide whether it wants to continue nuclear talks.

"Today, Iran has made no commitment to suspend," Solana told the European Parliament. "This dialogue I am maintaining cannot last forever and it is up to Iranians now to decide whether its time has come to end."

He said that if that was the case, he suggested that the standoff over Iran's nuclear program be moved to the United Nations Security Council.

Meanwhile, Vice Premier Shimon Peres, speaking at a press conference in Berlin, said that the international community must adopt an aggressive stance against Iran.

According to Peres, Iran's strength stemmed from the international community's weakness in responding to it.

The vice premier said that it was a mistake for Western countries to keep talking with Iran after Teheran failed to meet a deadline to agree to stop enriching uranium.

"Iran seeks a nuclear bomb, although it already has a human bomb in the image of Ahmadinejad," said Peres.

Iran let an August 31 deadline pass, failing to agree to an offer of economic incentives in return for dropping its uranium enrichment program.

Solana has continued to talk with chief Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani.

Asked what he expected from the talks, Peres said, "If you don't want to govern the world by guns, then you have to govern the world by wills - which means if you say something you must respect it."

"The fact is, that the United Nations, all countries, gave a date to the Iranians to answer," he said. "The Iranians didn't respect it and the negotiations are still continuing. And I think this is a devaluation of the wills, which is in my judgment mistaken. Don't say it's OK ... you must stick to what you have said."

"The United States went with Europe for the diplomatic and economic option and they try to build a coalition," Peres said. "Well, a coalition must produce an agreement, otherwise it cannot hold. An agreement must have a time and a date, it cannot be weak, it must be a choice."

US officials have said they are willing to give Solana up to several more weeks to see if he can reach a deal with Larijani before pressing for sanctions in the UN Security Council.

[Rasputin]

Iran to open nuclear sites to tourists

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has ordered authorities to open the doors of Iran's nuclear facilities to foreign tourists in order to prove that the country's disputed nuclear program has been peaceful, state-run television reported on Wednesday.

"After an order by the president... foreign tourists can visit Iran's nuclear facilities," the head of Iran's tourism division, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, was quoted as saying.

Mashai said Ahmadinejad issued the order to show that Iran's nuclear program has been peaceful, and that it aims to generate fuel, not weapons.
"We are reviewing the related instructions in this regard," he reportedly said.

The report did not clarify the definition of a foreign tourist. The announcement came a day after Iran's parliament voted to debate a bill that would require the government to fingerprint all US citizens visiting Iran.

The draft law would require all American citizens to be fingerprinted when they enter Iran. The measure was in retaliation for the fingerprinting of Iranian travelers visiting the United States, a procedure implemented in 2002 for Iranians and citizens of several other countries.

[Rasputin]

سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه ايران اعلام کرد: تعليق از نظر ما کاملا رد شده است و به هيج وجه قابل پذيرش نيست.
به گزارش خبرنگار سياسی مهر، سيد محمد علی حسيني، سخنگوی جديد وزارت امور خارجه، در نخستين نشست خبری خود با خبرنگاران افزود: آنچه رسانه ها از آن تحت عنوان تعليق چند روزه يا يک روزه ياد می کنند به هيچ عنوان در سياست جمهوری اسلامی ايران جايی ندارد.

وی تاکيد کرد: ايران بر حقوق خود طبق ان پی تی پا فشاری می کند و هيچ پيش شرطی را برای مذاکره نمی پذيرد.

[Rasputin]

Iran rejects six nations' demands

Iran has refused to suspend its uranium enrichment programme after six key countries agreed to discuss possible sanctions against Tehran.
A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry said suspension was "unacceptable" and the threat of sanctions "inefficient".

The five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany held talks in the UK on Friday to discuss Iran's repeated refusal to halt nuclear activities.

Despite fears it is developing nuclear arms, Iran says its aims are peaceful.

"The suspension is completely unacceptable and we have rejected it," foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told reporters.

"The threat of sanctions is an inefficient means to achieve a solution," he said.

Russia and China favour diplomacy, not sanctions. A UN debate on punitive action could start as early as next week.

