|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S. Confident of Iran Referral to Security Council
The United States said yesterday that there continue to be sufficient votes at the International Atomic Energy Agency to refer Iran’s nuclear dossier to the U.N. Security Council, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 25). “We believe it’s time. Many other members of the international community believe it’s time, as well,” said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said the Bush administration believes referral might lead Tehran to halt its sensitive nuclear work. “It changes the dynamic to have the Iranian weapons program in the spotlight in the Security Council rather than considered at a technical agency in the U.N.,” Bolton said. However, key IAEA governing board members China, India and Russia remain reluctant to refer Iran to the council for possible sanctions at the Feb. 2 emergency board meeting, according to AP (Anne Gearan, Associated Press I/Yahoo!News, Jan. 26). U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan yesterday expressed doubt about whether the agency could make a decision on referral by next week, Reuters reported. Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei is not expected to have a key report on Iran prepared until late next month, Annan said. “I am not sure that they will be ready to refer (Iran) to the Security Council if the official report of the board has not been released,” he said. Annan said he found positive comments from Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani on a Russian compromise proposal encouraging. “It is … encouraging to hear the Iranians say they are considering the Russian offer very seriously. It is a solution that the international community is ready to accept,” he said (Evelyn Leopold, Reuters, Jan. 25). U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday told the Wall Street Journal that he also supports Moscow’s offer to enrich uranium in Russia for use in Iranian nuclear energy reactors (Cooper/McKinnon, Wall Street Journal, Jan. 26). British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said yesterday that the Russian compromise proposal “may provide a solution” to the standoff, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse I/Yahoo!News, Jan. 25). Chinese officials today also announced support for the plan, AFP reported. “We think the suggestion would be a good attempt at breaking the stalemate,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan. “We are opposed to the use of sanctions or the threat of sanctions to resolve problems, as this will often complicate issues,” he said (Agence France-Presse II/Yahoo!News, Jan. 26). The State Department, however, expressed skepticism about whether Iran would ultimately accept Moscow’s plan, Agence France-Presse reported. “Over the years, (Iran has) made every effort to try to avoid being referred to the Security Council,” McCormack said. “I think this is just one more move that they are making” (Agence France-Presse III/IranMania.com, Jan. 25). Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday proposed that all countries be granted access to nuclear energy, RIA Novosti reported. Russia is prepared “to offer nuclear fuel cycle services, including [uranium] enrichment under the control of the IAEA,” Putin said. “We will propose this approach to [Group of Eight] member states during our presidency,” he said (RIA Novosti/MosNews.com, Jan. 26). Iran’s nuclear negotiator met with officials in Beijing today, AP reported. “We agreed members of the [Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty] have [the] right to peaceful nuclear technology,” Larijani said (Audra Ang, Associated Press II/Pravda, Jan. 26). China and the United States both oppose a nuclear-armed Iran, but their approach to the issue “may differ,” said Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, who is also traveling in China this week. “It would not surprise me that China would not want to take exactly the same course as the (European powers) and the U.S.,” Zoellick said. Chinese analysts have seen indications from Beijing that it would be more willing to impose sanctions on Iran than on North Korea for its nuclear work, the New York Times reported today (Joseph Kahn, New York Times, Jan. 26). Meanwhile, experts said the United States has military options in Iran even though it is presently concentrating on diplomatic efforts, AFP reported. GlobalSecurity.org has said that the Bushehr reactor and the nuclear installations at Natanz and Arak would be prime targets for a U.S. strike. The United States could also carry out a “more comprehensive set of strikes” against military targets “that might be used to counterattack against U.S. forces in Iraq,” according to GlobalSecurity.org. However, Heritage Foundation national security expert Peter Brookes warned that “flattening Iran’s nuclear infrastructure isn’t easy or risk-free.” “Iran burrowed many sites deep below the soil, making them much tougher targets (it also put some sites near populated areas to make civilian casualties a certainty if attacked),” Brookes wrote in a report. He also warned of potential Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces in the region. “The Iranian regime is already up to its neck in the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. It could certainly increase its financial/material support to the Sunni insurgents, Shia militants, al-Qaeda and the Taliban to destabilize the new Baghdad and Kabul governments,” he said. A U.S. attack could “rally the Iranian public around an otherwise unpopular government,” said Joseph Cirincione, nonproliferation director at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The strike would not, as is often said, delay the Iranian program. It would almost certainly speed it up,” he said (Jerome Bernard, Agence France-Presse IV/Yahoo!News, Jan. 25).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
