Iran said Sunday it would withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if Western powers continue to pressure the country to institute a uranium enrichment moratorium, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 5).
In a letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, the Iranian parliament said the nuclear standoff must be resolved “peacefully, [or] there will be no option for the parliament but to ask the government to withdraw its signature” from a treaty protocol that allows for short-notice inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The letter stated that parliament would order a “review” of treaty Article 10, which outlines withdrawal procedures. Three months’ notice must be given prior to withdrawal, according to that clause. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad echoed the warning, according to AP. “If a signature on an international treaty causes the rights of a nation be violated, that nation will reconsider its decision and that treaty will be invalid,” Ahmadinejad told the official Islamic Republic News Agency. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton called the statements “a typical Iranian threat.” “It shows they remain desperate to conceal that their nuclear program is in fact a weapons program,” Bolton said. “I’m confident that these statements from Iran will not deter the sponsors of the draft resolution from proceeding in the Security Council.” Bolton said he believed the council would soon vote on the tough resolution submitted by France and the United Kingdom (Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press I/Philadelphia Inquirer, May 7). Bolton said Saturday the United States would not wait for support from Russia and China to seek a vote on the resolution, AP reported. Council members reported making progress during an informal meeting at the British mission to the United Nations. However, British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, said the most contentious issues had not been discussed at length. “We are still working to achieve unanimity ... but we’re prepared to go to a vote without it,” Bolton said. “We’re not prepared to extend these negotiations endlessly.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice considered “the search for a diplomatic solution of the Iranian nuclear problem” during a telephone conversation, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced Saturday. “It is too early to say which changes should be made to the draft resolution to satisfy Russia,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak. Bolton said he pressed Russian and Chinese officials last week to come up with an alternative way of making the resolution binding on Iran without invoking Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which Beijing and Moscow are concerned would lead to military action. There has been no response, he said. “There’s no dispute about the basic course of conduct that we want Iran to pursue,” Bolton said. It is unlikely that Chapter 7 references would be removed from the resolution, according to Jones Parry. Jones Parry, however, said he did not envision a resolution without Chapter 7. “We have no intention of producing a new text at this stage,” he said. The Security Council is scheduled to meet again today, followed this evening by a gathering of foreign ministers of permanent council members and Germany, according to France’s ambassador to the United Nations, Jean-Marc de La Sabliere. “We are moving in the right direction,” de La Sabliere said. “I think we have made some progress, but there is still a lot of work to do.” Bolton said he expects the ministers to consider “the longer term policy that we need to pursue to stop Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability, and I think they could have that discussion on the assumption that this resolution will be adopted next week” (Edith Lederer, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, May 7). French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said today that the council should send a “firm and unified signal to convince Iran to return to the negotiating table,” AFP reported. “The Security Council resolution should strengthen the authority of the IAEA and give obligatory force to its demand for the suspension of activities linked to enrichment, including that for research purposes. We must respond to Iran in a united, firm and rapid manner,” he said (Agence France-Presse I/The Tocqueville Connection, May 8). U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) said yesterday that the United States should look at bilateral nuclear negotiations with Tehran but that “there has to be some kind of glimmer of hope or optimism before we sit down and give them that kind of legitimacy,” AP reported. He said it would be “a tough decision, because here’s a country whose rhetoric daily continues to be the most insulting to the United States and to democracy and freedom.” However, “it’s an option that you probably have to consider,” he said (Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press III/Yahoo!News, May 8). Experts said that the next CIA director, after the resignation Friday of Porter Goss, would confront the severe shortcomings in U.S. intelligence on Tehran’s weapons programs and intentions, the New York Times reported yesterday. “How many years are they away from having a nuclear weapon?” asked Senate intelligence committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.). “We don’t know, and the people providing the answers don’t know.” Representative Jane Harman (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said a March classified briefing on Iran’s missiles and warheads “raised as many questions as it answered.” Harman said there has been no reply from national intelligence director John Negroponte to a letter sent by lawmakers March 9 posing additional questions. Some experts told the Times that official U.S. estimates indicating that Iran is unlikely to have a nuclear weapon until the next decade were accurate, though other former intelligence officials expressed doubt about that estimate. “Whenever the CIA says 5 to 10 years, that means they don’t know,” said Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA Iran specialist. He said French and Israeli experts believe Iran could be as little as one to three years away from producing a bomb. A senior U.S. intelligence official did not dispute that assessment. “It is a hard target, but we are not complacent,” the official said. “On a daily basis we’re trying to recruit new sources” (Scott Shane, New York Times, May 7). Washington is pushing Europe’s public and private sectors to isolate Iran through financial regulatory actions similar to those the U.S. Treasury Department has used to crack down on North Korea, the Financial Times reported yesterday (see GSN, March 10). “This is about de facto sanctions instead of formal sanctions, which can be used to whip up nationalist sympathies [within Iran]. It is a good idea to do things quietly,” said Patrick Clawson, deputy director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The risk of reputation damage has already caused some European banks to stop dealing with Iran, the Times reported. “The Treasury is becoming even more aggressive in enforcing the rules they have. The U.S. helped persuade [in January] two of the largest banks — UBS and Credit Suisse — to cease business in Iran,” said Clawson. “I think these financial institutions are very responsible for the most part, and they’re trying to figure out what kind of corporate citizens they want to be,” said a senior U.S. official. “They’re starting to look at whether they really want to do business with the government of Iran” (Alden/Daniel, Financial Times, May 7). Iranian government spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham said Ahmadinejad has sent a letter via the Swiss Embassy in Tehran to U.S. President George W. Bush, AP reported today. Elham said it would be the first letter in 27 years from an Iranian leader to a U.S. president. The letter proposes “new solutions for getting out of international problems and current fragile situation of the world,” he said (Nasser Karimi, Associated Press IV/Yahoo!News, May 8). Top Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani today called on Western nations to use the International Atomic Energy Agency instead of the Security Council to find a solution to the showdown, AFP reported. “We want a political solution to the nuclear question,” he said. “We believe the IAEA is the forum where a solution can be found ... and we do not want it bypassed in favor of the U.N. Security Council,” he said. Larijani also said Tehran does not intend to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (Agence France-Presse II, May 8). Iran yesterday rejected Annan’s call for direct nuclear talks with the United States, AFP reported. “It’s obvious that all these artificial crises have been created by the U.S., which is against Iran’s independence. So there is not need to have the U.S. in these talks,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi. “The U.S. is not ready for equal dialogue. They want to have others on their side through intimidation. So we think there are no conditions to enter into a respectful dialogue,” Asefi said (Agence France-Presse III/IranMania.com, May 7).
