On 8/26/06, Marvin Gandall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yoshie wrote:
The best news I have heard in recent months. -- Yoshie
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/world/middleeast/26russia.html>
August 25, 2006
Russia Says Iran Sanctions Are Premature
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
[...]
===================================
Agreed. The Russian response is not only owing to the economic ties between
the two countries, but also because Russia as well as China - and probably
also the US's European allies, though they won't say so publicly -
understand that Iran's negotating position is a reasonable one under the
circumstances and should be the basis for more discussion. Iran has
indicated it is prepared (under pressure) to consider a measure of
international supervision and control over its nuclear program provided it
first receives a guarantee (inasmuch as this is possible) that it won't be
threatened or attacked by the US as well as a timetable when US sanctions
will be lifted and it will be supplied with nuclear reactors and other
assistance from the West to develop its energy resources. So far it has
received only promises. Articles like the one below from the Guardian are
useful in helping to counter US propaganda that the Iranians are only
"stalling for time" - propaganda whose purpose is to end the negotations in
favour of immediate sanctions as a possible prelude to air strikes.
Iran nuclear response leak reveals demands
Ian Traynor
Friday August 25, 2006
Guardian
The US would have to lift decades-old sanctions against Iran and probably
give assurances that it has no policy of regime change towards the Islamic
republic to settle Iran's nuclear dispute with the west, according to leaks
of the Iranian response.
Iran is demanding firmer guarantees on trade and nuclear supplies, a tighter
timetable for implementing agreements and clearer security pledges from the
west before it decides whether to freeze its uranium enrichment programme
and explore an offer of a new relationship.
<snip>
The Iranians are balking at having to pay up front, by freezing uranium
enrichment now, for a set of contracts and agreements that may - or may
not - deliver years down the line.
The Iranian response to the international offer tabled in June is said to
contain about 100 queries. The Iranians want more explicit international
recognition of and support for Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy.
American sanctions in place against Iran would prevent, for instance,
European firms supplying nuclear technology to Iran because the companies
would imperil their trade in America.
"Is the United States willing to lift some if not all of those sanctions?"
Tehran has asked, according to the leak.
There appears to be far more unanimity on the nuclear program than on
economic, social, and cultural fronts among the Iranian power elite,
and that's good. Tehran shouldn't "pay up front" -- that's the lesson
of Iraq and North Korea, and the Iranians ought to stick to that.
<blockquote>August 27, 2006
Iran Opens a Heavy-Water Reactor
By MICHAEL SLACKMAN
TEHRAN, Aug. 26 — Just days before it is supposed to suspend
enrichment of uranium or face the prospect of sanctions, Iran
continues to project an image of defiance and confidence. Its position
regarding the demand that it suspend enrichment remains a determined
"no."
On Saturday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a provocative, if
symbolic, gesture by formally inaugurating a heavy-water reactor. The
Iranians say the plant would be used for peaceful power generation.
But nuclear experts note that heavy-water facilities are more useful
for weapons because they produce lots of plutonium — the preferred
ingredient for missile warheads.
"There are no talks of nuclear weapons in Iran," President Ahmadinejad
said as he announced the opening of the plant. "And we are not a
threat for any country, even the Zionist regime that is the enemy of
the countries in the region."
But he added, "We tell the Western countries not to cause trouble for
themselves because the Iranian people are determined to take big
steps."
The action was the latest in a series of not-too-veiled threats
against the West if Iran is saddled with sanctions.
But Iran's public posture has all but guaranteed that the members of
the United Nations Security Council will have to at least address
Iran's violations of the resolution setting Aug. 31 as the deadline
for suspending enrichment.
Iran's public confidence is based on three primary factors, political
analysts here said: a strong belief that two of the council's
permanent members, Russia and China, will support Iran's call for
talks and oppose moving toward sanctions; the conclusion that the
United States is far too bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan to be
willing to engage in another conflict in the region; and the feeling
that the perceived victory of Hezbollah in its war with Israel has
strengthened Iran's political capital in the region.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/world/middleeast/27iran.html></blockquote>
If Moscow and Beijing back Tehran as the Iranians appear to believe
they will, then, we have a beginning of a new multi-polar world order.
--
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>
