LATEST Iran Urgent: The Deal on Uranium Enrichment (and US Response)

UPDATE 18 MAY, 1445 GMT: Ahh, so here's the apparent response of the Obama Administration, or at least Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: reduce the Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement to "a number of unanswered questions" and push forward with the high-profile sanctions drive in the United Nations. Clinton's statement, just made to a Senate committee:

“We have reached agreement on a strong draft with the cooperation of both Russia and China. We plan to circulate that draft resolution to the entire Security Council today. And let me say, Mr. Chairman, I think this announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken in Tehran over the last few days as any we could provide.”

Iran Document: Text of Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement on Uranium Enrichment

UPDATE 1745 GMT: The US Government has now made its formal response to the Tehran agreement. It's little more than a "hold the line" statement, issued by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. It gives no clue as to whether Washington was supportive of the Brazilian-Turkish mediation; instead it sets the next challenge: let's see the proposal go to the International Atomic Energy Agency and, possibly, let's see Iran suspend its unilateral push for 20-percent uranium:

We acknowledge the efforts that have been made by Turkey and Brazil. The proposal announced in Tehran must now be conveyed clearly and authoritatively to the IAEA before it can be considered by the international community. Given Iran’s repeated failure to live up to its own commitments, and the need to address fundamental issues related to Iran’s nuclear program, the United States and international community continue to have serious concerns. While it would be a positive step for Iran to transfer low-enriched uranium off of its soil as it agreed to do last October, Iran said today that it would continue its 20% enrichment, which is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolutions and which the Iranian government originally justified by pointing to the need for fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor. Furthermore, the Joint Declaration issued in Tehran is vague about Iran’s willingness to meet with the P5+1 countries to address international concerns about its nuclear program, as it also agreed to do last October.

The United States will continue to work with our international partners, and through the United Nations Security Council, to make it clear to the Iranian government that it must demonstrate through deeds –-- and not simply words –-- its willingness to live up to international obligations or face consequences, including sanctions. Iran must take the steps necessary to assure the international community that its nuclear program is intended exclusively for peaceful purposes, including by complying with U.N. Security Council resolutions and cooperating fully with the IAEA. We remain committed to a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear program, as part of the P5+1 dual track approach, and will be consulting closely with our partners on these developments going forward.

The European Union and Britain have put out similar statements.

UPDATE 1245 GMT: A group of Iranian political activists have declared that today’s uranium agreement, from a “political and economic” stance, is in the interest of the Iranian nation.

Mohammad Bastehnegar, Ezzatollah Sahabi, Taghii Rahmani, Hosein Rafii, Reza Raistoosi, Hossein ShahHosseini, Azam Taleghani, Reza Alijani, and Nezameddin Ghahari asserted that the agreement could end economic sanctions against Iran and lead to “transparency” in Iran’s relationship with the world.

The statement calls for collaboration of both conservative and reformist political activists in supporting this government initiative.

UPDATE 1110 GMT: Trita Parsi gets to the heart of why this arrangement was struck when last October's very similar deal, which reached top-table discussions in Geneva between Iran, the US, and other powers, collapsed. He notes talks between Brazil's Lula and the Supreme Leader: "This is no longer Ahmadinejad's nuclear deal, this is Khamenei's nuclear deal."

UPDATE 1015 GMT: Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has offered more details of the proposed uranium swap at a press conference. From Press TV:

Iran will ask the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] to station its personnel in Turkey to monitor the safe-keeping of the dispatched LEU [Tehran's 1200 kilogrammes low-enriched uranium]....The top diplomat underlined Iran will inform the IAEA of its decision "through official channels" within no more than seven days from the Monday meeting.
"Upon the positive response of the Vienna Group --- which includes Russia, France, the United States and the IAEA --- further details of the exchange will be elaborated through a written agreement and proper arrangement between Iran and the Vienna group that specifically committed themselves to deliver 120 cages of fuel needed for the Tehran research reactor (TRR)," noted Mottaki.

