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.
Iran Mentions New Plan at Nuclear Talks as Stalemate Continues
Korea Events Hanging Over Nuclear Talks With Iran
(about 9 hours later)
ALMATY, Kazakhstan — As negotiations resumed here on Friday between Iran and the six world powers demanding that it curb its nuclear program, Iran said it had put forward a new “comprehensive proposal” that it hoped would “establish a new bedrock for cooperation.”
ALMATY, Kazakhstan — North Korea is more than 2,500 miles from the resumed nuclear negotiations that got under way here Friday between Iran and the six big powers, but North Korea’s nuclear-arms bombast and the cautious foreign response are hanging over the negotiations in unsettling ways.
The other negotiators, however, described Iran’s statement as a bewildering surprise and said they had not received any concrete new proposal. An afternoon negotiating session ended with little sign of additional clarity, and though officials said the talks would continue on Saturday, they seemed to have hit a roadblock.
For the first time since Iran and the six powers restarted their dialogue a year ago after a long lapse, North Korea, which had held similar talks in the 1990s that unraveled in betrayal and mistrust, is simultaneously demonstrating an outcome that Iran may find enviable, nonproliferation experts said. North Korea’s arsenal of nuclear weapons, however small, has nonetheless emboldened it to challenge the United States and other nuclear-armed powers, which have responded with caution and — from North Korea’s vantage point — some degree of respect.
A Western official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the Iranian remarks essentially echoed a position articulated at talks in Moscow last June. “We are somewhat puzzled by the Iranians’ characterization of what they presented at this morning’s plenary,” the official said. “There were some interesting but not fully explained general comments on our ideas.”
“I do feel as if Iran has inevitably been drawing lessons from how the world is dealing with North Korea,” said Valerie Lincy, executive director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, a Washington-based research and advocacy group. “I would imagine the lessons they’re drawing are not the ones the Western powers would like: That you can weather sanctions, and renege on previous agreements, and ultimately if you stand fast, you’ll get what you’re looking for.”
The announcement of a new proposal, by Ali Baqeri, deputy head of the Iranian delegation, came after the opening session of talks as Iranian officials took a break for lunch and prayers. Mr. Baqeri did not offer any details. In the past, expansive language about a “comprehensive” solution has involved additional complicated issues, like the civil war in Syria, that seemed to dim rather than improve the prospects for an agreement.
Cliff Kupchan, an Iran specialist at the International Crisis Group, a Washington-based consulting firm, said that while Iran does not want to be viewed as an “irrational cult state” like North Korea, it also sees the conspicuous absence of talk about regime change by North Korea’s adversaries in the current episode of heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula.
With American and European officials demanding that Iran show willingness to address international concerns, Mr. Baqeri suggested that the Iranian delegation had gone even further. “These steps are referred to as confidence-building measures, but they are part of a comprehensive set of measures,” he said at a news conference at a central Almaty hotel. “This is not distinct from that comprehensive step.”
“These guys are smart, and they’re shrewd,” Mr. Kupchan said of Iran’s leaders. “They’re well aware of what North Korea has gotten away with. They see that North Korea elicits fear and significant geopolitical ballast because it has nuclear weapons.”
But at a second briefing at the end of the day’s talks, Mr. Baqeri acknowledged that the proposal put on the table had roughly the same contours as the plan offered in Moscow. “The Islamic republic of Iran this morning proposed a practical method to implement the Moscow plan in a smaller scale,” he said.
Expectations for this latest round of negotiations have been modest at best, with little sign that the Iranian government was ready to accept an offer made by the six powers at the last round of talks in February: restrictions on its supply of dangerous enriched uranium in exchange for an initial modest easing of international sanctions, to be followed by further trust-building measures later.
Expectations for this latest round of negotiations have been modest at best, with little sign that the Iranian government was ready to accept an offer made by the six powers at the last round of talks in February: restrictions on its supply of dangerous enriched uranium in exchange for a modest easing of international sanctions.
The Iranian delegation said as talks resumed that it had put forward a “comprehensive proposal” that it hoped would “establish a new bedrock for cooperation.” But negotiators representing the group of six powers said they had not seen anything new, suggesting they may have already hit a roadblock.
