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/2013/04/07/world/middleeast/talks-on-irans-nuclear-program-remain-far-apart.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Talks on Iran’s Nuclear Program ‘Remain Far Apart’ Nuclear Talks With Iran End Without Advances or Plans for Another Round
(about 1 hour later)
ALMATY, Kazakhstan — Negotiations over Iran’s disputed nuclear program broke off on Saturday without signs of even incremental progress, much less an agreement on tighter controls and tougher international oversight demanded by six world powers in exchange for some easing of sanctions that now have a stranglehold on the Iranian economy. ALMATY, Kazakhstan — Negotiations over Iran’s disputed nuclear program broke off Saturday with scant signs of incremental progress, much less an agreement on tighter controls and tougher international oversight demanded by six world powers in exchange for some easing of sanctions that have a stranglehold on the Iranian economy.
The failure to reach any accord was a serious setback for the talks, which have become complicated by the Iranian presidential election now just 10 weeks away. The failure to reach any accord was a serious setback for the talks, which have become complicated by the Iranian presidential election just 10 weeks away.
After the conclusion of two days of tense bargaining, Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, said that after “long and intense discussions” it was clear that the sides “remain far apart on the substance.” Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, said that after two days of “long and intense discussions,” the sides “remain far apart on the substance.”
No future negotiations were announced and Ms. Ashton said that she would be "in touch very soon" with the top Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili, "in order to see how to go forward.” No future negotiations were announced, and Ms. Ashton said she would be “in touch very soon” with the top Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili, “in order to see how to go forward.”
Russia’s lead negotiator at the talks, Sergei Ryabkov, also sounded a dark note but said there was still hope for future discussions. Russia’s lead negotiator at the talks, Sergei Ryabkov, also sounded a dark note but said there was still hope for future discussions.
"Unfortunately, we failed to achieve a breakthrough," Mr. Ryabkov, a deputy foreign minister, said at a briefing at the Russian consulate in Almaty, according to the Interfax news service.  "We’re still on the threshold." “Unfortunately, we failed to achieve a breakthrough,” Mr. Ryabkov, a deputy foreign minister, said at a briefing at the Russian Consulate in Almaty, according to the Interfax news service. “We’re still on the threshold.”
The futility of the talks was certain to arouse renewed alarm, particularly from Israel, which had tempered its repeated threats of a military strike against Iranian nuclear sites in deference to the diplomatic efforts.The futility of the talks was certain to arouse renewed alarm, particularly from Israel, which had tempered its repeated threats of a military strike against Iranian nuclear sites in deference to the diplomatic efforts.
The conclusion of the talks without even a modest confidence building measure or the clear prospect of future talks was striking given that all sides seemed to have incentives to keep the conversation going, and avoid talk military intervention. The conclusion of the talks without even a modest confidence-building measure or the clear prospect of future talks was striking given that all sides seemed to have incentives to keep the conversation going, and avoid talk of military intervention.
The United States, in particular, has focused increasingly in recent weeks on an intensifying threat from North Korea, which unlike Iran, already possesses nuclear weapons. The United States, in particular, has focused increasingly in recent weeks on an intensifying threat from North Korea, which, unlike Iran, already possesses nuclear weapons.
Western countries fear that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, while Iran has insisted that its program is for peaceful purposes, including atomic energy and medical research, to which it claims a right as a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Western countries fear that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, while Iran has insisted that its program is for peaceful purposes, including atomic energy and medical research, to which it claims a right as a signer of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Iran has accused the big powers, particularly the United States, of hypocrisy for maintaining their own arsenals of nuclear weapons. But at the same time, Iran has refused to comply with Security Council demands that it suspend its uranium enrich program, expand access for inspectors, and answer questions about its intentions. Iran has accused the big powers, particularly the United States, of hypocrisy for maintaining their own nuclear arsenals. But at the same time, Iran has refused to comply with United Nations Security Council demands that it suspend its uranium enrichment program, expand access for inspectors and answer questions about its intentions. The talks here in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic that views itself as a model of nuclear nonproliferation, were the fifth round over the past year between Iran and the so-called P5-plus-1. The group consists of the five permanent members of the Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — plus Germany.
The talks here in Kazakhstan, the former Soviet republic that views itself as a model of nuclear nonproliferation, were the fifth round over the past year between Iran and the so-called P5-plus-1, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States — plus Germany. Negotiations began last April in Istanbul and were followed by sessions in Baghdad in May, in Moscow in June and here in February. They have settled into a familiar routine: the big powers demand concrete steps from Iran and a firm commitment to comply with United Nations and other international mandates, only to be faced with delays or complicated counterproposals, including one on Friday that one Western diplomat said had left officials “puzzled.”
Negotiations began last April in Istanbul followed by sessions in Baghdad in May, in Moscow in June, and here in Almaty in February, and they have now settled into a familiar routine. Western officials had arrived here with guarded optimism that Iran would give a concrete response to a February proposal that would provide a modest easing of sanctions in exchange for restrictions on Iran’s supply of enriched uranium. Enriched to high levels, the uranium could be used in nuclear weapons.
