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/2015/04/03/world/middleeast/disarmament-groups-welcome-iran-framework-israel-is-mistrustful.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Disarmament Groups Welcome Iran Framework; Israel Is Mistrustful Disarmament Groups Welcome Iran Framework; Israel Is Mistrustful
(about 4 hours later)
Advocates of disarmament and reconciliation with Iran embraced the framework agreement announced Thursday that would limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities, while the Israeli government and its supporters voiced deep criticism and mistrust. Advocates of disarmament and reconciliation with Iran embraced the framework agreement announced Thursday that would limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities, calling it a welcome alternative to war, while the Israeli government and its supporters voiced deep criticism and said the opposite outcome was more likely.
In Tehran, news of the framework agreement, which could portend the end to an era of burdensome sanctions in the country, there was no immediate official reaction. But the state-run television, in what appeared to be a precedent, broadcast live President Obama’s announcement from the White House about the agreement’s details. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said he told President Obama in a telephone call that “a deal based on this framework would threaten the survival of Israel.”
The Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan group in Washington, called the framework agreement a “historic breakthrough” and said that if it was fully carried out, the agreement would block Iran’s pathway to a bomb. The group said the agreement “promises to lead to one of the most consequential and far-reaching nuclear nonproliferation achievements in recent decades.” In Tehran, news of the framework agreement, which could portend the end to burdensome sanctions on the country, brought no immediate official reaction from Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who will have the final word on a completed agreement. But state-run television, in what appeared to be a precedent as well as a sign of top-level approval, broadcast live Mr. Obama’s announcement from the White House about the agreement’s details.
The National Iranian American Council, an advocacy group in Washington, said that if the framework agreement led to a final agreement by June 30, as negotiators hope and expect, it would have “secured through diplomacy what neither war nor sanctions could ever have accomplished.” The Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan group in Washington, called the framework agreement a “historic breakthrough” that, if fully carried out, would block potential Iranian pathways to a bomb. The group said the agreement “promises to lead to one of the most consequential and far-reaching nuclear nonproliferation achievements in recent decades.”
The agreement was reached in Lausanne, Switzerland, between Iran and the group of powers known as the P5-plus-1 — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States. It contained what disarmament experts said were surprisingly specific provisions. The National Iranian American Council, an advocacy group in Washington, said that if the framework agreement led to a final agreement by June 30, as negotiators hope and expect, it would achieve “through diplomacy what neither war nor sanctions could ever have accomplished.”
Iran agreed to reduce by roughly two-thirds the number of installed centrifuges it has for enriching uranium fuel, and to take other steps to limit its uranium enrichment. It agreed to dismantle and rebuild a reactor so that it would not produce plutonium fuel, and to allow extensive inspections to assure the world of its peaceful intent. In exchange, the powers would lift the array of sanctions that have been imposed on Iran for years. The agreement was reached in Lausanne, Switzerland, between Iran and the group of powers known as the P5-plus-1 — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States — and it contained what disarmament experts said were surprisingly specific provisions.
Iran agreed to reduce by roughly two-thirds the number of installed centrifuges it has for enriching uranium fuel, and to take other steps to limit its uranium enrichment. It agreed to dismantle and rebuild a reactor so that it would not produce plutonium fuel, and to allow extensive inspections to assure the world of its peaceful intent. In exchange, the P5-plus-1 powers would lift the array of sanctions that have been imposed on Iran for years.
In Israel, which considers Iran its most dangerous enemy, the official reaction to the framework agreement was, not unexpectedly, harsh and mistrustful.In Israel, which considers Iran its most dangerous enemy, the official reaction to the framework agreement was, not unexpectedly, harsh and mistrustful.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been an outspoken critic of the nuclear negotiations, said in a Twitter message that “any deal must significantly roll back Iran’s nuclear capabilities and stop its terrorism and aggression.” Mr. Netanyahu, an outspoken critic of the nuclear negotiations, reiterated in a statement issued by his office what he had told Congress in Washington last month. “Such a deal would not block Iran’s path to the bomb,” he said. “It would pave it.”
An Israeli government official who was not authorized to speak publicly said that if a final accord was reached “based on the guidelines of this framework, that would be a historic mistake which will transform the world into a much more dangerous place.” He and other Israeli officials sought to cast Iran as an expansionary and deceitful power that is bent on destroying Israel and meddling in Israel’s neighbors.
