This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-talks.html

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 8 Version 9
Iran and Six Nations Agree to Continue Nuclear Talks As Negotiators Ease Demands on Iran, More Nuclear Talks Are Set
(about 11 hours later)
ALMATY, Kazakhstan — Two days of talks between six world powers and Iran over its nuclear program ended on Wednesday with specific agreement for further meetings in March and April over a proposal that would sharply constrain Iran’s stockpile of the most dangerous enriched uranium in return for a modest lifting of some sanctions. ALMATY, Kazakhstan — Two days of talks between six world powers and Iran over its nuclear program ended on Wednesday with specific agreement for further meetings in March and April over a proposal that would sharply constrain Iran’s stockpile of the most dangerous enriched uranium, in return for a modest lifting of some sanctions.
But the six powers dropped their demand that Iran shut down its enrichment plant at Fordo, built deep into a mountain, instead insisting that Iran suspend enrichment work there and agree to unspecified conditions that would make it hard to quickly resume enrichment there. The six also agreed, in another apparent softening, that Iran could produce and keep a small amount of 20 percent enriched uranium for use in a reactor to produce medical isotopes. But the six powers dropped their demand that Iran shut down its enrichment plant at Fordo, built deep underneath a mountain, instead insisting that Iran suspend enrichment work there and agree to take a series of steps that would make it hard to resume producing nuclear fuel quickly. The six also agreed, in another apparent softening, that Iran could keep a small amount of 20 percent enriched uranium — which can be converted to bomb grade with modest additional processing — for use in a reactor to produce medical isotopes.
The two sides agreed that technical experts would meet to discuss the proposal on March 18 and 19 in Istanbul, while the negotiations at this higher political level will resume, again in Almaty, on April 5 and 6. It was unclear whether any of these new positions would pave the way for any kind of agreement. Iran’s negotiators must now take the new proposal back to Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, at a time of intense maneuvering and infighting in Iran. The two sides agreed that technical experts would meet to discuss the proposal on March 18 and 19 in Istanbul, while the negotiations at this higher political level would resume, again in Almaty, on April 5 and 6.
The chief Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili, called this meeting positive, asserting that the six powers, representing the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany, had offered a revised proposal that was “more realistic” and “closer to the Iranian position.” Mr. Jalili, whose news conference was notably short of the aggressive rhetoric he has used in the past, called the meeting “a turning point.” The chief Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili, called this week’s meeting positive, asserting at a news conference that the six powers, representing the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany, had offered a revised proposal that was “more realistic” and “closer to the Iranian position.”
Mr. Jalili, whose comments were notably short of the aggressive wording he has used in the past, called the meeting “a turning point.”
But senior Western diplomats were less enthusiastic, saying that Iran had not in fact responded to the proposal of the six and that real bargaining had not yet begun. A senior American official described the meeting as “useful” — refusing to call it positive — and emphasized that it was “concrete results” that counted, not atmospherics.But senior Western diplomats were less enthusiastic, saying that Iran had not in fact responded to the proposal of the six and that real bargaining had not yet begun. A senior American official described the meeting as “useful” — refusing to call it positive — and emphasized that it was “concrete results” that counted, not atmospherics.
A senior European diplomat was even more skeptical, saying that the technical meeting was essentially to explain the proposal to the Iranians once again, and that Iran may very well come back in April with an unacceptable counterproposal that swallows the “carrots” of the six and demands more. A senior European diplomat was even more skeptical, saying that the technical meeting was essentially to explain the proposal to the Iranians once again, and that Iran might very well come back in April with an unacceptable counterproposal that swallows the “carrots” of the six and demands more.
The senior American official said that as a first step toward confidence-building and reducing the urgency around the issue, the six were demanding that Iran “significantly restrict” its accumulation of uranium enriched to 20 percent — which can quickly be turned into bomb-grade material — and limit its production to what is needed for fuel for the small Tehran Research Reactor to make medical isotopes. The senior American official said that as a first step toward building confidence and reducing the urgency around the issue, the six were demanding that Iran “significantly restrict” its accumulation of medium-enriched uranium, which could be turned to bomb-grade material in a matter of weeks or months. Iran has a growing stockpile of that fuel, but it has diverted a considerable amount to the Tehran research reactor, which the United States provided to Iran during the shah’s rule to make medical isotopes.
Iran must also “suspend enrichment at Fordo,” a plant deep inside a mountain and very difficult to attack from the air, and accept conditions that “constrain the ability to quickly resume enrichment there,” the official said. Third, Iran must allow more regular and thorough access to monitoring from the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that it keeps its promises and cannot suddenly “break out” quickly to create a nuclear warhead, so that there is “early warning of any attempt to rapidly or secretly abandon agreed limits and produce weapons-grade uranium,” the official said. Iran must also suspend enrichment at Fordo and accept conditions that “constrain the ability to quickly resume enrichment there,” the official said, without being specific. In Washington, a senior administration official said those steps included dismantling part of the system that feeds low-enriched fuel into the plant’s centrifuges; it would take weeks or months to rebuild that system, giving the Western allies time to respond.
In return, the official said, the six would suspend some sanctions, but not those involving oil or financial transactions, which are the harshest, and would promise not to vote new sanctions through the United Nations Security Council or the European Union. Third, Iran must allow more regular and thorough access to monitoring from the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that it keeps its promises and cannot suddenly “break out” quickly to create a nuclear warhead, the official said.