Brazil conducted an unveiling ceremony Friday of its Resende uranium enrichment plant, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 21). The center is expected to provide fuel for Brazilian nuclear power plants, and to save the nation millions of dollars now spent to enrich fuel at a European enrichment consortium. Science and Technology Minister Sergio Rezende said Brazil was committed to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Brazil drew international criticism two years ago when it barred unrestricted inspections by the International Atomic Energy Association, citing concerns over industrial espionage. Inspectors later said they were satisfied after monitoring uranium inputs and outputs, according to AP (Peter Muello, Associated Press/Washington Post, May 7).
A top Japanese lawmaker has indicated that Tokyo could support the pending India-U.S. civilian nuclear technology cooperation deal at next month’s meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group in Brazil, the Indo-Asian News Service reported yesterday (see GSN, May 5). “As far as peaceful uses of nuclear energy are concerned, Japan is not opposed to it,” said Kisaburo Tokai, director general of the international bureau of the Liberal Democratic Party. “If there is complete trust between India and the international community and India complies with provisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency on the safeguards issue, then Japan has no problems with it,” he said. Tokai added, however, that Japan would seek cooperation from India — a nuclear weapons state — in promoting atomic disarmament. “Japan’s position has always been complete disarmament. We need to ensure there is complete disarmament and complete elimination of nuclear weapons,” he said. Japan was one of the few countries that expressed reservations over the India-U.S. deal at the 2005 Nuclear Suppliers Group meeting, according to the Indo-Asian News Service. Its support for the agreement would be a diplomatic victory for Washington and New Delhi (Manish Chand, Indo-Asian News Service/Hindustan Times, May 7).
North Korean leader Kim Jong Il in a meeting last month with a senior Chinese official refused to return his country to multilateral nuclear negotiations, Kyodo News reported yesterday (see GSN, May 5). Chinese State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan made a visit to Pyongyang, where Kim reaffirmed his position that North Korea would not return to talks unless the United States ends its crackdown on Pyongyang’s suspected financial misconduct, diplomatic sources said. Tang’s trip was apparently spurred by U.S. President George W. Bush’s call on China during last month’s summit meeting in Washington to press North Korea to resume talks, the sources told Kyodo (Kyodo News/Yahoo!News, May 7).
A non-nuclear explosion scheduled for June 2 in Nevada could be postponed, a lawyer representing an Indian tribe that opposes the test said Friday (see GSN, April 21). Robert Hager, an attorney for the Western Shoshone tribe and others downwind of the Nevada Test Site, said a Justice Department lawyer told him the test would be delayed three weeks for the revision of safety data and environmental assessments. Hager noted the delay in court papers he filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, the Associated Press reported. However, spokesmen for two federal agencies denied there had been a date change. “We don’t have any postponement at this time,” said David Rigby, a spokesman for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn and federal lawmakers from Nevada and Utah received a revised environmental assessment Friday indicating “that we’re OK to go forward with the experiment, from an environmental perspective,” said Kevin Rohrer, a National Nuclear Security Administration official in Las Vegas. Nevada Environmental Protection Division spokesman Dante Pistone said Friday that his agency would review the document. “We haven’t given them a date certain when we’ll be able to sign off,” he said (Ken Ritter, Associated Press/Las Vegas Sun, May 6).
A 34-year-old Mexican man pleaded guilty Friday in California to perpetrating a hoax indicating that Boston was the target of a terrorist nuclear bomb, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported (see GSN, Feb. 9). Jose Ernesto Beltran Quinonez is expected to receive a prison sentence of about two years. Sentencing is scheduled for Aug. 15 in federal court. Beltran during a court hearing Friday acknowledged telling the California Highway Patrol in a January 2005 telephone call that he had smuggled two Iraqi men and four Chinese men into the United States. He said the men were waiting for a nuclear warhead that was to be brought through a tunnel into the country from Mexico, the Union-Tribune reported. Beltran also tossed a package of Chinese money, travel papers and photographs across the border, he conceded. The contents of the bag were meant to support Beltran’s story, authorities said in previously filed court documents. Beltran said he was using methamphetamines and seeking revenge against a one-time employer at the time of the incident. The hoax spurred a large-scale investigation and search for the alleged terrorists. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney missed the inauguration of President George W. Bush so that he could return to his state and face the fake threat (Onell Soto, San Diego Union-Tribune, May 8).
| 
Back to top