Mr. Netanyahu’s economics minister, Naftali Bennett, likened the framework agreement to negotiations with Hitler and the Nazis before World War II that some leaders in Europe mistakenly believed would forestall war. “The smiles in Lausanne are detached from the wretched reality where Iran refuses to make concessions on the nuclear issues and continues to threaten Israel and the rest of the countries of the Middle East,” said Yuval Steinitz, the intelligence minister.
“‘Peace in our time,’ 2015,” Mr. Bennett said in a statement. “The world’s most radical Islamic terror regime received today an official kosher stamp for its illicit nuclear program. This is a regime that cannot be trusted, and which has already violated consecutive U.N. resolutions. Today’s deal paves the way for Iran to eventually obtain a nuclear weapon, to further destabilize the Middle East and to continue spreading terror across the globe.” The World Jewish Congress, an umbrella group of communities in 100 countries, was less critical, but still highly skeptical. Its president, Ronald S. Lauder, said in a statement that “the key question was if Iran could be trusted to implement the deal.”
The World Jewish Congress, an umbrella organization of Jewish communities in 100 countries, was less critical, but still highly skeptical. Its president, Ronald S. Lauder, said in a statement that “the key question was if Iran could be trusted to implement the deal.” The Al Manar broadcasting channel of Hezbollah, the Shiite militant organization in Lebanon that is an important Iranian ally, carried Mr. Obama’s speech and showed a logo of Ayatollah Khamenei and the slogan: “Victory for Steadfastness.”
Britain and France, members of the group of big powers that negotiated the deal with Iran, praised the outcome but cautioned that a final agreement must still be finished or signed. The framework agreement is bound to be seen as a boon by Hezbollah, which relies on Iran for financing and weapons, and has lately claimed to see common interests with the United States in fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. Hezbollah’s Saudi-backed Sunni political rival in Lebanon, the Future Movement, has been wary of an Iran deal. 
Syria’s state news agency did not immediately react. But the deal would likely help President Bashar al-Assad of Syria by lifting sanctions on Iran, which has subsidized Syria’s government in a civil war now four years old.
Mr. Assad’s opponents by and large argue that the United States has sacrificed them and their movement in order to prioritize the Iran deal. 
Britain and France, members of the group of big powers that negotiated the deal, praised the outcome but cautioned that a final agreement must still be finished and signed.
President François Hollande of France warned in a statement that “sanctions that are lifted can be reimposed if the deal is not applied,” adding that Paris would closely watch to ensure that “a credible, verifiable agreement be established under which the international community can be sure Iran will not be in a position to have access to nuclear arms.”President François Hollande of France warned in a statement that “sanctions that are lifted can be reimposed if the deal is not applied,” adding that Paris would closely watch to ensure that “a credible, verifiable agreement be established under which the international community can be sure Iran will not be in a position to have access to nuclear arms.”
The French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, said that “this is a stage agreement that includes some incontestable positive developments, but there is still work to do.” The British foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, said that the “extremely tough” talks had provided a good basis to reach what could be a comprehensive deal.
The British foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, said that the “extremely tough” talks had provided a good basis to reach what could be a “very good” comprehensive deal. “This is well beyond what many of us thought possible even 18 months ago and a good basis for what I believe could be a very good deal,” Mr. Hammond said in a statement. “But there is still more work to do.”
“This is well beyond what many of us thought possible even 18 months ago and a good basis for what I believe could be a very good deal,” Mr. Hammond said in a statement. “But there is still more work to do” to work out the “fine detail.”
Mr. Hammond said a fuller deal that kept to the agreed parameters of the initial agreement would provide reassurance that Tehran’s nuclear program was peaceful, but said intensive talks on the details now lay ahead, especially about oversight measures and mechanisms regarding United Nations Security Council resolutions.Mr. Hammond said a fuller deal that kept to the agreed parameters of the initial agreement would provide reassurance that Tehran’s nuclear program was peaceful, but said intensive talks on the details now lay ahead, especially about oversight measures and mechanisms regarding United Nations Security Council resolutions.
”We will continue to have our differences on many other issues with Iran,” Mr. Hammond said. “But a comprehensive deal will improve confidence, trust and dialogue on all sides, and most importantly, avoid a nuclear arms race in the region.”