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/2014/07/19/world/middleeast/negotiators-agree-to-extend-iran-nuclear-talks-diplomats-say.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Negotiators Agree to Extend Iran Nuclear Talks Four More Months, Diplomats Say Negotiators Agree to Extend Iran Nuclear Talks Four More Months, Diplomats Say
(about 2 hours later)
Iran, the United States and the five other countries negotiating the future of the Iranian nuclear program have agreed to a four-month extension of the talks, giving them more time to try to bridge major differences over whether Tehran will be forced to dismantle parts of its nuclear infrastructure, according to a statement released early Saturday in Vienna by all seven nations.Iran, the United States and the five other countries negotiating the future of the Iranian nuclear program have agreed to a four-month extension of the talks, giving them more time to try to bridge major differences over whether Tehran will be forced to dismantle parts of its nuclear infrastructure, according to a statement released early Saturday in Vienna by all seven nations.
The extension was expected after both Iran and President Obama signaled that more time would be needed to resolve differences; some American officials say that even the additional time may not prove sufficient. The original deadline for an accord was Sunday, though a temporary agreement that has been in effect since November envisioned a six-month extension. The extension was expected, but some American officials say that even the additional time may not prove sufficient. The original deadline for an accord was Sunday, though a temporary agreement that has been in effect since November had envisioned a six-month extension.
This week, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, described an Iranian proposal that would essentially freeze Iran’s operations at current levels for three to seven years, allowing it to continue limited production. But after that, the country would be free to produce as much nuclear fuel as it wants. Secretary of State John Kerry said that under the extension, Iran would get access to $2.8 billion in assets that have been frozen in the United States, but sanctions against oil sales and other major sources of income would not be lifted. “Let me be clear,” Mr. Kerry said in a statement, “Iran will not get any more money during these four months than it did during the last six months, and the vast majority of its frozen oil revenues will remain inaccessible.”
The United States and its negotiating partners — Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia — have argued that Iran must dismantle major elements of its uranium enrichment program, and they envision the restrictions going on for a decade or more. It is unclear whether, in four months, the two sides can bridge that gap, though there have been innovative proposals discussed that could lengthen the time Iran would need to make bomb-grade material. Iran, in return, has agreed to dilute additional stocks of material or turn it into reactor fuel. Once the material is made into the metal plates that fit into its research reactor, it is extremely difficult to turn it into bomb-grade fuel.
The six nations and Iran said that they would continue to implement the sanctions relief previously agreed upon by the West, and the restrictions on production and stockpiling that were part of the temporary agreement reached in the fall. There was no mention of lifting additional sanctions, or further steps by Iran to dilute its stockpile of nuclear material, during the extension, which ends Nov. 24.  A senior administration official said the decision to try an extension was bolstered by “creativity” on both sides on ways to provide assurances that Iran’s program would be peaceful. But he declined to detail those ideas.
If an agreement is reached in late November, Mr. Obama would have a brief period to try to win sanctions relief on Iran from a lame-duck session of Congress. Administration officials have viewed that moment as the “sweet spot” for a vote, after congressional elections but before what is assumed to be a larger Republican majority in the House. This week, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, described an Iranian proposal that would essentially freeze the country’s operations at current levels for three to seven years, allowing it to continue limited production. But after that, Iran would be free to produce as much nuclear fuel as it wants.
But more than 300 members of Congress recently signed a letter to President Obama laying out steps Iran must take to win sanctions relief — including curbs on missile development and an end to support of terror groups, including Hamas. Those issues are not part of the nuclear negotiations, so it is unclear how a final accord would incorporate a lifting of sanctions, or whether President Obama would attempt it by executive order. The United States and its negotiating partners — Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia — have argued that Iran must dismantle major elements of its uranium enrichment program, and they envision the restrictions going on for a decade or more. It is unclear whether, in four months, the two sides can bridge that gap.
But all of it presumes that the two sides can resolve a central disagreement: whether Iran needs, or can be permitted to achieve, an industrial-size capacity to produce nuclear fuel. Iran says it will not depend on outside producers for its nuclear fuel. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, spoke last week in Tehran of needing a huge industrial capacity — one that could produce more than 10 times Iran’s current theoretical nuclear enrichment capacity — though he said it would have to be in place within five years. The six nations and Iran said that they would continue to enforce restrictions on production and stockpiling that were part of the temporary agreement reached last fall.
So a final deal may well include delays to Iran’s industrial production. Some Republicans in Congress have argued that an extension is just a way for Iran to keep producing fuel while negotiations continue. The lawmakers have pressed for more sanctions, but the White House has argued that such pressure at this juncture would probably worsen the problem.
In a briefing for reporters, administration officials argued that they had “a strong and clear case” for extending the talks, citing progress in getting Iran to agree to limit plutonium production at a heavy reactor under construction at Arak, and discussions of a new purpose for an enrichment facility deep underground at Fordow.
American officials acknowledged that there were still major differences on what kind of research and development Iranian scientists could conduct, and how much Tehran would have to reveal, including about suspected weapons designs. Iran denies it has engaged in such work.
The extension ends on Nov. 24, and if an agreement is reached by then, President Obama would have a brief period to try to win sanctions relief from a lame-duck session of Congress.
More than 300 members of Congress recently signed a letter to Mr. Obama laying out steps Iran must take to win sanctions relief — including curbs on missile development and an end to support of terrorist groups. But those issues are not part of the nuclear negotiations.
Talk of lifting sanctions presumes that the two sides can resolve a central disagreement: whether Iran needs, or can be permitted to achieve, an industrial-size capacity to produce nuclear fuel. Iran says it will not depend on outside producers for its fuel. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, spoke last week in Tehran of needing a huge industrial capacity — one that could produce more than 10 times Iran’s current theoretical nuclear enrichment capacity. So a final deal may well include delays to Iran’s industrial production.