Iran says it won't halt atomic work

[motivez]

My Way News

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran said on Sunday it would not suspend uranium enrichment, ruling out the main demand in a nuclear package backed by six world powers that aims to allay Western fears that Tehran is seeking to build atomic bombs.

Iran says it will formally respond by Tuesday to proposals made by the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany. The six have offered incentives for Iran to suspend enrichment, a process that has both military and civilian uses.

Tehran, which insists its nuclear aims are purely civilian, shows no sign of accepting the package.

"We are not going to suspend (enrichment). The issue was that everything should come out of negotiations, but suspension of uranium enrichment is not on our agenda," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a weekly news conference.

Western diplomats say Iran must halt the atomic work before talks can start. Any response that falls short of that is likely to be considered a rejection of the offer in Western capitals.

Iran's case has already been sent back to the U.N. Security Council because Tehran did not reply quickly enough and, last month, the council passed a resolution demanding Iran suspend enrichment by August 31 or face possible sanctions.

The package offers Iran state-of-the-art nuclear technology, the easing of some trade restrictions and other incentives such as support for a regional security dialogue.

The United States has said it will join multilateral talks with Iran if it accepts, a move seen as a policy shift in Washington which cut ties with Tehran after the 1979 Islamic revolution. But Washington has also warned of swift U.N. action if Iran refuses.

"COMPLICATIONS"

Western diplomats who follow the work of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) say Iran has been "complicating" the U.N. watchdog's work in monitoring nuclear sites in the runup to the August 31 deadline, denying entry to a senior inspector and cutting back on multiple-entry visas for IAEA staff.

"It's not outright obstruction, but Iran is creating complications within its rights (not created before). They have reduced cooperation to a minimum under treaty obligations," one Western diplomat in Europe said.

Asefi said one inspector had been "replaced on Iran's request" although he said Iran could continue to give routine access. But he suggested this policy could change.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has threatened to quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if Iran feels undue pressure.

Analysts say Iran's defiance may be based on a calculation that divisions at the United Nations mean it will only face modest measures such as travel restrictions on officials or asset freezes. The world's fourth largest oil exporter, brimming with petrodollars, feels it can cope with such steps.

Permanent Security Council members United States, Britain and France back sanctions, but China and Russia, the two other members with veto powers, oppose such steps.

Some analysts say Iran may also feel its hand is stronger after Lebanon's Iranian-backed Hizbollah guerrillas scored what they and Tehran called a victory against U.S. ally Israel.

The United States says it wants a diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff but has refused to rule out military action.

Iran has not said precisely what day it will give its answer or who will deliver the reply.

Chief atomic negotiator Ali Larijani is Iran's interlocutor with the Europeans who drew up the package, while Ahmadinejad has been a vociferous critic of the demand to stop enrichment.

Under Iran's system of clerical rule, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has the final say in matters of state, not the president. He has said Iran will not bow to pressure.

Well, this wasn't unexpected. Iran is in a pretty good situation right now with their influence growing and their economy unlikely to be hampered thanks to Russia and China wanting their oil more than they care about sanctions

I don't see them ever stepping down from enrichment, especially if they feel that they are guarenteed that right under the NPT. They could just as easily withdraw from the treaty and not have to worry about it.. and then were would we be?

So, what's the next move? Another incentive package? War?

I've pointed out in threads before that no country has ever been forced to give up their nuclear ambitions, however, over a dozen have been talked into it..

I think continued diplomacy is the way to go, but do you think we can accept as a nation, or that Israel can accept that we wont get all that we want from Iran? That we'll have to make concessions to avoid war?

[Thorgrim]

Iran is in a win-win situation

Without this nuke tech dispute, their regime would be on the slow track to falling apart because the young persians

Now, if they defy the US, they rally their people around nationalism, if the US attacks, they rally their people around a common enemy

I personally think its better for the mullahs if the US attacks, they benefit from it politically just like Hezbollah did, and in the end game they've shown (in the 80s) they can bury hundreds of thousands of their dead easily...however they need to win politically

[Donkey®]

I don't know about the rest of you, but if I were the ruler of Iran, I would ENJOY the threats of sanctions. Eventually, if they DID decide to sanction, I would cut all oil production and shipments out of my country to anyone going against us.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Iran is in a win-win situation

