Iran nuclear talks near deadline; differences remain
GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press
MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — Negotiations over Iran's nuclear program reached a critical phase Monday with diplomats struggling to overcome substantial differences just a day before a deadline for the outline of an agreement.

With Tuesday's target date for a framework accord just hours away, the top diplomats from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany were meeting with Iran to try to bridge remaining gaps and hammer out an understanding that would serve as the basis for a final accord to be reached by the end of June.

"We are working late into the night and obviously into tomorrow," said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who has been meeting with his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif in Lausanne since Thursday in an intense effort to reach a political understanding on terms that would curb Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.

"There is a little more light there today, but there are still some tricky issues," Kerry said. "Everyone knows the meaning of tomorrow."

Kerry and others at the table said the sides have made some progress, with Iran considering demands for further cuts to its uranium enrichment program but pushing back on how long it must limit technology it could use to make atomic arms. In addition to sticking points on research and development, differences remain on the timing and scope of sanctions removal, the officials said.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said Iran's expectations from the talks are "very ambitious" and not yet acceptable to his country or the other five negotiating: the U.S., Britain, China, France and Russia.

"We will not allow a bad deal," he said. "We will only arrive at a document that is ready to sign if it ... excludes Iran getting access to nuclear weapons. We have not yet cleared this up."

In particular, Steinmeier said the question of limits on research and development that Iran would be allowed to continue was problematic.

Other officials said the issue of the scope and timing of sanctions relief was also a major sticking point.

In a tweet, Gerard Araud, the French ambassador to the United States, said that "very substantial problems remain to be solved."

In a sign that the talks would go down to the wire on Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov left, just a day after arriving, to return to Moscow. His spokeswoman said he would will return to Lausanne on Tuesday only if there was a realistic chance for a deal.

Meanwhile, Iran's deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, told Iranian state television that the talks were not likely to reach any conclusion until "tomorrow or the day after tomorrow."

"We are not still in the position to be able to say we are close to resolving the (remaining) issues but we are hopeful and we'll continue the efforts," he said.

The Obama administration says any deal will stretch the time Iran needs to make a nuclear weapon from the present two to three months to at least a year. But critics object that it would keep Tehran's nuclear technology intact.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at the forefront of accusations that Iran helped Shiite rebels advance in Yemen, says the deal in the works sends the message that "there is a reward for Iran's aggression."

"But we do not shut our eyes, and we will continue to act against any threat," he said, an allusion to Israeli warnings that it will use force as a last resort against Tehran's nuclear program.

Officials in Lausanne said the sides were advancing on limits to aspects of Iran's program to enrich uranium, which can be used to make the core of a nuclear warhead.

Tehran has said it is willing to address concerns about its stockpiles of enriched uranium, although it has denied that will involve shipping it out of the country, as some Western officials have said. One official said on Monday that Iran might deal with the issue by diluting its stocks to a level that would not be weapons grade.

A senior State Department official said that shipping the stockpile is one of the "viable options that have been under discussion for months ... but resolution is still being discussed."

Uranium enrichment has been the chief concern in over more than a decade of international attempts to cap Iran's nuclear programs. But a Western official said the main obstacles to a deal were no longer enrichment-related but instead the type and length of restrictions on Tehran's research and development of advanced centrifuges and the pace of sanctions-lifting.

Both demanded anonymity — the State Department official in line with U.S. briefing rules and the Western official because he was not authorized to discuss the emerging deal.

Over the past weeks, Iran has moved from demanding that it be allowed to keep nearly 10,000 centrifuges enriching uranium, to agreeing to 6,000. The officials said Tehran now may be ready to accept even fewer.

Tehran says it wants to enrich only for energy, science, industry and medicine. But many countries fear Iran could use the technology to make weapons-grade uranium.
____

Associated Press writer Aron Heller in Jerusalem contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-31

Congratulations to the Germans who seem to be making sense.

Whatever derails this deal is okay with me.

"German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said Iran's expectations from the talks are "very ambitious" and not yet acceptable to his country or the other five negotiating: the U.S., Britain, China, France and Russia."

Interesting. Russia is more in bed with Syria, and not Iran. France doesn't like this deal. Germany doesn't. The Arab coalition doesn't. I wonder what the UK and China think.

Obama's minions might go home with their tails between their legs and the US Congress may not have to take action. I can hope.

It seems that everyone in the world is wiser than Obama.

It doesnt matter what other countries fear. Iran have the right to enrich only for energy, science, indistry and medicine according to agreements signed by Iran. Its Irans legal right to do so. People have trouble accepting that international law is too important to ignore. If it gets ignored now it can be ignored again and again in future situations. Then we should throw away and dont care about international altogether.

