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/2015/03/22/world/middleeast/kerry-pushes-iran-nuclear-deal-timetable-amid-differences-with-france.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Kerry Pushes Iran Nuclear Deal Timetable Amid Differences With France Kerry Pushes Iran Nuclear Deal Timetable Amid Differences With France
(about 4 hours later)
LAUSANNE, Switzerland — Stressing that it was time to make tough decisions, Secretary of State John Kerry said Saturday that negotiators should stick to their goal of completing an initial accord limiting Iran’s nuclear program by the end of March. LONDON — Stressing that it was time to make tough decisions, Secretary of State John Kerry said Saturday that negotiators should stick to their goal of completing an initial accord limiting Iran‘s nuclear program by the end of March.
“We recognize that fundamental decisions have to be made now, and they don’t get any easier as time goes by,” Mr. Kerry said before leaving for a meeting Saturday night in London with his British, French and German counterparts. “We recognize that fundamental decisions have to be made now, and they don’t get any easier as time goes by,” Mr. Kerry said in Lausanne, Switzerland, before arriving here for a meeting with his British, French and German counterparts.
“We have not yet reached the finish line but make no mistake we have the opportunity to try to get this right,” Mr. Kerry added. “We have not yet reached the finish line but make no mistake, we have the opportunity to try to get this right,” Mr. Kerry added.
While American officials have sought to play down reports of differences with French officials, Mr. Kerry’s comments were at odds with the views of French diplomats who have expressed alarm that the West may undermine its own negotiating leverage by rushing to complete an initial understanding.While American officials have sought to play down reports of differences with French officials, Mr. Kerry’s comments were at odds with the views of French diplomats who have expressed alarm that the West may undermine its own negotiating leverage by rushing to complete an initial understanding.
American and Iranian negotiators are trying to meet a March 31 deadline for drafting the outlines of an accord. Once that is done, a detailed, comprehensive agreement is to be completed by the end of June.American and Iranian negotiators are trying to meet a March 31 deadline for drafting the outlines of an accord. Once that is done, a detailed, comprehensive agreement is to be completed by the end of June.
But in a message on Twitter on Friday that reflected the views of other French officials, Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United States, warned that it was risky to stick with a firm March 31 deadline.But in a message on Twitter on Friday that reflected the views of other French officials, Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United States, warned that it was risky to stick with a firm March 31 deadline.
“Repeating that an agreement has to be reached by the end of March is a bad tactic,” Mr. Araud wrote. “Pressure on ourselves to conclude at any price.” “Repeating that an agreement has to be reached by the end of March is a bad tactic,” Mr. Araud wrote in a message that got the attention of Obama administration officials. “Pressure on ourselves to conclude at any price.”
Iran has generally expressed a more optimistic view of the state of the talks than the United States, and President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday that the recently completed round of negotiations had established “a foundation for a final agreement.” Iran has generally expressed a more optimistic view of the state of the talks than the United States, and President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday that the recently completed round of negotiations had created “a foundation for a final agreement.”
“In this round of talks, shared points of view emerged in some of the areas where they had been a difference of opinion,” he told the state news agency IRNA. “I believe it is possible to reach an agreement and there is nothing that cannot be resolved.” “I believe it is possible to reach an agreement and there is nothing that cannot be resolved,” he told the state news agency IRNA.
Mr. Kerry said that his meeting in London would provide an opportunity to exchange ideas on how to overcome the remaining issues in the talks with his European counterparts, Laurent Fabius of France, Philip Hammond of Britain, Frank-Walter Steinmeier of Germany and Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s foreign policy chief. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on any nuclear deal, supported Iran’s nuclear negotiating team in a speech for the Iranian New Year while stressing there was no basis for broader discussions with the United States on regional issues.
After coordinating strategy, Mr. Kerry added, the United States and its negotiating partners would return to Lausanne for talks that are scheduled to resume Thursday and determine “whether or not an agreement is possible.” But referring to one of the major impediments in the talks, he told an audience of thousands at a shrine in the northeastern city of Mashhad that sanctions must be lifted in one go, not in a step-by-step manner, as Iran fulfills its obligations under an accord, as the United States and its negotiating partners have proposed.
A number of hurdles emerged during of the most recent talks. One is how quickly to suspend or remove sanctions that have been imposed on Iran. Another is what type of limits should be imposed on the research and development of new types of centrifuges for enriching uranium. “If the other side has the ability to reimpose sanctions against the Iranian nation under any excuse, there is then absolutely no reason whatsoever for our negotiating team to accept a term which would be irreversible,” he said.