'Time limited'

Speaking after discussions in London, UK Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said the six powers would "consult on measures under article 41 of Chapter 7 of the UN Charter".


Iran's nuclear programme is popular with many in the country

Article 41 authorises the Security Council to apply non-military means, such as economic or diplomatic sanctions, "to give effect to its decisions".

EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said earlier that "the door to negotiations is and will be always open", despite saying earlier this week that little progress had been made in his "endless hours" of talks with Tehran.

He said the issue could only be solved through negotiations, although talks could not go on forever.

The six nations - the UK, Russia, China, France, the US and Germany - had offered Iran a package of incentives in return for the suspension of its uranium enrichment programme.

Iran missed a 31 August UN Security Council deadline to stop work, after which the US agreed to allow Mr Solana to continue talks with Tehran.

But BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins says the major powers now seem to accept that Iran is not prepared to meet their demand for a halt.

'Extreme measures'

There are sharp differences between the six countries attending the meeting on what kind of sanctions to possibly impose on Iran.


Tehran says it will not give up its nuclear programme
The US and the UK favour immediate punitive sanctions, but in order to win over Russia and China, they are believed to be considering a series of low-level sanctions as a first step.

These would be what British officials describe as incremental, proportional and reversible.

They could include travel restrictions on Iranian officials and embargoes on missile and nuclear technology that could have dual civilian-military use.

But China and Russia have both said diplomacy is still the best way to achieve a solution.

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described sanctions as "extreme measures".

He said he would like to "see what extra possibilities exist to pursue multiparty diplomatic efforts".

Russia has built a nuclear power station in Iran and China relies on oil imports from the country.

[Rasputin]

كره آزمايش اتمی كرد، اما بوش ايران و سوريه را تهديد كرد!
آزمايش اتمی كره شمالی
مشوق حمله ايران شد؟




آزمايش اتمی كره شمالی كه گفته می شود قدرت آن كمی بيش از قدرت انفجار اتمی هيروشيما، در پايان جنگ دوم جهانی بود، بهانه ای تحريك آميز برای موضع گيری تند تر امريكا عليه ايران شد. بوش در بخشی از پيام كوتاهی كه چند ساعت پس از آزمايش از طريق راديو داد، مدعی شد:

«كره شمالی گسترش*دهنده شماره يك فن آوری موشكی در جهان است. اين كشور به ايران و سوريه نيز اين فناوری را صادر مي*كند. انتقال تسليحات هسته*ای يا مواد آن به كشورها و گروههای ديگر توسط كره شمالی خطری بزرگ برای آمريكا شناخته مي*شود و پيونگ يانگ كاملا مسئوليت عواقب آن را بايد قبول كند. من به متحدين در منطقه شامل كره جنوبی و ژاپن مجددا تاكيد مي*كنم كه واشنگتن آماده اجرای تعهدات امنيتی و بازدارنده بصورت تمام و كمال است.»

دراين پيام بيش از آنكه كره شمالی مخاطب باشد، ايران و سوريه كه تاكنون بحثی در باره اتمی بودن آن مطرح نبود مخاطب اند! بوش در پيام خود، درعين حال كه روی قاطعيت امريكا برای تعهدات امنيتی و بازدارنده تاكيد كرد، روی ادامه ديپلماسی با كره نيز تاكيد كرد، درحاليكه چنين تاكيدی روی جمله تهديد آميزی كه در ارتباط با ايران و سوريه بكار برد وجود نداشت. متن پيام، كوتاهی و سمت گيری آن، آشكار ساخت كه كاخ سفيد آزمايش اتمی كره شمالی را درخدمت اهداف خود برای حمله به ايران می خواهد به كار بگيرد و چنين تبليغ كند كه حمله پيشگيرانه به ايران، از شكل گيری يك كره شمالی در خاورميانه جلوگيری می كند و ضمنا تاخير در اين اقدام، به همان نتايجی می انجامد كه دركره شمالی انجاميد!

بايد ديد، درجمهوری اسلامی آزمايش اتمی كره شمالی مشوقی برای طرفداران توليد سلاح اتمی درايران می شود و يا شده و يا ارزيابی بالا بعنوان هشداری جدی مورد نظر قرار گرفته است.