The big powers demand a concrete steps from Iran and a firm commitment to comply with United Nations and other international mandates, only to be faced with delays or complicated counterproposals, included one offered here on Friday that one Western diplomat said had left officials “puzzled.” The proposal called for Iran to accept broad oversight for all of its nuclear activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency, but the big powers dropped a demand that Iran shut its enrichment plant at Fordo, built deep below a mountain. Instead, Iran would have to suspend its enrichment activities there, and take other steps that would make it difficult to resume quick production of nuclear fuel.
Western officials had arrived here with guarded optimism that Iran would give a concrete response to a proposal offered here in February that would provide a modest easing of sanctions in exchange for restrictions on Iran’s supply of enriched uranium, which, enriched to high levels could be used in nuclear weapons. In another apparent softening, the six powers had said Iran could keep a small amount of uranium enriched to 20 percent purity, which can be converted relatively quickly to weapons grade, for use in a reactor to produce medical isotopes.
The proposal called for Iran to accept broad oversight for all of its nuclear activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency, but the big powers dropped a previous demand that Iran shut its enrichment plant at Fordo, built deep below a mountain. Instead, Iran would have to suspend its enrichment activities there, and take other steps that would make it difficult to resume quick production of nuclear fuel. At a news briefing, Mr. Jalili offered a different characterization of the breakdown in discussions. He said Iran had offered proposals largely based on a plan, first put forward in Moscow in June, aimed at addressing some of the international community’s concerns. The six Western powers, he said, responded that they needed time to discuss those proposals with officials back home. He said that plan incorporated the proposal put forward in February and reflected the results of a meeting on technical issues last month in Istanbul.
In another apparent softening, the six powers had said that Iran could keep a small amount of 20 percent enriched uranium — which can be converted relatively quickly to weapons grade — for use in a reactor to produce medical isotopes. But Mr. Jalili also adopted a strident tone in reiterating Iran’s view that it has a right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes.
Ahead of the latest round of talks, Western officials were adamant that they expected Iran to offer a direct response to that package. Instead, after the first morning of discussions on Friday, the Iranians said that they had offered a new “comprehensive” proposal aimed at building cooperation. “Of course, there is some distance in the position of the two sides,“ he said. But he said Iran’s proposals, which required recognizing “our right to enrich and ending behaviors which have every indication of enmity toward the Iranian people,” were designed “to help us move toward a constructive road.”
The big powers expressed surprise and confusion, saying that they had not heard anything that sounded like a new plan. The Iranian side later clarified that it presented a “scaled down” version of a package first proposed in talks in Moscow in June 2012, which was quickly rejected. Mr. Jalili said the next move was up to the six powers. “Good negotiations took place, and in consideration of our new proposals, it is now up to the P5-plus-1 to demonstrate its willingness and sincerity to take appropriate confidence building steps in the future,” he said.
 As the talks neared the scheduled conclusion on Saturday evening, their appeared to be some last-ditch maneuvering to try to salvage the session. Before the latest talks, Western officials were adamant that they expected Iran to offer a direct response to that package. Instead, after the first morning of discussions Friday, the Iranians said they had offered a new “comprehensive” proposal aimed at building cooperation.
Some Iranian news organizations quoted an official saying that the Iranian negotiators had offered to temporarily halt uranium enrichment at the Fordo plant, calling it a gesture of good faith. If so, it would have representative a minor, even tentative step that was unlikely to quell consternation among the big powers over Iran’s potential development of weapons-grade uranium. The big powers expressed surprise and confusion, saying they had not heard anything that sounded like a new plan. The Iranian side later clarified that it had presented a “scaled down” version of a package first proposed in Moscow in June, which was quickly rejected.
Still, both Ms. Ashton and Mr. Ryabkov suggested that there was somewhat more productive give-and-take than in previous meetings. As the talks neared the scheduled conclusion on Saturday evening, there appeared to be some last-ditch maneuvering to try to salvage the session.
"The Iranians’ position was quite open and quite constructive," Mr. Ryabkov said. Still both he and Ms. Ashton said that ultimately the sides were too far apart on the substantive issues. Some Iranian news organizations quoted an official saying the Iranian negotiators had offered a temporary halt to uranium enrichment at the Fordo plant, calling it a gesture of good faith. If so, it would have been a minor, even tentative step that was unlikely to quell consternation among the big powers over Iran’s potential development of weapons-grade uranium.
Still, Ms. Ashton and Mr. Ryabkov suggested that there had been somewhat more productive give-and-take than in previous meetings.
“The Iranians’ position was quite open and quite constructive,” Mr. Ryabkov said. Still both he and Ms. Ashton said that ultimately the sides were too far apart on the substantive issues.