Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ElBaradei: West may have to accept atomic Iran
ynetnews ^ | 02.20.06, 09:1 | na

Posted on 02/20/2006 4:26:30 AM PST by Flavius

Nuclear watchdog chief suggests compromise may lie in accepting small-scale enrichment in Iran in exchange for guarantees of no full nuclear fuel production that could enable diversions into bomb-making Reuters

The crisis over Iran's atomic agenda is deepening, but the world's nuclear watchdog chief has warned there may be no choice but to accept limited uranium enrichment by Tehran, diplomats say.

For a mistrustful West, the quid pro quo would be to give U.N. inspectors more intrusive powers via a Security Council resolution to prevent suspected atomic bomb projects.

Tehran in turn would have to pledge no industrial-scale enrichment of uranium. Iranian Threat Report: Iran ready to use missiles, terror / Yitzhak Benhorin American intelligence assessments warn Iran will launch long-range missiles, initiate global terror wave in case of attack on its nuclear facilities Full story

Countries on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have called for the Iranian controversy to be referred to the U.N. Security Council by March 6.

Iran hit back by breaking a moratorium on enrichment, the process of making fuel for atomic plants or, potentially, bombs.

The board vote has driven Iran into a corner under a banner of national pride and risks paralyzing the Council given that veto-holding Russia and China reject sanctions on Tehran mooted by Washington, IAEA veterans say.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei will make no recommendations in a broad report on three years of probes in Iran he is to give to board members on February 27, a week before they convene to weigh whether to urge a course of action by the Security Council.

But he has already suggested in diplomatic circles that a compromise may lie in accepting small-scale enrichment in Iran in exchange for guarantees of no full nuclear fuel production that could enable diversions into bomb-making, diplomats say.

IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said ElBaradei was still advocating publicly and privately that Iran take steps to earn international confidence by shelving enrichment-related work and cooperating fully with agency investigations.

"He has also told diplomats that Natanz (pilot enrichment plant) is Iran's bottom line, a sovereignty issue, a reality we may have to deal with," a diplomat close to the IAEA, who asked for anonymity due to the subject's sensitivity, said.

"Nothing of consequence will happen in the Security Council because the Russians and Chinese will block sanctions," the diplomat said of the two non-Western big powers determined to protect massive energy investments and trade with Iran.

Iran receptive to Elbaradei idea

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has welcomed ElBaradei's idea as a potential way to dispel Western suspicions Tehran seeks atomic bombs, while retaining its "irrefutable right to acquire nuclear technology" for electricity generation.

As an incentive for Iran to renounce its goal of industrial enrichment, Russia has offered to provide it purified uranium under a joint venture. This could prevent development of fissile fuel on Iranian soil that might be siphoned into warheads.

Iran agreed to negotiations on the idea in Moscow this week but its Atomic Energy Organization chief warned Iran would accept no deal excluding enrichment at home.

"We are a nuclear country. The (West) knows it has no other choice but to negotiate," Gholamreza Aghazadeh told state television, adding that Iran had invited Western countries to invest in Natanz and be present on site.

"There is no greater objective guarantee (against bomb-building) we can provide to the world," he said.

Last week Iran resumed test-feeding of uranium UF6 gas into a few centrifuges, which spin at supersonic speeds to yield fuel for nuclear plants or, if enriched to high levels, for warheads.

Analysts believe it may take Iran months to revive a cascade of 164 centrifuges corroded by disuse, and considerably longer to hurdle technological barriers to running the minimum 1,000 that would be needed to make fuel for a single crude bomb.

But U.S. and EU leaders, citing Tehran's past record of hiding nuclear work from the IAEA, object that to give Iran any leeway to ramp up UF6 production will hand it the know-how to "break out" with a nuclear arsenal whenever it so chooses.

Then it will be too late to prevent Iran endangering world peace, they say, pointing to the Islamic Republic's calls for Israel's destruction and alleged support for Muslim militants.

Naive compromise?

"ElBaradei's suggestion seems naive ... If the Iranians get the compromise he's raised, they're likely to demand more concessions, especially operating more centrifuges," said David Albright, a former IAEA inspector in Iraq and director of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.

Iran cites a right to develop civilian nuclear energy as a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Toughening the NPT may be the only viable way out of the crisis given Security Council deadlock over sanctions and Iran's promise to enrich under IAEA monitoring, some analysts say.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; iaea; iran; irannukes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: bill1952

I can not and will never get that image out of my mind.