“We had a long and substantial discussion on the issues, but we remain a long way apart on the substance,” a Western diplomat said Friday. “We are now evaluating the situation and will meet again tomorrow.”
The talks were to continue on Saturday between Saeed Jalili, the lead Iranian negotiator, and Catherine Ashton, the European Union foreign policy chief who represents the so-called P5-plus-1, which are the five permanent members of the Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — plus Germany.
Although American and European officials arrived expressing guarded hope of a breakthrough, the lead Iranian negotiator began his visit with a speech to university students in which he insisted on his country’s unfettered right to develop a civilian nuclear program and accused the larger powers of hypocrisy because they have nuclear arms.
Michael Mann, a spokeswoman for Ms. Ashton, told reporters as the talks opened that “the confident-building measure has to come from Iran.”
In the speech, at Al-Farabi Kazakh International University on Thursday, the Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili, said that it was possible to “unlock” the stalemate in the talks if the international negotiators — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States — would simply “accept the inalienable rights” of Iran, specifically the right to enrich uranium.
But in what could be a sign that Iran’s position has basically remained unchanged, Mr. Jalili began his visit to Almaty on Thursday with a speech to university students in which he insisted on his country’s unfettered right to develop a civilian nuclear program, and accused the larger powers of hypocrisy because they have nuclear arms.
In complaining of hypocrisy, Mr. Jalili singled out the United States for criticism and called the new round of talks here “a test for American behavior.”
In the speech, Mr. Jalili suggested that his counterparts must simply “accept the inalienable rights” of Iran, specifically the right to enrich uranium, as part of any solution.
But American and European officials have insisted that the test is for Iran, which must respond to an offer presented here in Almaty at the last talks in February and explained in greater detail at a meeting with technical experts in Istanbul last month.
Throughout the dispute, the Iranians have asserted that their uranium enrichment activities are for civilian purposes and that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, issued a religious decree banning nuclear weapons in the country. Iran has also repeatedly argued that as a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, its activities are by definition peaceful and legal.
“How far we get,” a senior Obama administration official said before leaving Washington for Almaty, “depends on what the Iranians come back with in terms of a response on the substance to our proposal.”
At the same time the Iranians have refused to comply with Security Council demands that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment until unresolved questions about its nuclear intentions are answered, including indications that it has done work on triggers for atomic bombs.
That proposal would impose constraints on Iran’s supply of enriched uranium and require Iran to shut its enrichment plant at Fordo, which is built deep underneath a mountain. Iran would also have to agree to a series of steps making it more difficult to resume producing nuclear fuel quickly. The proposal would allow Iran to keep a small amount of uranium enriched to 20 percent purity for use in a reactor to produce medical isotopes. Such uranium can be converted to weapons grade with relatively modest additional processing.
Ms. Lincy said she believed Iran may be primarily interested in the negotiations in order to achieve some relief to the punishing regimen of sanctions imposed by the United States and European Union, which have been causing increased economic pain in the country — but to do so without sacrificing its ability to make nuclear fuel.
While Iran says its nuclear program is exclusively for civilian purposes, Western officials suspect that Tehran is seeking the technology for nuclear weapons.
Again, she drew a parallel to North Korea’s negotiations more than two decades ago, when it negotiated a step-by-step deal for food and fuel assistance from the United States in exchange for promises to not to make nuclear weapons. That deal collapsed in 2002, when the Americans accused North Korea of secretly building a facility to enrich uranium.
As the talks opened Friday, Michael Mann, the spokesman for Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief and chairwoman of the group of six powers, said: “What we are hoping is that the Iranian side will come back to us today with a clear and concrete response.” Mr. Mann, speaking at a news conference, declined to speculate on the response should Iran initially not offer a concrete counterproposal early in the session. But he said the process at this point hinged on the Iranian side.
In some ways, she said, the P5+1 group’s offer made to Iran is similar in structure to that failed North Korea agreement — initial moves by Iran, followed by eased sanctions, followed by further steps.