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

Iran says 'hostile' to nuclear weapons after NKorea test

TEHRAN (AFP)Iran said it was "hostile" towards the development of nuclear weapons, a day after North Korea claimed an atomic weapons test, but said the big powers have to start disarmament.

"The Islamic Republic is hostile to the production and utilisation of nuclear weapons and to destruction," said government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham.

"The best solution to combat nuclear weapons is for the big powers to start by destroying them themselves," he was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

He pledged Tehran's help if the world's nuclear powers were serious in achieving this goal.

The five UN Security Council permanent members, Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany, are expected to begin discussing this week a resolution imposing sanctions on Tehran if it does not halt its own nuclear program.

Tehran insists its nuclear program is solely for peaceful energy needs, vehemently rejecting allegations that it is seeking nuclear weapons.

Following North Korea's announcement Monday of its weapons test, Iran said it wants a world "free of nuclear weapons".

"Iran's position is clear and Iran on principle believes in a world free of nuclear weapons," foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini was quoted as saying by a state television anchor.

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

Khamenei defends nuclear 'right'

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, says the country will continue developing nuclear technology.
"Our policy is clear, progress with clear logic and insisting on the nation's right without any retreat," state television quoted him as saying.

His comments come as the United Nations discusses its response to North Korea's claimed nuclear test on Monday.

Iran has always maintained the technology is for peaceful purposes and not for atomic weapons.

Last week, at talks in London, the six major powers trying to persuade Iran to curtail its nuclear research agreed to consult on the possibility of imposing sanctions.

The Ayatollah's comments are his first public remarks since the meeting.

'Full confidence'

He was also quoted as saying that while Iran had previously suspended its enrichment program, it would not do so again.

"Now with steady heart and full confidence we press ahead and nobody can give a good reason that the nuclear path is wrong for the country," he said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was also quoted by state television, saying the country would continue to negotiate and cooperate in the nuclear energy field.


Iran says their nuclear intentions are peaceful

"Iran's proposal is an appropriate framework for cooperation in the nuclear issue and the Iranian nation will continue the path of dignity with perseverance and prudence without any fear."

Tehran had rejected a 31 August deadline set by the UN Security Council that it suspend enrichment or face possible sanctions.

At the London talks last week, the US and the UK favoured immediate punitive sanctions, but China and Russia both said diplomacy was still the best way to achieve a solution.

[Rasputin]

Iran has called the west's bluff on the nuclear standoff

The US cannot risk imposing stricter sanctions or military action. Fairness is now the only option


As the Iranian and American presidents offer their rival versions of international reality at the United Nations this week, it is worth recalling that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the first Iranian leader to travel to New York to proclaim his country's right to make its own decisions about energy resources, to denounce imperialism, and to condemn a world order weighted in favour of a handful of powerful nations.
In this same month in 1951, Dr Mohammad Mossadeq convinced the UN that British efforts to regain control of the oil industry the Iranian government had just nationalised did not deserve the world body's support. Mossadeq won over the security council, and he won over the United States, which enjoyed the spectacle of this elderly, eccentric and eloquent man challenging the British empire. American reporters affectionately nicknamed him "Old Mossy".

How different is the scene at the UN today, with Bush castigating Iran for political suppression at home, for supporting terrorism abroad, and for pursuing nuclear weapons, while Ahmadinejad portrays the US as the leader of a group of nations which have hijacked international institutions in pursuit of their own narrow interests. Between these two moments on the East River lies a half century in which the US was transformed, in Iranian eyes, from the angel in international affairs that Mossadeq had imagined into the demon scourged by Ayatollah Khomeini and most of his successors.
"Old Mossy" hoped America would help Iran become truly independent. Instead, America joined Britain in removing him from power and ensconcing the Shah as an authoritarian ruler. Most Iranians, including opponents of the regime, think the US has never redeemed itself for that act, or for its later meddling in Iranian affairs. American intervention would reach a malign climax, they say, if the US were to attack Iranian nuclear installations. Just as Iranians believe the US has never made up for the wrong it perpetrated in 1953, so Americans believe the Islamic republic demonstrated, by its seizure of American diplomats in 1979, a deeply unreasonable and probably permanent hostility towards America. The two nations, in other words, bulk pathologically large in each other's vision, and that is the ultimate problem which makes an accommodation between them on nuclear matters, let alone a more general rapprochement, so difficult to achieve.