If the Vienna Group accepts Iran's terms and conditions, Mottaki said, both parties will "commit themselves to the implementation" of the deal, which requires Iran to deposit its LEU in Turkey within one month, and in return, the Vienna group will deliver 120 kg of fuel required for the Tehran reactor in no later than one year.

UPDATE 0755 GMT: How big is this story for Iranian state media? Islamic Republic News Agency, noting that "Ahmadinejad raised his hands in victory", devotes 6 of its top 9 stories to the agreement. (Fars, on the other hand, has not stepped into line: its top story is on British Foreign Secretary William Hague speaking about the assassination of a Hamas official in Dubai.)

UPDATE 0645 GMT: The Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement is for a swap of uranium outside Iran, and just as signficant, it involves the 1200 kilogrammes of Tehran's stock that the US and "Western" countries were seeking last autumn.

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said Monday that the Tehran government has agreed to a draft proposal whereby Iran will send some 1200 kg of its 3.5 percent enriched uranium over to Turkey in exchange for a total of 120 kg 20 percent....

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will officially receive a letter with regards to the swap deal "within a week".

According to a Press TV correspondent, the swap will take place nearly a month after receiving official approval from the Vienna Group, which consists of representatives from Iran, France, Russia and the US and the IAEA.

Now watch carefully for the reaction from Washington. If it is favourable, even cautiously favourable, we've got a major breakthrough.

---
The dominant story in both Iranian and non-Iranian media today is likely to be the announcement between Iran, Brazil, and Turkey of an agreed procedure for a deal on enrichment of Iran's uranium.

No details will be available until later today, so significant questions remain. It is not clear whether Tehran has given any way to the essential demand of the US and other members of the "5+1" (UK, France, Germany, Russia, China) for a swap of uranium outside Iran. Politically, Washington's position --- has it privately supported the Brazilian and Turkish discussions? --- is murky.

The seriousness of the talks, however, is indicated not only by their 17-hour duration on Sunday but also by the level of involvement. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's postponement on Friday of his trip to Iran did not, in the end, mean that Turkey had withdrawn altogether. Rather, this seems to have been a case of wait-and-see: Turkish "ministers" were involved throughout Sunday: once it was clear that an agreement was possible, Erdogan reversed his position and flew to Tehran, joining Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

The core issue is how Iran's 3.5-percent uranium will be exchanged for 20-percent uranium, needed for the Tehran Research Reactor producing medical isotopes.

Comments

[Barry]

But where does the 20% enriched Uranuium come from?? Who supplies it??

Barry

[WitteKr]

Barry, according to this report from French wire service AFP the 20% comes from 'the world powers'...
http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/iran-inks-deal-send-enriched-uranium-turkey" rel="nofollow">http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/iran-inks-de...
Interesting though, how none of the major news outlets jump on this story. Nothing - or at least very little - on CNN, BBC (including Worldservice), the major newspapers, you name it.
"Now watch carefully for the reaction from Washington. If it is favourable, even cautiously favourable, we’ve got a major breakthrough." I guess that is what we will be doing today, Scott. But till now it seems Washington is still asleep.

[Kurt]

I saw it on CNN and FOX (don't ask) in a brief special news break update, I'll check MSNBC later. Nothing much, because, yeah, it's still the middle of the night in the US. I'll know soon enough by the time of the morning shows - and later on, with Gibbs, if a statement isn't issued before that.

[escot]

I see Slackman is out with his usual oh-so-predictable interpretation in the NYTimes. The headline reads:

"Iran Offers to Ship Uranium, Complicating Sanctions Talks"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/world/middleeast/18iran.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

Translated, from the Slackman/Gordon/Miller worldview, the objective is more pressure on Iran. Anything that might let up on that has got to be questioned, defeated, found fault with....

And thus the new talking points line will be:

Well, they've made more LEU since the original deal, so even if Iran now goes for the original deal (with the added role of Turkey), these US hardliners (and the so typical un-named sources) will proclaim that the earth has moved, and anything short of Iran crying "Uncle" (as in Sam) will be rejected....