“The confidence-building measure has to come from Iran,” Mr. Mann said.
Gary Milhollin, executive editor of Iranwatch.org, a Web site published by the Wisconsin Project, said in an article before the latest talks had even begun that such an approach could be a mistake. “The lesson from North Korea is that an interim agreement of this kind won’t work,” he wrote. “Before making any halfway deal, U.S. and European diplomats should insist that Iran remove itself from the path that North Korea so easily followed.”
Iran is in the midst of a contentious presidential election, a process that inevitably complicates any negotiations in the international arena.
Others said the Iranians — like the North Koreans — have shown a great tenacity for enduring economic sanctions regardless of their severity, calling into question their value in any negotiation strategy.
The senior Obama administration official said that so long as Iran remained in defiance of the international community, painful sanctions including Western restrictions on importing Iranian oil would remain in place and potentially become even more severe. “That pressure only will increase if Iran does not begin to take concrete steps and concrete actions,” the official said. “Sanctions as well as the isolation Iran has created for itself continue to have their effect, and oil importers have continued to make reductions.”
In a study released before the latest round of talks, the National Iranian American Council, a Washington advocacy group that opposes the sanctions, said they had actually strengthened the Iranian government’s resolve. “Capitulation is seen as a greater threat to the regime’s survival than even a military confrontation with the United States,” the study said.
The official noted Iranian statistics showing inflation has soared by 31.5 percent over the past year and continues to rise. The value of its currency, the rial, has plummeted since sanctions began.
Some experts said they believed Iranian leaders were viewing North Korea’s nuclear belligerence with some measure of alarm, however. In their view, it could be used by the United States and others as justification for even more ostracism of Iran, which has a brotherly military relationship with North Korea and has adopted some of its missile and weapons technology. The two countries, along with Syria, were the only ones that opposed passage of the Arms Trade Treaty on conventional weapons at the United Nations earlier this week, for example.
As in February, the negotiations are taking place in Kazakhstan, the former Soviet republic that was once the main site for testing of nuclear weapons by the Soviet Union. It takes pride in its role on the issue of nuclear nonproliferation, including the elimination of missiles left behind by the Soviets.
“If the North Koreans really started a war, Iran will be subject to intense international pressures,” said Mehrzad Boroujerdi, a professor of political science at Syracuse University. He said many people would fear “the Iranians are as crazy as those guys and therefore we should contain them.”
Russian and Chinese officials have been more restrained in their comments ahead of the current round of talks.
David
M. Herszenhorn reported from Almaty, and Rick Gladstone from New York.
Earlier this week, a deputy Russian foreign minister, Igor Morgulov, said that an agreement ultimately would have to recognize Iran’s right to the use of atomic power for energy and medicine. Russia has been a partner in the construction and operation of Iran’s existing Bushehr nuclear power plant.
“We believe a long-term settlement should be based on the recognition of Iran’s unconditional right to develop its civilian nuclear program, including the right to enrich uranium” provided that all nuclear activity is put under supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. Morgulov told the Interfax news agency.
Mr. Morgulov said that the Russian delegation was working in close consultation with its Chinese counterparts. “We highly value a close dialogue with China on the situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear program,” he said. “Our positions coincide in many aspects.”
A spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, however, said expectations were modest for the Almaty talks. “Regrettably, the sides have not yet started to move toward formulating compromise-based agreements,” the spokesman, Aleksandr Lukashevich, said in Moscow on Thursday.
Gary Samore, who oversaw nuclear arms control issues for the White House during the first Obama administration and is now executive director for research of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, said in Washington this week that he had very low expectations for the talks and that both sides had reasons to prolong the diplomatic wrangling.
“The Iranians use diplomacy in an effort to try to show that there’s progress and therefore no further sanctions are justified, and to the extent that it looks like there’s progress it helps maintain the value of the rial,” Mr. Samore said, while the United States and its partners “use diplomacy in order to demonstrate that Iran is being intransigent and unreasonable and therefore more sanctions are required.”
“That process is going to continue,” Mr. Samore added.
Michael Gordon contributed reporting from Washington.
