Iran hails turning point in nuclear talks

hamidreza

Active member
Iran hails turning point in nuclear talks


Six-nation group offers concessions including sanctions relief in return for acceptance of limits on uranium enrichment.


Saeed Jalili, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, in Almaty. Photograph: Stanislav Filippov/AFP/Getty Images

Iran has declared that negotiations with a group of world powers have reached a "turning point" after it was offered a series of concessions, including sanctions relief on gold and petrochemical exports, in return for acceptance of limits on uranium enrichment.

Two days of talks in the Kazakh city of Almaty between Iran and a six-nation negotiating group ended on Wednesday with an agreement to hold further meetings aimed at finalising a deal.

In return for a limited relaxation of sanctions, the six-nation group – the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China – maintained its insistence that Iran stop making 20%-enriched uranium, which is relatively easy to turn into weapons-grade material.

However, it relaxed its demand that all of Iran's stockpile of about 170kg of 20%-enriched uranium should be shipped out of the country, allowing Iran to retain enough to fuel a research reactor in Tehran.

The six powers also softened the stipulation put forward at a series of abortive meetings last year that an underground enrichment plant at Fordow, in central Iran, should be shut down.
In Almaty the Iranians were asked only to "reduce the readiness" of Fordow while accepting more intrusive monitoring of the facility by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a western diplomat said.

Other officials said enrichment at Fordow would have to be suspended and demonstrable steps taken to ensure it could not be quickly restarted.

The main financial and oil sanctions on Iran would stay in place, but sanctions relief on gold and other precious metals would allow it to sidestep some banking restrictions. The ability to export petrochemical products would allow it to boost foreign currency earnings and potentially increase its domestic oil refining capacity.

The chief of the Iranian delegation, Saeed Jalili, welcomed the offer, saying: "We consider these talks a positive step which could be completed by taking a positive and constructive approach and taking reciprocal steps … We believe this is a turning point."

Nuclear experts from all sides are due to meet in Istanbul on 18 March to hammer out details of the proposal, and another meeting of senior diplomats in Almaty is scheduled for 5 April.

A western diplomat said: "I think we now have traction to get into proper detailed negotiations. This is the first time we have put sanctions relief on the table. Its more than a gesture, it's sending a message. We have shown we are listening and are serious without giving up the major lever we have, which is the oil embargo."

The diplomat said a deal on Iran's 20% uranium could open the way to a more comprehensive agreement later on in which the oil and financial sanctions could be lifted in return for permanent limits on Iran's nuclear programme and robust IAEA monitoring.

"It's more for less," said Shashank Joshi, the author of a study on the Iranian nuclear negotiations, The Permanent Crisis. "It's offering more sanctions relief and asking less of Iran, which is a move in the right direction that many of us have been calling for. What is just as important is the Iranian reaction. They are talking in the same terms about the same things rather than just putting forward diametrically opposed positions."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/27/iran-turning-point-nuclear-talks

Well, west are gradually learning how to negotiate with Iran.
 
Well, west are gradually learning how to negotiate with Iran.

Are they?

Isn't it usually Iran that ignores agreements and does its own thing i.e breaching UN sactions?

Will Iran actually do as agreed? It would certainly make a change.
 
Are they?

Isn't it usually Iran that ignores agreements and does its own thing i.e breaching UN sactions?

Will Iran actually do as agreed? It would certainly make a change.

I recommend you to read the provisions of the NPT and then you will find who is ignoring the agreements.

Based on NPT every country can have enrichment technology in each level if they dont use it for war weapons.
 
Iran aren't using it for "war weapons"? Silly me.

Yes Iran aren't. As I told you before west media some times say lie and you should be smart enough to distinguish the different between lie and truth,
So if you want to know truth, read the provisions of the NPT.
 
Yes Iran aren't. As I told you before west media some times say lie and you should be smart enough to distinguish the different between lie and truth,
So if you want to know truth, read the provisions of the NPT.

Why is your country so secretive about it then?

"Iran is a party to the NPT but was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and the status of its nuclear program remains in dispute."

