Iran aims high ahead of push for final nuclear deal

[webfact]

Iran aims high ahead of push for final nuclear deal
NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press
ADAM SCHRECK, Associated Press

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran is staking out a tough bargaining stance for the final phase of nuclear negotiations, with both its supreme leader and its moderate president saying Thursday that any deal must include an immediate lifting of withering sanctions.

While that might be popular domestically, it could be setting the bar too high for what negotiators will be able to deliver in the final deal they hope to reach by June 30.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will have the final say on whether Iran agrees to a deal that could transform its relationship with the wider world -- and he is keeping everyone guessing.

In his first comments on last week's deal, Khamenei told a gathering of religious poets on Thursday that he "is neither for nor against" it. His reasoning was matter-of-fact: Because the agreement was only the framework of a final deal and not the accord itself, "nothing has been done yet," he said.

"What has happened so far neither guarantees a deal... nor does it guarantee the content of a deal," he said. "It doesn't even guarantee the talks will go on until the end and will lead to a deal."

Khamenei did say, however, that the punitive "sanctions should be lifted completely, on the very day of the deal" — something that has not been agreed upon.

He cautioned that the six world powers — the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany — are "not to be trusted" and may try "to limit Iran" in further talks.

And he urged Iranian negotiators not to accept any "unconventional inspections" of Iran's nuclear facilities, stressing that the inspection of military facilities would not be permitted.

At the same time, however, he said a successful deal would show that negotiations are possible on other issues beyond the nuclear program.

Khamenei has backed the negotiating team despite criticism of the process from hard-liners. And this week, the negotiators won a major endorsement from the chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who praised their work "in defending the rights of the Iranian nation."

The supreme leader's caution seems designed to manage public expectations by characterizing the deal as just one more step on the road to an agreement whose outcome is far from certain.

But it also means the negotiations have his continued support.

"If you read between the lines, the supreme leader said he is willing to approve an extension of the talks," said Haleh Esfandiari, who directs the Middle East program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

"If he was not interested in the negotiations, he would have just said 'we did what we could' and just stop," she said.

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani, a relative moderate, meanwhile aimed high during a ceremony Thursday marking Iran's nuclear technology day, which celebrates the country's atomic achievements.

"We will not sign any agreement unless all economic sanctions are totally lifted on the first day of the implementation of the deal," Rouhani said.

Iran and the six powers agreed last week on a framework deal that is meant to curb Tehran's nuclear activities while granting it quick access to bank accounts, oil markets and financial assets blocked by international sanctions.

But the deal does not include the immediate lifting of sanctions. Instead, it says sanctions put in place over Iran's nuclear program will be suspended once international monitors verify that Tehran is abiding by the limitations spelled out in the agreement.

"The process of sanctions suspension or relief will only begin after Iran has completed its major nuclear steps and the breakout time has been increased to at least a year," State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke told reporters in Washington on Thursday.

"That's consistent with what we said over the last week or so, and that was agreed upon by all the parties in Lausanne," the Swiss city where the framework agreement was reached.

The deal also specifies that if at any time Iran fails to fulfill its commitments, the sanctions would snap back into place.

Tehran-based analyst Saeed Leilaz downplayed the significance of Rouhani's remarks, which he described as "part of efforts by Iran to have the upper hand in the talks."

On the streets of Tehran, Iranians are hopeful a deal will be reached — and will change their lives for the better.

"I do not know politics and details. But I am sure (Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad) Zarif and his team will make it possible to have better relations with the West," said Maryam Hosseini, 35, who works in a beauty salon.

Mohammad Lak, a shopkeeper downtown, likened the back-and-forth of negotiations to a soccer match.

"Everybody is shouting, from spectators to players and the referee. But ultimately Iran will win the match and the West should agree to stop the sanctions," he said.

The West has long feared Iran's nuclear program could allow it to build an atomic bomb and that Tehran has used uranium enrichment — the key point of contention in the negotiations — to pursue nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge, saying its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, such as power generation and cancer treatment.

Rouhani described the framework deal reached in Switzerland as evidence that Iran has "not surrendered to a policy of pressure, sanctions and bullying."

"This is our victory," he said.
___

Schreck reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-04-10

[JDGRUEN]

OBAMA’S ‘HISTORIC’ IRAN DEAL FALLS APART, AS MULLAHS REV UP HIGH-SPEED

The very thin fiction of Obama’s “historic” agreement with Iran is unraveling with amazing speed

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/08/obamas-historic-iran-deal-falls-apart-as-mullahs-rev-up-high-speed-centrifuges/

[marquess]

If Sanctions aren't lifted immediately then what is Iran getting out of the deal, no more than getting the goal posts moved every time it suits the US Congress or some other Western 'interest' if the deal is worth anything then they should lift the sanctions, if the conditions are violated they can always put them back.

[NeilSA1]

"... the current “breakout” time for Iranian nukes (is) only 30-90 days..."

Will there be time to re-enforce sanctions again " if the conditions are violated..." ?

[Ulysses G.]

if the conditions are violated they can always put them back.

