News Analysis: Iran nuclear talks send positive signals

News Analysis: Iran nuclear talks send positive signals

news.xinhuanet.com

SEVERAL GOOD SIGNALS

The one-day closed-door talks were participated by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, senior diplomats from the five UN Security Council permanent member states plus Germany, as well as Iran's top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili.

It was the first time that the United States participated fully at the talks with Iran -- the U.S. representative were present at a similar session in July 2008 only as an observer.

More noticeably, U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns held informal bilateral consultations with Jalili on the sidelines of the talks.

(visit the link for the full news article)

WOW
Good news here folks No delays in talks, making quick progress,Iran seems to be co operating with open arms.



European Union foreign policy Chief Javier Solana, left, with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili as they arrive for talks over Iran's nuclear ambitions at a villa in Genthod, near Geneva, on Thursday.

Thanks

Ocker

news.xinhuanet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The Hawks will have to go to plan B.
Israel on its own.

reply to post by Cosmic4life


Hi Cosmic hope your right

Spiegel interview with Saeed Jalili, general secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council and the country's chief nuclear negotiator.

SPIEGEL: In your position paper, you call for a "reorganization of the United Nations" and "collective management for environmental matters." With all due respect, that's not what this is all about -- it's about Iran's potential nuclear bomb.

Jalili: You're setting the wrong priorities. It is not us who are the danger, but rather the other powers which have already possessed nuclear weapons for a long time. We want all nuclear powers to disarm, as they called for in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. We're calling for an "Axis of Negotiations"…

SPIEGEL: … a clear allusion to former US President George W. Bush's "Axis of Evil," which Bush considered Iran to be part of, together with North Korea and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. But, if you'll pardon our saying so, you've been talking about everything but Iran's nuclear program.

Jalili: But how do the fears in relation to the program arise? Who creates this atmosphere? The media in the US and Europe are irresponsibly playing on people's fears. Take the alleged threat of Iranian missiles, for example. For years, Washington wanted to set up a missile shield in Eastern Europe. Now President Barack Obama has determined that the threat doesn't exist, and he's abandoned the missile shield plan…

SPIEGEL: …but instead he has announced a mobile missile defense system as an alternative.

Jalili: In any case, Europeans have seen a problem vanish into thin air overnight.

SPIEGEL: President Obama has showed a willingness to make concessions, with his speech to mark the Iranian New Year and by offering to negotiate without preconditions. Do you not see the difference between Bush and Obama?

Jalili: We see a change, but no improvement in America's position.

SPIEGEL: The Iranian side, for its part, has not even made symbolic gestures. The fact is that the UN Security Council has imposed multiple sanctions on Tehran. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna has complained of a lack of cooperation from your side and it continues to have considerable doubts that your nuclear program is really only for civilian purposes. Do you mean to ignore all of that?

Jalili: Mohamed ElBaradei, the outgoing director general of the IAEA, has expressed in his latest report for the umpteenth time that there is no proof of an Iranian military nuclear program. As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we have not only responsibilities, but also rights. And that includes uranium enrichment.

SPIEGEL: Most of the international community believes Iran forfeited that right by keeping quiet about the existence of the Natanz nuclear facility and buying centrifuges on the black market.

Jalili: What do you mean by the international community? Do the 120 countries in the Non-Aligned Movement, which have defended Iran's rights, not belong to the international community?

Full interview here

I was watching this story on the news and indeed it is good news Israel will not be like this.
S+F because this is good news thank you ocker i feel happy now for a little bit anyway.

THANKYOU

You couldn't get a nation more compliant with IEAE regulations than Iran , them also agreeing to voluntary and additional concessions that they weren't legally obliged to undertake . That in the face of Israel's blatant refusal to sign any document to allow inspection of their nuclear facilities. So, it isn't really about Iran's compliance , if anything , they want to raise the requirements on Iran to such a level that they eventually do fail to comply, just like they did with Iraq. Because they want sanctions, they want to weaken Iran's economy, they want Iran in kow tow to the imf and the world bank , they want american corporations in there , they want Iran's resources. They still do, but the sanctions method and the stick approach was Bush's and Israel's policy . Maybe obama doesn't want to continue with that approach, maybe he wants to use the carrot ,but the stand off was already in existence and some kind of deal had to be made, some kind of extra concession from Iran had to occur, to please the Israeli's and the hawks .

They know , at the moment the status quo favours Russia and China , while the Americans force the Europeans out of dealing with Iran for gas to the nabucco pipeline, it forces them into a greater reliance on Russian supplied gas , and chinese companies move in to make the deals the western companies reluctantly had to withdraw from. So, from this point , if we see an easing off in the rhetoric , then they'll use this Iran concession to justify a carrot approach. Which won't please Israel, but you can't please everybody all the time.