The Islam-Firsters are certainly on their high horse today.The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world has the "right" to nuclear weapons too.

International agreements, you know.

If we dont follow them every time, without excepetions then they lose their value.

Some people, not you or other poster on TVF of course can shove up those Islamic Firster accusations were the sun dont s....

It doesnt matter what other countries fear. Iran have the right to enrich only for energy, science, indistry and medicine according to agreements signed by Iran. Its Irans legal right to do so. People have trouble accepting that international law is too important to ignore. If it gets ignored now it can be ignored again and again in future situations. Then we should throw away and dont care about international altogether.

NeverSure, read my post.

Headache...

Using this kind of so-called "logic" is what might cause those accusations of being an "Islam-Firster". Iran signed a treaty NOT to enrich uranium. They have no "right" to do so anyway.

Show links to the agreements that prevent Iran from enriching zero uranium.

Offical websites. No magazines, blogs, TV or newspapers.

Headache...

The Islam-Firsters are certainly on their high horse today.The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world has the "right" to nuclear weapons too.

International agreements, you know.

If we dont follow them every time, without expections then they lose their value.

Some people, not you or other poster on TVF of course can shove up those Islamic Firster accusations were the sun dont s....

"International agreements"? Countries actually follow "international agreements"?

That aside, what international agreement allows Iran to have nukes?

Read the post, nobody is saying Iran has the right to have nuclear weapons, but they have the right for nuclear power....But you tell us. which international agreement allows Israel to have nukes?

Read the post, nobody is saying Iran has the right to have nuclear weapons, but they have the right for nuclear power....But you tell us. which international agreement allows Israel to have nukes?

Please try to keep up. This has been settled long ago. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

The Islam-Firsters are certainly on their high horse today.The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world has the "right" to nuclear weapons too.

International agreements, you know.

What malarkey. You mean like the International agreements against enriching uranium which Iran signed? If they need uranium for "peaceful purposes" they can buy it from International Enrichment Centres, like pretty much every country that does not have nuclear weapons does.

Who do Israel buy it from?

Read the post, nobody is saying Iran has the right to have nuclear weapons, but they have the right for nuclear power....But you tell us. which international agreement allows Israel to have nukes?

Please try to keep up. This has been settled long ago. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

None of us are saying that Iran is allowed to make nuclear weapons!

Migraine...

Im not going to participate in a bickering fest.

I was suspended this weekend.

Why don't you calm down then? There's nothing to fight about. It's a discussion.

Cheers

Show links to the agreements that prevent Iran from enriching zero uranium.

http://fas.org/nuke/control/npt/

http://www.aipac.org/~/media/Publications/Policy%20and%20Politics/AIPAC%20Analyses/Issue%20Memos/2012/06/Iranian%20UN%20and%20IAEA%20Violations.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304141204577508442031058860

Im not going to participate in a bickering fest.

I was suspended this weekend.

Why don't you calm down then? There's nothing to fight about. It's a discussion.

Cheers

How can you discuss when someone dont take the time to read the OP, posts and replies to those posts before jumping into the discussion. That someone doesnt even know what the discussion is about.

Theres no fight. Just makes me tired. Some people just seem to be trigger happy on the keyboard. Shoot first read later or dont read at all.

The real reason of my low tolerance at this moment are because of members baiting, trolling, provoking, insinuating that i dont tell the truth while Ive been spending a lot of time on TVF this past few weeks. I was suspended during the weekend cause I blurted out a insult. I blame it on myself but some people just seem to sit on the forum trying to push peoples buttons and feed on others peoples energy.

Cheers.

Show links to the agreements that prevent Iran from enriching zero uranium.

http://fas.org/nuke/control/npt/

http://www.aipac.org/~/media/Publications/Policy%20and%20Politics/AIPAC%20Analyses/Issue%20Memos/2012/06/Iranian%20UN%20and%20IAEA%20Violations.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304141204577508442031058860

Im not even going to comment on your links.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT.shtml

This agreement was signed by Iran and gave Iran the right to enrich uranium for friendly nuclear technology.

A deal between the P-5 and Iran is solely in the hands of Iran. The P-5 led by the US KERRY'S NEGOTIATING TEAM has enjoyed an unusual concensus with the other P-4 countries to push Iran into an uncompromising position that it would consider blasphemy to its Supreme Leader and to its sovereignty in general.