"the IAEA launched an investigation that concluded in November 2003 that Iran had systematically failed to meet its obligations under its NPT safeguards agreement to report those activities to the IAEA."
 
Why is your country so secretive about it then?

"Iran is a party to the NPT but was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and the status of its nuclear program remains in dispute."

"the IAEA launched an investigation that concluded in November 2003 that Iran had systematically failed to meet its obligations under its NPT safeguards agreement to report those activities to the IAEA."

Again Zionist media propaganda!

First the rules and laws of a country is usually fair but corrupt judges and police make them unfair. We have the same condition in IAEA. Because of that I recommended you to read the provisions of the NPT not the reports which were prepared by mercenary experts who are affected by west.

second the west problem is not that Iran is planning to makes nukes. The west problem is Iran is going toward a technology which is dual-use, peaceful and military. And Iran will have nukes making capability if she want in future. But having a capability doesn't mean your are forbidden to achieve it. Every state who are a member of IAEA could have enrichment technology, even 99%. Such as Netherlander or Germany as I can remember. The same as space sciences. you can use it for unconventional missiles and also use it to send satellite to space,

Yes all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal than others.
 
Again Zionist media propaganda!

First the rules and laws of a country is usually fair but corrupt judges and police make them unfair. We have the same condition in IAEA. Because of that I recommended you to read the provisions of the NPT not the reports which were prepared by mercenary experts who are affected by west.

second the west problem is not that Iran is planning to makes nukes. The west problem is Iran is going toward a technology which is dual-use, peaceful and military. And Iran will have nukes making capability if she want in future. But having a capability doesn't mean your are forbidden to achieve it. Every state who are a member of IAEA could have enrichment technology, even 99%. Such as Netherlander or Germany as I can remember. The same as space sciences. you can use it for unconventional missiles and also use it to send satellite to space,

Yes all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal than others.

No, it's not "Zionist media propaganda". It's what the IAEA said or are they also biased?

Why was the underground nuclear plant kept secret until "the west" discovered it after monitoring it for months?
 
No, it's not "Zionist media propaganda". It's what the IAEA said or are they also biased?

Why was the underground nuclear plant kept secret until "the west" discovered it after monitoring it for months?
Underground or above ground it is not against NPT rules. And you are allowed to not announce your nuclear facilities places till six month before it operation. West found Fordow 18 month before it's operation and announced it sooner. what is the problem?
read the NPT rules.
 
Last edited:
Underground or above ground it is not against NPT rules. And you are allowed to not announce your nuclear facilities places till six month before it operation. West found Fordow 18 month before it's operation and announced it sooner. what is the problem?
read the NPT rules.

But is the IAEA biased?

I never said it was against NPT rules! Why had such great effort been taken to conceal it?

" For reasons set out in previous reports to the Board of Governors, Iran remains bound by the revised Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements General Part to which it had agreed in 2003,7 which requires that the Agency be provided with preliminary design information about a new nuclear facility as soon as the decision to construct or to authorize construction of the facility is taken. The revised Code 3.1 also requires that Iran provide the Agency with further design information as the design is developed early in the project definition, preliminary design, construction and commissioning phases.8 Even if, as stated by Iran, the decision to construct the new facility at the Fordow site was taken in the second half of 2007, Iran’s failure to notify the Agency of the new facility until September 2009 was inconsistent with its obligations under the Subsidiary Arrangements to its Safeguards Agreement."

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2009/gov2009-74.pdf
 
Why is your country so secretive about it then?

"Iran is a party to the NPT but was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and the status of its nuclear program remains in dispute."

"the IAEA launched an investigation that concluded in November 2003 that Iran had systematically failed to meet its obligations under its NPT safeguards agreement to report those activities to the IAEA."

To be fair show me a country that isn't secretive about its nuclear program, try walking in off the street to one of your own nuclear plants an see how welcoming they are.

As for the NPT it is just a treaty if you want to build a nuclear program just withdraw from it, as with most treaties they aren't a life long contract and at some point become irrelevant.
 
