04 21 2015
  1:31 am  
     •     
40 Years of Service
McMenamins

GENEVA, Switzerland (CNN) -- Western diplomats and Iran appeared to be on the verge of a breakthrough agreement Friday that could slow the Middle Eastern nation's suspected progress toward a nuclear bomb while easing some sanctions that have hobbled its economy.

Top diplomats from the United States, France, Great Britain and Germany rushed to Geneva on Friday to see if they could close the deal, which has emerged suddenly after years of frustrating stalemates and Western suspicions of Iranian cat-and-mouse games with international weapons inspectors.

Intense talks were under way Friday, a spokesman for EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton said.

The emerging deal would ease some sanctions on Iran if it stops enriching uranium to 20 percent purity -- a key step on the path to a nuclear weapon -- destroys its existing stockpile and takes other steps, according two senior U.S. administration officials.

For years, international leaders have suspected Iran of working toward nuclear weapons, fearful of the instability such a scenario could bring to the already tense Middle East.

Those fears include the possibility of a pre-emptive Israeli strike that could spark a broader conflict. In the past, Iran has threatened Israel with military attack.

Iran has denied working toward a nuclear weapon, and has said it will not submit to any plan that would totally eliminate its nuclear program.

While those issues remain, Iranian foreign minister and chief nuclear negotiator, Javad Zarif predicted a deal could be reached by Friday night.

"We are at a very sensitive stage of negotiations, and it is best if these negotiations are done at the negotiating table rather than on live television," he told CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "But I can tell you that we are prepared to address some of the most immediate concerns that have been raised, and we expect reciprocally our concerns to be met by the P5+1."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is not involved in the talks, warned that the proposed agreement is "the deal of a century for Iran" but a "very dangerous and bad deal for peace."

"It's a very bad deal," he said. "Iran is not required to take apart even one centrifuge. But the international community is relieving sanctions on Iran for the first time after many years. Iran gets everything that it wanted at this stage and pays nothing."

British Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted Friday that he had discussed the talks with French President Francois Hollande and they agreed the talks "offer an opportunity to make real progress."

Separately, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' atomic watchdog agency, announced its director will travel to Iran on Monday to meet senior Iranian leaders. The agency's nuclear experts will meet the same day with their Iranian counterparts in Tehran, the agency said.

Despite the progress, officials said much work remains to be done.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said "some important gaps" remain in the negotiations, echoing earlier comments from his French counterpart, Laurent Fabius.

"There have already been advances but I must express that there are still agreements to be made here," he said as he went into a meeting with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton in Geneva.

U.S. officials outline possible deal

Two senior U.S. administration officials said that, under the potential deal, Iran would agree:

-- to stop enriching nuclear fuel to 20 percent purity;

-- to render unusable most of its existing stockpile of such fuel;

-- to agree not to use advanced IR-2 centrifuges, which can enrich nuclear fuel five times faster than older centrifuges;

-- not to activate a plutonium reactor at Arak.

In turn, the P5+1 would agree:

-- to unfreeze some Iranian assets held in banks overseas;

-- to consider easing sanctions banning trade in gold, precious metals and petrochemicals.

Other sweeteners were also under consideration, they said.

One of the officials said the deal is designed to "stop Iran's progress by stopping the shortening of time by which they could build a nuclear weapon" while also providing temporary, reversible sanctions relief to Iran.

That official cautioned the deal is not done, but said it could happen if the Iranians agree to the P5+1's demands.

Most sanctions to stay in place

Speaking to NBC on Thursday, Obama said the United States would retain its "core sanctions" in place against Iran while granting "very modest relief" from economic sanctions.

"So that if it turned out during the course of the six months when we're trying to resolve some of these bigger issues that they're backing out of the deal, they're not following through on it, or they're not willing to go forward and finish the job of giving us assurances that they're not developing a nuclear weapon," Obama told NBC, "we can crank that dial back up."

Broader implications

Such a deal would be "stunning," said Jane Harman, director of the Woodrow Wilson Center and a former member of the House Intelligence Committee.

"This is way beyond the initial deal that people speculated about," she said on CNN's "New Day" on Friday.

"If this can work, if they can get to this agreement today, I see all kinds of advantages for other issues pending in the Middle East, like Syria," she said.

Iran's cooperation could be key to ending the civil war there, she said.

'Getting to the root of the problem'

The details were hashed out during a bilateral U.S.-Iran meeting -- part of an apparent effort on each side to mend fences -- which lasted about an hour on the sidelines of broader talks under way in Geneva.

The U.S. delegation was led by Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman. The Iranian delegation was led by Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi.

"The main issue is getting to the root of the problem, which is the enrichment issue and all things that lead from that," Michael Mann, spokesman for Ashton, said on the sidelines of negotiations.

Moments later, the Iranian state-run Fars News Agency tweeted a quote from Araqchi: "Enrichment is our red line and its suspension is unacceptable."

When CNN asked Araqchi about the issue of uranium enrichment, he declined to answer.

"The talks are extremely complex and are now going into a serious phase," Mann said. "We want to focus on substance and hope there will be concrete progress over the next couple of days."

Zarif said Iran's nuclear program would continue in some form.

"There won't be a suspension of our enrichment program in its entirety," he said. "But we can deal with various issues. Various issues are on the table."

History of the issue

The sudden progress in meetings between Iran and the group of nations known as the P5+1 or EU3+3 -- United States, France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany -- comes after years of stalemate between Western nations and Iran over its nuclear program.