No, it would be very difficult to put them back - maybe impossible. Iran are the ones acting illegally. It is their responsibility to prove they are not violating yet another treaty.

[Naam]

if the conditions are violated they can always put them back.

No, it would be very difficult to put them back - maybe impossible. Iran are the ones acting illegally. It is their responsibility to prove they are not violating yet another treaty.

until now Iran has not violated any treaty. a violation is the demand, enhanced with sanctions, that Iran should not be allowed to enrich Uranium.

The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) treaty language is quite clear. In Article IV of the treaty it states : "Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty."

[Ulysses G.]

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

[TooPoopedToPop]

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

Maybe they saw how successful Israel has been at avoiding international treaties and obligations.

Hopefully the current negotiations will bring the Iranians back on board.

if so, that will leave Israel isolated and subject to well-deserved sanctions from the civilized countries of the world.

[Jingthing]

The "deal" is indeed fizzling to nothing.

So assuming it won't be happening ... then what?

[Steely Dan]

How's about dropping all sanctions save for an embargo on rugs and carpets?

[Naam]

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

Iran "agreed" to nothing! these are the "unilateral" notes respectively a resolution of november 2003:

On 10 November 2003, the Agency received from the Government of Iran a letter of the same

date in which Iran conveyed its acceptance of the draft text of the Additional Protocol based on the

Model Additional Protocol (INFCIRC/540 (Corr.)) Iran indicated that it was prepared to sign the

Additional Protocol, and that, pending its entry into force, Iran would act in accordance with the

provisions of that Protocol.

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2003-75.pdf

[Srikcir]

if the conditions are violated they can always put them back.

No, it would be very difficult to put them back - maybe impossible. Iran are the ones acting illegally. It is their responsibility to prove they are not violating yet another treaty.

The sanctions imposed by the UN will not be reinstated once lifted. These UN sanctions required the unanimous consent of the Permanent Security Council that includes Russia and China. I do not see either agreeing once again to impose the sanctions but rather pursuing their own separate agreements with Iran. The P-5 each have also imposed sanctions against Iran to add to the UN sanctions and can AT ANY TIME lift those sanctions. The UN sanctions have always been unbreachable in negotiations but Iran hopes the West wants a deal at any risk. Unlikely to happen.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Srikcir

[how241]

The "deal" is indeed fizzling to nothing.

So assuming it won't be happening ... then what?

+1...Keep the sanctions , they must be bothering Iran.

[Ulysses G.]

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

Iran "agreed" to nothing! these are the "unilateral" notes respectively a resolution of november 2003:

On 10 November 2003, the Agency received from the Government of Iran a letter of the same

date in which Iran conveyed its acceptance of the draft text of the Additional Protocol based on the

Model Additional Protocol (INFCIRC/540 (Corr.)) Iran indicated that it was prepared to sign the

Additional Protocol, and that, pending its entry into force, Iran would act in accordance with the

provisions of that Protocol.

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2003-75.pdf

"Conveyed its acceptance" means they AGREED.

[Naam]

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

Iran "agreed" to nothing! these are the "unilateral" notes respectively a resolution of november 2003:

On 10 November 2003, the Agency received from the Government of Iran a letter of the same

date in which Iran conveyed its acceptance of the draft text of the Additional Protocol based on the

Model Additional Protocol (INFCIRC/540 (Corr.)) Iran indicated that it was prepared to sign the

Additional Protocol, and that, pending its entry into force, Iran would act in accordance with the

provisions of that Protocol.

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2003-75.pdf

"Conveyed its acceptance" means they AGREED.

[Seastallion]

The stupid smiley does not change the fact that you are making it very obvious that you are not an educated native speaker of English. Iran AGREED to act in accordance with the provisions of the additional protocol.

Naam's apt smiley is for your non-comprehension of diplomatic language when taking words in the full context of the quote.

Casting aspersions at his English is VERY ironic.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Seastallion

[Seastallion]

I expected this from Iran. I would expect it from any country in a similar position. Good on them.

Of course they will make absolute demands....their domestic functions are no business of any other country and the sanctions were/are a political function that should never have occurred.

Lets see the same sanctions on another nuclear ME country that, unlike Iran, has NOT signed up to NPTs or conventions.

[Ulysses G.]

Naam's apt smiley is for your non-comprehension of diplomatic language when taking words in the full context of the quote.

Naam is not a native speaker of English. I'm guessing your comprehension problem lies elsewhere.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Linky]

The stupid smiley does not change the fact that you are making it very obvious that you are not an educated native speaker of English. Iran AGREED to act in accordance with the provisions of the additional protocol.

Naam's apt smiley is for your non-comprehension of diplomatic language when taking words in the full context of the quote.

Casting aspersions at his English is VERY ironic.

Conveyed they agreed is not an agreement

[Seastallion]

Naam's apt smiley is for your non-comprehension of diplomatic language when taking words in the full context of the quote.

Naam is not a native speaker of English. I'm guessing your comprehension problem lies elsewhere.

I'm guessing your confidence of immunity from suspension makes you feel you can always offend people with impunity.