The drama which began three years ago when Britain, France and Germany undertook to bring Iran round on the nuclear issue has had its comic dimension, as European wiliness encountered Iranian guile, and was usually outmatched by it. But now comedy threatens to tip over into farce, and tragedy lies in wait. After the passing of many deadlines, the latest at the end of last month, the Iranians are still enriching uranium. They have so far suffered no consequences, and even if a very modest package of sanctions were to survive Russian and Chinese objections at the UN, it would not hurt the Iranians much, if at all.

The western bluff has been called. The Europeans have moved from making suspension a condition for talks to contriving formulas to allow talks to begin without it. As long as serious sanctions lay in the far future, the Europeans were ready to act as if they, and even the highly sceptical Russians and Chinese, would be prepared to take strong measures. But as soon as they become a real prospect, the excuses emerge, ranging from the lack of adequate inducements to the absence of conclusive proof of Iran's nuclear intentions and the danger of pushing the Tehran regime into too tight a corner. All have some substance, but nevertheless represent a retreat from previous positions.

In the unlikely event that strong sanctions were imposed, Iran would find it relatively easy to survive them, and they would play into the hands of those in the Iranian government, including Ahmadinejad, who may well believe that a good relationship with the west is a contradiction in terms - something that would sully the revolutionary purity of the republic. So there are indeed reasons for caution on sanctions. In any case the real sanction has been the prospect that if negotiations were to end in total failure, they would be followed, no doubt after a period in which economic measures would be shown to be ineffective, by American military action. The bunker-busters would go in and parts of Iran would be dug up and ploughed under by a bombing campaign, aimed both at destroying installations and killing scientists, which would set back Iran's nuclear programme by three or four years.

Yet even if the Bush administration was less weakened by Iraq than it is, the chances of it choosing this option are somewhat less than they may have seemed some months ago. There is no readiness in the country to accept another military enterprise, even if it "only" involved air action, and anyone ordering it would suffer grievous political damage. This would come not so much in the campaign itself, but with the inevitable retaliation by Iran in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. The US government would be wide open to the charge of making a bad mess worse, and the charge would be true, something which it may now be beginning to grasp. It will not rule out the counter-proliferation option, and the American military will continue to plan for it on a contingency basis, but the Iranians are probably right to conclude that it is not a very immediate threat.

But it is in the nature of the relationship between Iran and the west that as one danger recedes, another advances. If the Iranian regime comes to believe that both the Europeans and the US are paper tigers, it will be both strengthened and emboldened. At home, the consequences may well be to quicken the pace of the regime's encroachments on the freedom and democracy the Iranian system still displays. Abroad, they could give a push to the sort of adventurism which would make war between Iran and the US a stronger possibility. The only answer is a Middle Eastern policy which stresses needs, rights and fairness more than threats and enemies. Easy generalities, but somewhere in that direction lies the solution, if there is one to be found.

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

نمايندگان وزراى خارجه پنج عضو دائمى شوراى امنيت و آلمان روز گذشته بر سر تحريم دولت ايران به توافق دست نيافتند. ,مك كورمك, سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا گفت كه طى يك كنفرانس ويديوئى، نمايندگان وزراى خارجه گروه ,پنج به اضافه يك, عليرغم اتفاق نظر در مورد تحريم ايران، موفق نشدند در مورد جزئيات يك قطعنامه به توافق دست يابند. بنا به تائيد سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا، پيشنهادات ارائه شده در اين كنفرانس به سفراى گروه ,پنج به اضافه يك, ارائه خواهد شد. از سوى ديگر ,نيكلاوس برنز, معاون وزرات خارجه آمريكا گفت از آنجائى كه شوراى امنيت در حال بررسى موضوع آزمايش اتمى كره شمالى است، مشاوره در زمينه مناقشه اتمى با ايران، ممكن است چند روز ديگر به تاخير بيافتد.