“What matters are concrete results on the most urgent issues, on 20 percent enrichment and on Fordo,” the official said, which are “the most destabilizing and urgent elements of Iran’s nuclear program.” In return, the official said, the six would suspend some sanctions. But the relief would not involve oil or financial transactions, which have done the most damage to Iran’s main source of revenue. The group of nations said that if Iran took the deal, they would also promise not to vote for new sanctions through the Security Council or the European Union.
The proposal is a slightly softer modification of the proposal the six made eight months ago in Moscow. There it was described as “stop, shut, ship” — demanding that Iran stop enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity, shut the Fordo facility and ship abroad its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium to be turned into nuclear fuel. “What matters are concrete results on the most urgent issues, on 20 percent enrichment and on Fordo,” the official said, “the most destabilizing and urgent elements of Iran’s nuclear program.”
The new offer demands the suspension of enrichment to 20 percent, the suspension of work at Fordo with unspecified conditions to make it difficult to renew enrichment there, and the ability of Iran to produce and keep a small amount of 20 percent enriched uranium for medical isotopes. The decision to drop the demand that Iran fully dismantle the plant was unexpected. But one official familiar with the strategy said the United States and its allies were “trying to come up with something face-saving for the Iranians” that would allow them to claim that they had resisted demands to shutter the plant even though production had ended.
The official denied that there was any “softening of our position,” citing further constraints on Iran, but conceded that Iran was being offered some more sanctions relief in response to its concerns and in an effort “to gain traction for these talks.” One American official denied that there was any “softening of our position,” citing further constraints on Iran, but conceded that Iran was being offered some more sanctions relief in response to its concerns and in an effort “to gain traction for these talks.”
If the American position was an effort to show the toughness of the offer, Mr. Jalili was at pains to sound both conciliatory and triumphant.If the American position was an effort to show the toughness of the offer, Mr. Jalili was at pains to sound both conciliatory and triumphant.
With presidential elections scheduled for June in Iran and visible political infighting there, Mr. Jalili’s news conference was a study in politics, Iranian style, with Mr. Jalili insisting that the six had moved toward Iran because of the “failure” of economic sanctions.With presidential elections scheduled for June in Iran and visible political infighting there, Mr. Jalili’s news conference was a study in politics, Iranian style, with Mr. Jalili insisting that the six had moved toward Iran because of the “failure” of economic sanctions.
Mr. Jalili insisted that Iran would never close Fordo, which was under I.A.E.A. safeguards, and was only producing 20 percent enriched uranium “to meet our needs” for the isotopes. “It is important to us to have the 20 percent,” he said.
Western experts say that Iran has far more of that uranium than it needs, and has refused in the past to export its enriched uranium in return for fuel rods. But Mr. Jalili indicated that Iran was prepared to discuss limits. “This can be discussed in the negotiations,” he said, “in view of confidence building.”
Noticeably missing at his news conference were the posters of Iranian atomic scientists who have been assassinated in Tehran, and he only spoke of Syria and Israel in response to questions.
The willingness of Iran to agree so quickly to a new set of meetings and venues was also a marked change, indicating some sense of urgency and also of a political need to show Iranians that progress was being made to reduce the pain of sanctions. The sanctions have cut 8 percent from Iran’s gross domestic product, produced high inflation and chopped the value of the Iranian currency, the rial, by half.The willingness of Iran to agree so quickly to a new set of meetings and venues was also a marked change, indicating some sense of urgency and also of a political need to show Iranians that progress was being made to reduce the pain of sanctions. The sanctions have cut 8 percent from Iran’s gross domestic product, produced high inflation and chopped the value of the Iranian currency, the rial, by half.
But Western officials said the tough sanctions regime was working to put pressure on the government to negotiate. “There is a cost to Iran and its people every day they don’t solve this problem,” one senior Western official said. “And that cost will go up.” But Western officials said the tough sanctions put pressure on Iran’s government to negotiate. “There is a cost to Iran and its people every day they don’t solve this problem,” one senior Western official said. “And that cost will go up.”
The European Union foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, who led the talks on behalf of the six, was also cautious. “I hope the Iranian side is looking positively on the proposal we put forward,” she said. “We have to see what happens next.” If Mr. Jalili’s comments seemed positive, Ms. Ashton said: “I’m pleased, but I believe in looking at what the results are.”

David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washington.

The plenary meeting Wednesday morning lasted only about 90 minutes, in which Mr. Jalili made a presentation, trying to link the proposal of the six to a previous Iranian one. But there was quick agreement on moving forward.
Diplomats had said that this week’s meeting would be a low-level success if it produced a specific agreement to meet again soon so that there would be an element of momentum to the negotiations. The talks have been intermittent since beginning in October 2009, when the United States had its only bilateral meeting with Iran.
The ultimate goal of talks with Iran is to get the country to comply with Security Council resolutions demanding that it stop enrichment altogether until it can satisfy the International Atomic Energy Agency that it has no weapons program and no hidden enrichment sites. In return, all sanctions would be lifted.
Mr. Jalili and negotiators from the six powers agreed that there was a long way to go. The six, said Mr. Jalili, “tried to bring proximity in some points between the viewpoints of Iran and their own, which we believe is a positive step, despite the fact that we have a long way to go to reach the optimum point.”