[Ulysses G.]

Conveyed they agreed is not an agreement

Keep on digging that hole.

[Ulysses G.]

Naam's apt smiley is for your non-comprehension of diplomatic language when taking words in the full context of the quote.

Naam is not a native speaker of English. I'm guessing your comprehension problem lies elsewhere.

I'm guessing your confidence of immunity from suspension makes you feel you can always offend people with impunity.

"immunity from suspension".

Are you completely delusional?

[Scott]

Nobody is immune from suspension. Get back on topic and stop sniping at each other.

[Naam]

Lausanne

Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program

Below are the key parameters of a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) regarding the

Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program that were decided in Lausanne, Switzerland. These

elements form the foundation upon which the final text of the JCPOA will be written between

now and June 30, and reflect the significant progress that has been made in discussions between

the P5+1, the European Union, and Iran. Important implementation details are still subject to

negotiation, and nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. We will work to conclude the

JCPOA based on these parameters over the coming months.

[Ulysses G.]

The NPT and the additional protocol that IRAN agreed to is a different deal than Obama's current blunder, but nice work finding the word "agree" in another context, in an attempt to muddy the waters.

Iran agreed to a 2003 update with the IAEA that required it to declare any new nuclear facility from the moment building is authorized. They did NOT do so. Iran declared the 3,000-centrifuge Fordow site near Qom after years of work, after they were reported.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Publicus]

Leaders of Iran have basically silenced the hard-core opposition and the Iranian negotiators alike while the two guys leading the negotiations and a final agreement are at this point the ayatollah and the elected president.

If the negotiations and a final agreement were going down the tubes, the ayatollah and the prez would let the hard-liners do the nasty work the way the fierce right is carrying on here on their own. The present phase of the negotiations is for the two guys at the top to scream at the top of their lungs.

They try to sweep under the rug that unemployment is 10.5%, the prime interest rate is 15%, GDP growth has climbed up to minus-two percent from minus-nine. Iran has lost $160 billion off GDP since the US and EU imposed new or expanded sanctions in 2012. Iran's break even on oil is $100 a barrel and, contrary to some misimpressions, oil is a quarter of the economy, not half of it and certainly not eighty percent of it.

Tehran is desperate for some, any, sanctions to be lifted so the way can be cleared for global corporations to do business there without a tangle of financial and legal restrictions, prohibitions. What Tehran does know in this respect is that it needs a clearly understood schedule established for a further lifting of sanctions based on Iran's compliance of an Agreement.

Tehran's negotiating position presently is to demand all the sanctions lifted. They will of course settle for what they can get lifted.

The hard core right -- to include right wing media and their headlines posted to the thread, such as Breitbart -- don't believe in an agreement, don't want an agreement, are working OT to try to destroy an agreement, so they will acknowledge nothing actual or real of the bluster that's coming out of Tehran. The bluster is, well, bluster. The far right and their media are, well and of course, the Obama hating far out right.

[SheungWan]

Leaders of Iran have basically silenced the hard-core opposition and the Iranian negotiators alike while the two guys leading the negotiations and a final agreement are at this point the ayatollah and the elected president.

If the negotiations and a final agreement were going down the tubes, the ayatollah and the prez would let the hard-liners do the nasty work the way the fierce right is carrying on here on their own. The present phase of the negotiations is for the two guys at the top to scream at the top of their lungs.

They try to sweep under the rug that unemployment is 10.5%, the prime interest rate is 15%, GDP growth has climbed up to minus-two percent from minus-nine. Iran has lost $160 billion off GDP since the US and EU imposed new or expanded sanctions in 2012. Iran's break even on oil is $100 a barrel and, contrary to some misimpressions, oil is a quarter of the economy, not half of it and certainly not eighty percent of it.

Tehran is desperate for some, any, sanctions to be lifted so the way can be cleared for global corporations to do business there without a tangle of financial and legal restrictions, prohibitions. What Tehran does know in this respect is that it needs a clearly understood schedule established for a further lifting of sanctions based on Iran's compliance of an Agreement.

Tehran's negotiating position presently is to demand all the sanctions lifted. They will of course settle for what they can get lifted.

The hard core right -- to include right wing media and their headlines posted to the thread, such as Breitbart -- don't believe in an agreement, don't want an agreement, are working OT to try to destroy an agreement, so they will acknowledge nothing actual or real of the bluster that's coming out of Tehran. The bluster is, well, bluster. The far right and their media are, well and of course, the Obama hating far out right.

Some people just make up any old junk to correspond with their risible narratives. The above is a classic. Latest news? The Ayatollah denouncing external inspections and demanding all sanctions be dropped on the signing of any treaty. Egg all over above contribution but expect some furious spinning from our resident soggy left ambassadors.

[JDGRUEN]

Garry Kasparov on Obama’s Foreign Policy: “I Think We Are Now Facing Disaster Beyond Belief” (VIDEO)...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/04/garry-kasparov-on-obamas-foreign-policy-i-think-we-are-now-facing-disaster-beyond-belief-video/