[Catherine]

I'm afraid the P5+1 (ie the US) is going to object to the amount of 1200 kg, saying that was an appropriate amount for back when the offer was first made, but noiw it has to be increased to account for Iran's additional production of LEU since then. It's a question of what overall percentage of Iran's total current LEU has to be shipped out. A year ago 1200 kg represented a certain acceptable percentage, but no longer does now. That'll be the argument I bet.

[Bahman]

It will be interesting to see what new schemes IRI will launch in order to continue to keep the world distracted from its repression of its internal opposition, the Green Movement.

[billy]

The story has been leading the news on Al Jazeera English since the deal broke, and has been and is covered extensively. CNN and MSNBC have no use for international news that does not re-inforce existing prejudice.

[Bahman]

The US media have had more important news to focus on: last night was the Miss USA pagent!!!

[Dissected News]

This is an interesting development, and here is why. When Obama took office, he admits that his policies towards Iran were 100% about nukes and 0% about Iran's internal politics. Last summer he said that this balance has shifted to 70/30. However, a regime change agenda has been condemned by Turkey and Russia.

So what if "nukes" is really Obama's "WMD" excuse to deal with the real issue, regime change in Iran? What if this deal goes down, and the U.S. gets everything that it said it wanted? Will Obama finally come out in support of the Green Movement, or will he use deception to push for sanctions over a non-existent nuclear issue?

The nuclear issue, while important, has long been overstated in American media (though not on Enduring America, pat on the back for Scott). During this time, the real problems have been ignored: human rights, freedom of the press, fake democracy, state sponsored terrorism, smuggling, isolation, ect.. So what happens now?

[Dissected News]

Yeah, Gibbs' response today is a typical "we have no idea how to respond to this" Washington Speak response. I wouldn't read too much into that for the next day or so.

[Bahman]

Diessected, the last thing that the Green Movement wants is for Obama (or any other foreign government with a history of meddling in its internal affairs) to formally support it.

What the Green Movement welcomes from all peoples and governments across the world is a clear condemnation of Iran regime's brutal violations of human rights.

Although the two may seem equal on the surface, they carry very different meanings in a country that has suffered from US's support for its dictator, shah, for decades.

[Arshama]

Bahman,

Before expecting any support from democratic governments and people around the world, the Green Movement has to prove its committment to a real democracy, not this still-born Islamic Republic, which is neither "Islamic" or a "Republic".
Look at Karroubi's statement today, still insisting on this political monstrosity. I know that he does it to deny the radicals' recent allegation of being "un-Islamic", but that is no solution to Iran's problems.

Instead of pointing to US and other states' meddling from 60 years ago, Iranians should start to solve their internal problems seriously -- all the rest are diversions and cheap excuses!

Arshama

[Bahman]

Arshama,

I think we agree. Firstly, note that I did not call for other governments and people to support the Green Movement, rather condemn regime's human rights violations. Green Movement is the movement that Iranian opposition (the large crowd inside Iran) is currently supporting and that's why I support it despite the fact that I do believe in the need to overthrow this regime. The Greens have made the most showing in the past 30 years in their vocal opposition to the regime, no other movement/party has come close.

Secondly, I have personally moved on from US's support of Shah. But I'm not a typical Iranian who is bombarded by regime propaganda or knows soldiers who died or were injured in the Iraq war that the US supported.

What I would like to see is for the US government to come up with a catchy slogan (in farsi) that captures the essence of the need to move on. And in every opportunity raise that slogan...Never under-estimate the impact of good marketing!

[Arshama]

Bahman,

Points taken!
Condemning human rights violations is always good and useful (sarcasm purposeful), but a rather blunt blade in terms of effectivity. I just remind you that even UN HR monitors have not been allowed to visit the IR during the past 11 months, not to mention other relevant organisations...