With Saudi Arabia and Egypt blocking Iranian expansionist, Iran as a weakened economic state cannot hope to gain further political influence over the Middle East if it decides to continue its nuclear weapons program in the face of even greater sanctions and possible surgical airstrikes against its nuclear industry. The best course for Iran would be to rejoin the global economic community and reward its people for their patience with economic rejuvenation.

Given 10 years of increased prosperity, the Iranian Supreme Leader may discover what the Chinese discovered: Global Strength through Economic Growth. People respond better to an improved standard of living than they do to threats of nuclear devastation. And a country's foreign policies are much easier to promote than military threat.

China is a communist country. Whatever may appear to have been discovered, it can hardly be noted that the "Chinese" realized something with consensus.

Iranian Supreme Leader is going to discover anything that is outside of the scope of his duty to Islam first, jihad second, his people third. Iran is one of the oldest, most cosmopolitan civilizations on earth; the Twelvers gain more by continuing to have an external demon to bind them in common glue. Iran now has Syria in a virtual stalemate, thus now owning a contiguous swath of land from Herat to Beirut. Iran now has demonstrable control of the Straits of Hormuz and is quickly moving to consolidate control the Bab al-Mandeb Straits of Yemen- the Red Sea. Iran is enjoying some considerable sunlight.

US Kerry's "negotiating team" can hardly be described as enjoying "unusual consensus." France, for one, is so vehemently opposed to the US positions that they are leaking their dismay. This type of high negotiating with leakage like this is not unheard of, but it reflects considerable fracturing. Its atmosphere is best described by the Iranians when they say to their people "The US is desperate for a deal" with Iran; indeed, this is the commentary of a high ranking Iranian defector.

"Saudi Arabia and Egypt" have hardly blocked Iranian expansion- but you note it! Iran may be in weakened economic state but clearly it is not in military despair. Iran has enjoyed fairly nonstop strategic gains recently. Iran still enjoys the fact that the people they are negotiating with are even more reluctant to war than before the talks as the despair of the region seeks even deeper into morass. Iran benefits greatly by fomenting sedition throughout the region. It increases the likelihood that the West will try to avoid immediate intervention and it immediately increases both land controlled and proxy armies.

Show links to the agreements that prevent Iran from enriching zero uranium.

http://fas.org/nuke/control/npt/

http://www.aipac.org/~/media/Publications/Policy%20and%20Politics/AIPAC%20Analyses/Issue%20Memos/2012/06/Iranian%20UN%20and%20IAEA%20Violations.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304141204577508442031058860

Im not even going to comment on your links.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT.shtml

This agreement was signed by Iran and gave Iran the right to enrich uranium for friendly nuclear technology.

Your agreement was violated by Iran which is what lead to them being banned from enriching uranium and sanctions being enforced by the UN. It is all there in my links.

I got the IAEA link - they were the ones who caught Iran - confused with a AIPAC link, by the way, but AIPAC tells what happened very clearly.

Is Iran's behavior governed by the NPT?

It's supposed to be. Iran signed the NPT as a non-nuclear state in 1968 and ratified it in 1970, when Iran was ruled by the Shah Reza Pahlavi, a close ally of the United States. After it was caught in what looked like violations of its NPT commitments last fall, Iran agreed to a much stricter Additional Protocol imposed by the IAEA, which called on it to suspend all uranium-enrichment and reprocessing activities, stop production of material for enrichment processes, and halt imports of enrichment-related items. Under the Additional Protocol, Iran must declare any plans to build centrifuges and must allow international inspectors expanded access to its facilities.

http://www.cfr.org/iran/iran-curtailing-nuclear-program/p7821

Read the post, nobody is saying Iran has the right to have nuclear weapons, but they have the right for nuclear power....But you tell us. which international agreement allows Israel to have nukes?

Please try to keep up. This has been settled long ago. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

Oh dear me, for the thousandth time would you please learn to read before you post.

Seems some of you see something about Iran and the eyes roll back and you froth at the mouth to try and be the first to be completely off topic.

If answering your question correctly is "off topic" That would be YOUR fault. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

Language and rhetoric can parse angels on the head of a pin, but it cannot change common sense, and consistent observation:

Iran has demonstrated no inkling that it has any real desire to be a productive partner in the US led international order (I would not want to be either, but different story).

Iran has not demonstrated in any manner that it is a peaceful state.

Iran has repeatedly, if not circumstantially, demonstrated it desires nuclear weapons. If in doubt, all one has to do is consider the mobilization and use of their [un]conventional forces; after all, a nuclear deterrent for any country, fits in to a continuum of state military power and rarely exists as tactical end in itself. Iran wants a nuclear weapon to enhance and defend the [un]conventional expansion it is acting out every day.