An important question about which American and French officials may have somewhat different views is how long an accord would last. Underscoring his demand for quick sanctions relief, Ayatollah Khamenei insisted Iran has remained faithful to its commitments in the talks.
The Obama administration has said that any agreement should extend to a year the time that Iran would need to produce enough nuclear material for a bomb. That measure is intended to preclude Iran from making a dash for a bomb if it decides to “break out” of an accord. “We did not break promises, we did not double-talk and we did not change our minds,” Ayatollah Khamenei said. “In contrast, the other side, the Americans, broke their promises, they changed their views and they cheated.”
Mr. Kerry’s meeting with his European counterparts was held at London’s Heathrow Airport and was arranged so that ideas could be exchanged on how to overcome the remaining issues in the talks, he said. The European participants included Laurent Fabius of France, Philip Hammond of Britain, Frank-Walter Steinmeier of Germany and Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, and their senior aides.
Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and Wang Yi, China’s foreign minister, did not attend. But Mr. Kerry spoke with them by phone on Friday.
The United States’ negotiating partners in the talks with Iran are France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China.
Mr. Kerry plans to fly to Washington Saturday night. After coordinating strategy, Mr. Kerry and other diplomats plan to return to Lausanne for talks with Iran scheduled to resume Thursday and determine “whether or not an agreement is possible.”
A number of hurdles emerged during the most recent round of talks, which ended Friday in Lausanne. One, flagged by Ayatollah Khamenei, is how quickly to remove sanctions that have been imposed on Iran. Another is what type of limits should be imposed on the research and development of new types of centrifuges for enriching uranium.
An important question about which American and French officials may have somewhat different views is how long an accord would last. The Obama administration has said that any agreement should extend to a year the time that Iran would need to produce enough nuclear material for a bomb. That measure is intended to preclude Iran from making a dash for a bomb if it decides to “break out” of an accord.
French officials have argued such break out provisions should be in effect for 15 years. American officials have been less specific on this point in briefings for reporters, insisting that such measures should be in place for at least 10 years.French officials have argued such break out provisions should be in effect for 15 years. American officials have been less specific on this point in briefings for reporters, insisting that such measures should be in place for at least 10 years.
While the French have raised concern about wrapping up an accord by the end of March, the Obama administration faces the political challenge of demonstrating progress so it can hold off a Congressional move to impose additional economic sanctions on Iran. While the French have raised concern about wrapping up an accord by the end of March, the Obama administration faces the political challenge of demonstrating progress so it can hold off a Congressional move to impose additional sanctions on Iran.
As reports of French concerns have emerged, President Obama called President François Hollande of France on Friday to discuss the negotiations.As reports of French concerns have emerged, President Obama called President François Hollande of France on Friday to discuss the negotiations.
“The presidents reaffirmed their commitment to achieving a long-term comprehensive deal that fully and verifiably addresses the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program, while noting that Iran must take steps to resolve several remaining issues,” the White House said in a statement.“The presidents reaffirmed their commitment to achieving a long-term comprehensive deal that fully and verifiably addresses the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program, while noting that Iran must take steps to resolve several remaining issues,” the White House said in a statement.
Some American commentators have suggested that the French position is more show than substance. They argue that France’s motivation is primarily to counter the notion that the United States is the main negotiator with Iran and show Sunni Arab states, who are potential arms buyers, that they are taking a firm stand.Some American commentators have suggested that the French position is more show than substance. They argue that France’s motivation is primarily to counter the notion that the United States is the main negotiator with Iran and show Sunni Arab states, who are potential arms buyers, that they are taking a firm stand.
But other observers say that France has expertise on arms control questions and legitimate concerns that an agreement must be effective enough to discourage other states in the Middle East from seeking to develop nuclear weapons. But other observers say France has expertise on arms control and legitimate concerns that an accord must be effective enough to discourage other Middle Eastern states from seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
“France wants an agreement, but a robust one that really guarantees that Iran can have access to civilian nuclear power, but not the atomic bomb,” Mr. Fabius told Europe 1 radio on Saturday.“France wants an agreement, but a robust one that really guarantees that Iran can have access to civilian nuclear power, but not the atomic bomb,” Mr. Fabius told Europe 1 radio on Saturday.
“If the accord is not sufficiently solid then regional countries would say it’s not serious enough, so we are also going to get the nuclear weapon, and that would lead to an extremely dangerous nuclear proliferation,” Mr. Fabius added.“If the accord is not sufficiently solid then regional countries would say it’s not serious enough, so we are also going to get the nuclear weapon, and that would lead to an extremely dangerous nuclear proliferation,” Mr. Fabius added.