[Rasputin]

اظهارنظر يکی از نمايندگان حزب محافظه کار در مجلس عوام بريتانيا درباره برنامه اتمی ايران واکنش شديدی در پی داشته و يکی از نمايندگان خواهان اخراج او از حزب محافظه کار شده است.
بوريس جانسون، نماينده محافظه کار مجلس عوام بريتانيا طی مقاله ای در روزنامه ديلی تلگراف نوشته که غرب بايد در مناقشه ای که بر سر فعاليت اتمی ايران با اين کشور دارد، اعتراف به "کيش - مات" يعنی شکست کند.

او همچنين نوشته که به سياستمداران ايرانی که به گفته وی به دنبال سلاح اتمی هستند حق می دهد و شايد اکنون زمان آن فرارسيده باشد که به ايران اجازه برخورداری از سلاح اتمی داده شود.

بوريس جانسون نوشته است: "ايرانيها بالاخره روزی صاحب بمب اتم می شوند و ما هم يقيناً هيچ کاری نمی توانيم بکنيم، همه جاروجنجال و تهديدها هم بی فايده است ... حتی ممکن است کار به جايی برسد که به ايرانيها بمب اتم هم بدهيم، بله، شايد وقت آن رسيده باشد که آمريکاييها اين روند توقف ناپذير را خودشان مهار کنند".

وی افزوده است: "به نظر من دستيابی ايران به بمب [اتم] نه تنها اجتناب ناپذير است بلکه مطابق با خواست مردم اين کشور است و اگر نظر من درست باشد، شايد بتوانيم همه چيز را از اول شروع کنيم ... شايد وقت آن رسيده باشد که به اين وضعيت پر از هراس و سوء ظن و وحشت خاتمه دهيم".

اين نماينده مجلس بريتانيا پيشنهاد داده است که آمريکاييها حتی به دستيابی ايران به سلاح اتمی کمک هم بکنند اما به اين شرط که رهبران ايران از "رجزخوانی" درباره اسرائيل دست بردارند و بسوی دموکراسی گام بردارند.

بوريس جانسون نوشته که اگر آمريکاييها به دستيابی ايران به سلاح اتمی کمک کنند، مردم ايران هم قدر اين کار آمريکاييها را خواهد دانست و احساس خواهند کرد که به جای اينکه چهره ای وحشتناکی از آنان در جهان ترسيم شود، در امور جهانی سهيم شده اند.

او نوشته که اگر به جای نماينده مجلس عوام بريتانيا، مثلاً نماينده قم در مجلس ايران می بود، وظيفه ميهنی خود می دانست که کشورش را هر چه سريعتر به بزرگترين، پر زرق و برق ترين، برنده ترين و مخربترين جنگ افزارهايی که در بازار وجود دارد تجهيز کند و از ته دل و بر اساس عقل و خرد بر اين باور می بود که دارا بودن بمب اتم و توان به کارگيری آن تنها راه مطمئن برای حفاظت از کشور و مردم حوزه انتخابيه اش در قم در مقابل حمله احتمالی آمريکا می بود.

بوريس جانسون سخنگوی حزب محافظه کار در مورد مسائل آموزش عالی است و از نمايندگان برجسته اين حزب به شمار می رود.

به دنبال انتشار مقاله آقای جانسون در روزنامه ديلی تلگراف، اندرو مک کينلی، عضو کميسيون امورخارجی مجلس عوام بريتانيا از حزب کارگر، نظر او را در مورد مسئله اتمی ايران "فوق العاده خطرناک و غيرمسئولانه" خوانده و از دبيرکل حزب محافظه کار خواسته که او را از حزب اخراج کند.

بوريس جانسون در حالی به سياستمداران ايرانی حق داده به دنبال سلاح اتمی باشند که سياستمداران ايرانی در ديدگاههای رسمی خود برنامه هسته ای کشورشان را کاملاً در راستای مقاصد صلحجويانه می دانند و با دستيابی به سلاح اتمی مخالفت می ورزند.

اين در حالی است که دولت بريتانيا از برنامه اتمی ايران ابراز نگرانی می کند و خواهان محدود شدن فعاليت اتمی ايران، بخصوص در زمينه غنی سازی اورانيوم است.