Yep. Ethel and Julias Rosenberg are good examples of the openness of the US Nuclear program. And I can't say that I blame any of them.

While I feel there is a very good chance of a radical group using the nuclear materials to hurt others, I feel that it is not the place of the US and UK or anyone for that matter to baby sit other countries and tell them "no nukes for you". If they build it, they build it. Pakistan and India are good examples. They have them. No nuclear exchange yet, either.

Call it what you want, I call it freeing other countries from the tyrannical jack boot of US and UK superiority. I feel the best way we can have world peace is if everyone is equally armed.

Of course I also feel that we should have obligatory cannibalism, too. You kill it, you eat it.
Maybe then we'd have peace.
(NOT!)
 
To be fair show me a country that isn't secretive about its nuclear program, try walking in off the street to one of your own nuclear plants an see how welcoming they are.

I'm not expecting to be allowed to just walk into one of our nuclear plants.

We're open about our nuclear plants, Iran isn't.
 
Again Zionist media propaganda!

First the rules and laws of a country is usually fair but corrupt judges and police make them unfair. We have the same condition in IAEA. Because of that I recommended you to read the provisions of the NPT not the reports which were prepared by mercenary experts who are affected by west.

second the west problem is not that Iran is planning to makes nukes. The west problem is Iran is going toward a technology which is dual-use, peaceful and military. And Iran will have nukes making capability if she want in future. But having a capability doesn't mean your are forbidden to achieve it. Every state who are a member of IAEA could have enrichment technology, even 99%. Such as Netherlander or Germany as I can remember. The same as space sciences. you can use it for unconventional missiles and also use it to send satellite to space,

Yes all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal than others.

every time something bad is said or done to your country you blame the "zionists" !
you should really stop blaming every shitty mistake you do on us
 
I'm not expecting to be allowed to just walk into one of our nuclear plants.

We're open about our nuclear plants, Iran isn't.

Iran is, more than others.
Iran has two Uranium enrichment centers, one of them is in Fordow and the another one is in Natanz. Fordow is under ground ( about 90 meter under ground ) but Natanz is almost above ground.

Now the question is why west insist that Iran has to close Fordow but not Natanz. Both of those are producing the same things.

The answer is they want to have destroying Iranians enrichment facilities option for themselves. They can do it for Natanz but for Fordow No.

Iran is planning to produce 20000MW electricity by nuclear power plant. The first one has been run this year ( Boshehr power plant with 1000 MW capacity ) and we must spend a lot of money for the rest nuclear power plants too.

What will you do if enemy destroys your enrichment facilities when your nuclear power plant need a lot of enriched uraniom? And how much will be the cost of losing 20000MW energy in Iran electrical network? specially for industrial consumers?

West always say they don't trust Iran because Iran may use her nuclear facilities to make nukes in future. Ok if it is how they expect Iran to trust them when they threaten Iran to attack her nuclear facilities every day?

Iran nuclear activities are completely legal and are based on NPT rules. West know it very well but they need some excuses to make a negative appearance of Iran nuclear activities to use it to prevent Iran to continue her nuclear activities. Because of this they always say lie about Iran nuclear activities in their media.
 
Last edited:
Iran is, more than others.
Iran has two Uranium enrichment centers, one of them is in Fordow and the another one is in Natanz. Fordow is under ground ( about 90 meter under ground ) but Natanz is almost above ground.

Just to be pedantic I am not sure it is possible to be "almost" above ground, either you are or you aren't.

As for the rest I really don't care whether Iran wants to build nuclear weapons or not as they are a pointless weapon in that they cant be used without your own guaranteed destruction but they will certainly keep others from attacking you.
 
Just to be pedantic I am not sure it is possible to be "almost" above ground, either you are or you aren't.

As for the rest I really don't care whether Iran wants to build nuclear weapons or not as they are a pointless weapon in that they cant be used without your own guaranteed destruction but they will certainly keep others from attacking you.
I mean Natanz is vulnerable by air strikes. it has been built 30 meters under ground but Fordow has been built 90 meter under ground protected by resistant concert and rocky reefs.
 
Back
Top