During the era of these talks Iran has expanded militarily to control 4 Arab capitals and contiguous swaths of extra territorial lands and potentially two strategic waterways.

Show links to the agreements that prevent Iran from enriching zero uranium.

http://fas.org/nuke/control/npt/

http://www.aipac.org/~/media/Publications/Policy%20and%20Politics/AIPAC%20Analyses/Issue%20Memos/2012/06/Iranian%20UN%20and%20IAEA%20Violations.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304141204577508442031058860

Im not even going to comment on your links.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT.shtml

This agreement was signed by Iran and gave Iran the right to enrich uranium for friendly nuclear technology.

Your agreement was violated by Iran which is what lead to them being banned from enriching uranium and sanctions being enforced by the UN. It is all there in my links.

I got the IAEA link - they were the ones who caught Iran - confused with a AIPAC link, by the way, but AIPAC tells what happened very clearly.

Is Iran's behavior governed by the NPT?

It's supposed to be. Iran signed the NPT as a non-nuclear state in 1968 and ratified it in 1970, when Iran was ruled by the Shah Reza Pahlavi, a close ally of the United States. After it was caught in what looked like violations of its NPT commitments last fall, Iran agreed to a much stricter Additional Protocol imposed by the IAEA, which called on it to suspend all uranium-enrichment and reprocessing activities, stop production of material for enrichment processes, and halt imports of enrichment-related items. Under the Additional Protocol, Iran must declare any plans to build centrifuges and must allow international inspectors expanded access to its facilities.

http://www.cfr.org/iran/iran-curtailing-nuclear-program/p7821

There is no country except Israel that has any problem with Iran enriching "1%" (1% as in an example of very small quantities) of uranium as of now.

Any other countries opposed to this? Dont bring up your beloved congress, please.

Im talking countries, not your very unimportant congress in the big scheme of things. Your congress is not the center of the universe in this matter.

If answering your question correctly is "off topic" That would be YOUR fault. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

Iran still has the right to produce an limited amount of uranium needed for friendly nuclear technology if Iran lets the nuclear program become fully transparent and lets it be under the supervision of IAEA. Exactly as all countries that signed the treaty.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT.shtml

C'mon Bibi......roast em.

C'mon Bibi......roast em.

I assume you're joking.

Israel has no desire to "roast" anyone.

On the other hand, it's always hard to say no to nice brisket.

If answering your question correctly is "off topic" That would be YOUR fault. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

You didn't answer the question, you merely stated the obvious, ie that Israel defies this and every other international agreement if it doesn't suit their needs. The most disturbing thing is that you actually defend this behaviour, while at the same time "scream murder" about Iran not following agreements (while actually they do). The Israel propaganda about the intention of Iran to get nuclear weapons is the same ingnorant propaganda of the WMD fairytale which Sadam supposedly had. Sadly it seems Israel, through the media, is fooling a large part of the world yet again.....

Its too bad that solving problems and moving forward is not your intention. When reading your posts, I can't help thinking that you are only out for blood (as a good Israeli would), and now that your buddy Natanyahu has sided with Saudi (and consequently ISIS and Al Qaida), war might be what you'll get. Afterall, if an agreement is reached with Iran, Israel might be stupid enough to go to war....and we all know that that will be the end of Israel as we know it....

The toxic Israel demonization rears its ugly head, yet again.

Of course, Iran would like nuclear weapons. Any five year old knows that. DUH!

Well today is the deadline for the framework agreement. There won't be one but Kerry and Obama will lie and say that there is one. They will agree that further gabfests are necessary.

Or success in March & failure in June.

If answering your question correctly is "off topic" That would be YOUR fault. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

Iran still has the right to produce an limited amount of uranium needed for friendly nuclear technology if Iran lets the nuclear program become fully transparent and lets it be under the supervision of IAEA.

That is a mighty big IF. They have done neither one for decades and therefore they are forbidden to enrich uranium at all. That is what all those UN Sanctions are about and multiple countries back them - not just the US Congress.

If answering your question correctly is "off topic" That would be YOUR fault. Iran signed the NPT and therefore is forbidden from producing nuclear weapons. Israel already had them, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so.

You didn't answer the question, you merely stated the obvious, ie that Israel defies this and every other international agreement if it doesn't suit their needs.

I did answer your question. Israel already had nuclear weapons, did not sign the NPT and is under no obligation to do so. FYI, very few countries sign agreements that do not benefit them somehow.