Imho this condemning should be linked with tangible consequences, e.g. no further investments in Iran as long as the HR situation has not improved etc.
Even though I do not overestimate "our" (Green supporters) power, denouncing Siemens and Nokia for selling spy-ware to the IR has certainly had its effects. We should then ask our representatives (as you say over there ;-) to insist on this "exchange" of more investments or cooperation for improvements in Iran's HR situation.

As to the slogan: fully agree with you on marketing, but that is OUR darn duty! Perhaps we could start a "Best Catchy Line Contest" here on EA?

Best
Arshama

[Bill Davit]

Bahman,

An interesting twist to your story is the fact the winner was a Arab Muslim!! So much for the Islamophobia the OIC thinks is awash in the West. Maybe now they will start to realize the West believes all are equal regardless of race, creed, and most importantly faith. In the West we strive to judge an individual based who you are not what you are. Hopefully this will sink in and the Islamic world can stop looking at everyone and everything through the "lens of Islam" judging by faith always.

Thx
Bill

[Bahman]

Bill,

We should all work towards that goal. While the Islamic world definitely has a longer ways to go, we in the west also have our own Armageddon-waiting, evolution-denying, homophobic segments to deal with.

Bahman

[Bill Davit]

Bahman,

We most certaintly do(ie Bush)!! The good part is the nations in the West actually have laws protecting equality that help us combat this. On the other hand the Islamic world still has vestiges of Dhimmi laws all over the place that support a divisive view(ie the ban on Bahais in Iran for instance.) God if we could only send all the nitwits on both sides to the moon and let them beat the snot out of each other the world would be a much better place.

Thx
Bill

[Megan]

Bahman,

Good Slogan? Clever marketing? Are you joking?

I do not need slogan from my government. I want action. For start I would like to see Obama administration giving refugee status to the 5000 Iranians stranded in Turkey. I want to see my State Department let these folks come to the US. The Iranian community in the US can help these folks get acclimated.

I listened to an interview and a report by three human rights activists, http://www.omidadvocates.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.omidadvocates.org/ last week. Stories of despair, hunger, psychological trauma, physical injuries were beyond heart breaking. It made me feel embraced as member of human race seeing people in so much emotional and physical pain so far away from their loved ones.

There is no brutal regime in Kenya and yet Obama’s aunt gets visa as refuge after living illegally in the US for several years and living on government handouts (tax-payers money) all the time that his millionaire nephew lived in plush neighborhood in Chicago. Yet an Iranian with bullet still lodged in his shoulder with his child and his wife in Turkey sleeps on the floor and can only eat once every three days. Iranians in Turkey need no slogan from any government; they need a safe place and a job to feed themselves.

[Bahman]

Megan,

Way to take things out of context to make a statement, you would make Fux News proud.

Not worthy of me taking the time to respond.

[Dissected News]

Well, I just read Clinton's statements. I'm not surprised that Washington isn't backing down, but I'm reserving judgement for several reasons.

A) Ahmadinejad lies. On this website, I'm hoping I don't need to clarify. But I'm not holding my breath to see Iran comply with this new agreement.

B) the Obama administration has already given plenty of clues that this is not just about a nuclear program. Sanctions are supposed to weaken the regime, possibly until it folds into revolution. Therefore, I'm not surprised that they won't back down.

C) Maybe Clinton's threats will pressure the IRI into complying with their own agreements, this time.

[Dissected News]

Of course, maybe ahmadinejad will just see this as another sign that the US is not serious about diplomacy, and he will back out of the deal. Either way... wow!

[Megan]

Bahman,

Great! In the absence of any worthy argument resort to name calling or playing a victim.

[Bahman]

In order to be able to label its internal opposition as foreign agents and continue to distract world's attention from its brutality toward its own people, IRI needs to keep the focus on its nuclear program.

Simultaneously, Israeli government also needs to keep this issue alive to distract the world from its own human rights violations and land grab in areas recognized by the international community including the US as Palestinian land.

So this is a win-win for both governments.