Without this nuke tech dispute, their regime would be on the slow track to falling apart because the young persians

Now, if they defy the US, they rally their people around nationalism, if the US attacks, they rally their people around a common enemy

I personally think its better for the mullahs if the US attacks, they benefit from it politically just like Hezbollah did, and in the end game they've shown (in the 80s) they can bury hundreds of thousands of their dead easily...however they need to win politically

What's the correct course of action for the US and world to take? Who cares whats best for the Iran regime. Its obvious the government is nuts.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I don't know about the rest of you, but if I were the ruler of Iran, I would ENJOY the threats of sanctions. Eventually, if they DID decide to sanction, I would cut all oil production and shipments out of my country to anyone going against us.

The US has sanctioned them for decades and they haven't cut oil production. Why? because if oil production falls their economy takes a significant nose dive. They have to sell oil period.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

What's the correct course of action for the US and world to take? Who cares whats best for the Iran regime. Its obvious the government is nuts.

Do you want a cedar revolution like in Lebanon (which had Hezbollah in powerful positions) or a popularly elected Hamas government in the ruins of what used to be cities

There are reformers in Iran who want to be more like the US, you can either cultivate them...or attack Iran and have them drafted and sent in human waves to try and over-run US bases in Iraq

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Do you want a cedar revolution like in Lebanon (which had Hezbollah in powerful positions) or a popularly elected Hamas government in the ruins of what used to be cities

There are reformers in Iran who want to be more like the US, you can either cultivate them...or attack Iran and have them drafted and sent in human waves to try and over-run US bases in Iraq

I'm well aware of the dynamics including those in Iran that want to be more like the US. But that fails to answer teh question of what is the correct course of action.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I'm well aware of the dynamics including those in Iran that want to be more like the US. But that fails to answer teh question of what is the correct course of action.

Direct talks with Iran, tell them we'll treat them like Egypt...ie prop up an anti-democratic government as long as they're friendly to us

Hagel is for it, I agree with him

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

The US has sanctioned them for decades and they haven't cut oil production. Why? because if oil production falls their economy takes a significant nose dive. They have to sell oil period.

I didn't say they had to cut their production for ALL the people they give their oil to. Just the ungrateful ones. China would NEVER vote for sanctions and could easily up their intake of oil to make up for the "western" countries that are bitching about Iran.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I didn't say they had to cut their production for ALL the people they give their oil to. Just the ungrateful ones. China would NEVER vote for sanctions and could easily up their intake of oil to make up for the "western" countries that are bitching about Iran.

I don't think that's true. They need the west to continue buying thier oil. That is how those who are in power retain power. If not for oil , the arab world would look alot like Africa.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Direct talks with Iran, tell them we'll treat them like Egypt...ie prop up an anti-democratic government as long as they're friendly to us

Hagel is for it, I agree with him

The Iranian Government is somewhat democratic, in that the President is voted for by the entire population.

I think ultimately they don't have any reason to be friendly to us when we're (rightly or wrongly) issuing the type of rhetoric we are about them, and our goals run counter productive to what they want to accomplish (becoming a real reigional power)

I think they're well aware that the threat of withholding oil sales to certain countries who might vote against them (ie: china or russia) is a very powerful one and can ensure for them that nothing which happens in the UN will be 'too bad' to endure if it actually comes to sanctions

I think ultimately what's going to happen is they'll withdraw from the NPT, they have no reason to stay when countries like India get nuclear technology from us without being a signatory.

I doubt there will be a war initiated by us, but Israel might bomb their facilities.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I don't think that's true. They need the west to continue buying thier oil. That is how those who are in power retain power. If not for oil , the arab world would look alot like Africa.

They really don't. Only 29% of Iran's oil exports are to Europe. None to the US. I am sure they could send 15% more to China and eat the rest or trade with other countries that want the oil.

[DosEquis]

You know what really pisses me off... is that oil went up $1 because of this. Someone tell me EXACTLY how we have less oil supply today, or how demand suddenly increased, because of a threat they are making.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

They really don't. Only 29% of Iran's oil exports are to Europe. None to the US. I am sure they could send 15% more to China and eat the rest or trade with other countries that want the oil.

Yeah, China is hungry.

[beez]

Don't play India out like Poland and forget about their growing economy and need for oil.