It also follows a slight thaw in relations between Iran and the West under newly elected president Hassan Rouhani.

Iran has always maintained its nuclear program is for purely peaceful purposes, despite repeated findings by U.N. weapons inspectors that the country appeared to be conducting nuclear weapons research.

In August, the International Atomic Energy Agency --the U.N. nuclear watchdog -- estimated that since declaring its nuclear program, Iran has processed 10 metric tons of uranium to 5 percent purity, the level used for nuclear power plants.

The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that Iran has a stockpile of 410 pounds (185 kilograms) of uranium at 20 percent purity.

Weapons experts warn that this uranium could be further refined for use in a nuclear warhead.

Although experts suggest that amount would not be enough for a single warhead, the IAEA has warned that it believes Iran's nuclear program could have "possible military dimensions."

Iran has been under crippling U.N. sanctions related to its nuclear program since 2006. The United States first sanctioned Iran over its nuclear program in 2000.

Resolutions and sanctions passed by the United Nations in 2006 called on Iran to halt all enrichment activities and clarify that its nuclear facilities were being used for peaceful purposes only.

CNN's Karl Penhaul reported from Geneva. CNN's Elise Labott reported from Washington. CNN's Yousuf Basil contributed to this report.

™ & © 2013 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.

 

Pacific NW Carpenters Union

Commenting Guidelines

  • Keep it clean: Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language
  • No personal attacks: We reserve the right to remove offensive comments
  • Be truthful: Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything
  • Be nice: No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person
  • Help us: If you see an abusive post, let us know at info@theskanner.com
  • Keep to topic: We will remove irrelevant posts and spam
  • Share with us: We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts; the history behind an article

Recently Published by The Skanner News

  • Default
  • Title
  • Date
  • Random
  • When should we use military to enforce US goals? NASHUA, N.H. (AP) — Rand Paul lashed out Saturday at military hawks in the Republican Party in a clash over foreign policy dividing the packed GOP presidential field. Paul, a first-term senator from Kentucky who favors a smaller U.S. footprint in the world, said that some of his Republican colleagues would do more harm in international affairs than would leading Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton. "The other Republicans will criticize the president and Hillary Clinton for their foreign policy, but they would just have done the same thing — just 10 times over," Paul said on the closing day of a New Hampshire GOP conference that brought about 20 presidential prospects to the first-in-the-nation primary state. "There's a group of folks in our party who would have troops in six countries right now, maybe more," Paul said. Foreign policy looms large in the presidential race as the U.S. struggles to resolve diplomatic and military conflicts across the globe. The GOP presidential class regularly rails against President Barack Obama's leadership on the world stage, yet some would-be contenders have yet to articulate their own positions, while others offered sharply different visions. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose brother, President George W. Bush, authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, declined to say whether he would have done anything different then. Yet Jeb Bush acknowledged a shift in his party against new military action abroad. "Our enemies need to fear us, a little bit, just enough for them to deter the actions that create insecurity," Bush said earlier in the conference. He said restoring alliances "that will create less likelihood of America's boots on the ground has to be the priority, the first priority of the next president." The GOP's hawks were well represented at the event, led by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has limited foreign policy experience but articulated a muscular vision during his Saturday keynote address. Walker said the threats posed by radical Islamic terrorism won't be handled simply with "a couple bombings." "We're not going to wait till they bring the fight to us," Walker said. "We're going to bring the fight to them and fight on their soil." South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham addressed the question of putting U.S. troops directly in the battle against the Islamic State group militants by saying there is only one way to defeat the militants: "You go over there and you fight them so they don't come here." Texas Sen. Ted Cruz suggested an aggressive approach as well. "The way to defeat ISIS is a simple and clear military objective," he said. "We will destroy them." Businesswoman Carly Fiorina offered a similar outlook. "The world is a more dangerous and more tragic place when America is not leading. And America has not led for quite some time," she said. Under Obama, a U.S.-led coalition of Western and Arab countries is conducting regular airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria. The U.S. also has hundreds of military advisers in Iraq helping Iraqi security forces plan operations against the Islamic State, which occupies large chunks of northern and western Iraq. Paul didn't totally reject the use of military force, noting that he recently introduced a declaration of war against the Islamic State group. But in an interview with The Associated Press, he emphasized the importance of diplomacy. He singled out Russia and China, which have complicated relationships with the U.S., as countries that could contribute to U.S. foreign policy interests. "I think the Russians and the Chinese have great potential to help make the world a better place," he said. "I don't say that naively that they're going to, but they have the potential to." Paul suggested the Russians could help by getting Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power. "Maybe he goes to Russia," Paul said. Despite tensions with the U.S., Russia and China negotiated alongside Washington in nuclear talks with Iran. Paul has said he is keeping an open mind about the nuclear negotiations. "The people who already are very skeptical, very doubtful, may not like the president for partisan reasons," he said, and "just may want war instead of negotiations."
    Read More
  • Some lawmakers, sensing a tipping point, are backing the parents and teachers who complain about 'high stakes' tests   
    Read More
  • Watch Rachel Maddow interview VA Secretary Robert McDonald  
    Read More
  • Some two thousand people pack halls to hear Trayvon Martin's mom speak   
    Read More
load morehold SHIFT key to load allload all

PHOTO GALLERY

Calendar

About Us

Breaking News

The Skanner TV

Turn the pages

Hood to Coast
The Skanner Photo Archives