"Peace in our time"


21 posted on 02/20/2006 4:56:45 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

No thanks to you.


22 posted on 02/20/2006 4:57:25 AM PST by ONETWOONE (onetwoone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

And where is his wife's family?Not in Iran I hope.If so,then we need a new head of the IAEA.


23 posted on 02/20/2006 4:59:46 AM PST by Farmer Dean (Every time a toilet flushes,another liberal gets his brains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Mohammad El Baradei is anti-West, anti-US piece of crap who cannot be trusted. Further, regardless of what this lowlife says, Israel will not accept a nuclear Iran under any scenario, period.


24 posted on 02/20/2006 5:01:03 AM PST by moose2004 (You Can Run But You Can't Hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
China and Russia will block any action in the Security Council - or water it down to piffle.

Our European allies will get cold feet. The Socialist component of the German coalition government has already said there should be no military action against Iran.

It will be left to the United States and/or Israel to take action, and I think it is only a 50/50 proposition that either will.

25 posted on 02/20/2006 5:01:24 AM PST by Malesherbes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

That's exactly what that band of UN third world thugs want, and it's just a drop in the bucket. They'll demand every stick and stone of US prosperity, the command and endless use of US forces, global taxes, etc.. A two year-old could see where this is heading...well, maybe not Jimmy Carter, AlGore, or Kerry.


26 posted on 02/20/2006 5:01:50 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
don't worry, be happy. The UN will protect us. There is no reason to act Unilaterally (SARC!)
27 posted on 02/20/2006 5:03:48 AM PST by Vaquero (time again for the Crusades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Malesherbes

Unfortunately I believe you are right.

I wouldnt trust the UN to monitor a case of Jock Itch.


28 posted on 02/20/2006 5:05:36 AM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bill1952
" 'PIECE' in our time" Piece of Poland, Checkoslovakia, France etc...etc.
29 posted on 02/20/2006 5:06:33 AM PST by Vaquero (time again for the Crusades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
Iran has already stated very clearly what it intends to do with its weapons once they are created. Their weapons program is, in effect, a declaration of war on the West. It's time we started targeting every government building in Tehran and Qom and take out the mullahs, now. Salvation will not come at the hands of spineless UN bureaucrats
30 posted on 02/20/2006 5:08:04 AM PST by reagan_fanatic (Darwinism is a belief in the meaninglessness of existence - R. Kirk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

One would think that ElBaradei would have learned a lesson from the North Korean promise???????


31 posted on 02/20/2006 5:09:19 AM PST by eeriegeno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Look at his name and see where his allegiance is.


32 posted on 02/20/2006 5:10:35 AM PST by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crz
I expect a diplomatic "breakthrough" timed around fall, near the mid term elections, that will say exactly that.
Probably Russia will be involved.

In Iraq, we waited until after the election to dispense with Fallujah.
It remains to be seen if we allow ourselves to be fooled again, or apply the Fallujah response.
33 posted on 02/20/2006 5:11:39 AM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Useless fools who will get us all killed.


34 posted on 02/20/2006 5:11:49 AM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
Why do we even bother listening to that Muslim rat, ElBaradei? He is as intent on killing us as the Mullahs - after he has secured a few more years of his princely salary and perks, richly subsidized by America, of course!
35 posted on 02/20/2006 5:13:15 AM PST by Gritty (Say what you will about Muslims, but they recognize a spineless punk when they see one-Jim Kouri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crz

Peace is won... the only thing negotiations ever produce is a cease-fire.


36 posted on 02/20/2006 5:13:51 AM PST by johnny7 (“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Malesherbes
Should we decide to go, we already have positioned substantial forces on both sides of Iran, and that is no accident.
37 posted on 02/20/2006 5:15:08 AM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

"Wars are won by destroying ones enemy totally and not by gaining ground"

Napoleon.


38 posted on 02/20/2006 5:16:04 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
"Nothing of consequence will happen in the Security Council because the Russians and Chinese will block sanctions," the diplomat said of the two non-Western big powers determined to protect massive energy investments and trade with Iran.

The day Iran drops nukes in support of Islamic Revolutions in Chechnya and Western China, I will, Heaven help me, laugh.

39 posted on 02/20/2006 5:17:38 AM PST by gridlock (eliminate perverse incentives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

ElBaradei can't admit what a failure he is. Or the UN.

We can admit that they are failures. How presumptuous, that he thinks that we will let it stand.


40 posted on 02/20/2006 5:22:16 AM PST by saveliberty (Spitzer (fleas be upon him))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson