Aa
Iran says to continue building at Arak nuclear site despite deal
(Reuters) - Iran will pursue construction at the Arak heavy-water reactor, Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif was quoted as saying on Wednesday, despite a deal with world powers to shelve a project they fear could yield plutonium for atomic bombs.
France, one of the six powers that negotiated Sunday's landmark initial accord with Iran to curb its disputed nuclear program, said in response to Zarif's statement that Tehran had to stick to what was agreed in the Geneva talks.
The uncompleted research reactor emerged as one of several big stumbling blocks in the marathon negotiations, in which Iran agreed to restrain its atomic activities for six months in return for limited sanctions relief. The agreement is intended to buy time for talks on a final settlement of the dispute.
Western powers fear Arak could be a source of plutonium - one of two materials, along with highly enriched uranium, that can be used for the core of a nuclear weapon - once it is operational. Iran says it would produce medical isotopes only.
According to the agreed text, Iran said it would not make "any further advances of its activities" on the Arak reactor, under construction near a western Iranian town with that name.
"Capacity at the Arak site is not going to increase. It means no new nuclear fuel will be produced and no new installations will be installed, but construction will continue there," Zarif told parliament in translated comments broadcast on Iran's Press TV.
When asked about this, French Foreign Ministry spokesman Romain Nadal said: "In the interim accord, the Arak reactor is specifically targeted and the end of all work at this reactor. In the agreement and the text, which has been approved by the Iranian authorities, the Arak reactor is clearly targeted."
Israel, widely believed to be the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East, has denounced the nuclear agreement with Iran as an "historical mistake" as it does not actually dismantle the program.
"The ink has not even dried on the agreement and already we are hearing provocative announcements from Iran, like this, whose coyness and ambiguity could well augur a breach of the deal," Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz told Reuters when asked about Zarif's statement.
DEAL "SILENT" ON KEY COMPONENTS
However, nuclear expert Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment think-tank said Zarif's statement seemed to be an attempt to reassure anti-Western hardliners in Iran that the Arak project will survive diplomacy with the powers.
"It doesn't matter whether Iran is doing excavation work or civil construction work around the reactor," Hibbs said.
"What matters for now is that there is no fuel production and testing, that there is no installation at the reactor. Freezing much more than that might be seen by hardliners as total suspension of the project and therefore unacceptable."
Other experts have said that an apparent loophole in the Geneva agreement could allow Iran to build components off-site to install later in the reactor.
"The agreement is silent on the manufacturing of remaining key components of the reactor and its continued heavy-water production," former chief U.N. nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen wrote in an analysis.
"Technically, such efforts are not reasonable if the goal is either to dismantle the reactor or modify it to a more proliferation-resistant, smaller light-water reactor as one of the alternative paths of producing isotopes for medical and industrial purposes," he said.
SOURCE: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/27/us-iran-nuclear-arak-idUSBRE9AQ0U120131127
France, one of the six powers that negotiated Sunday's landmark initial accord with Iran to curb its disputed nuclear program, said in response to Zarif's statement that Tehran had to stick to what was agreed in the Geneva talks.
The uncompleted research reactor emerged as one of several big stumbling blocks in the marathon negotiations, in which Iran agreed to restrain its atomic activities for six months in return for limited sanctions relief. The agreement is intended to buy time for talks on a final settlement of the dispute.
Western powers fear Arak could be a source of plutonium - one of two materials, along with highly enriched uranium, that can be used for the core of a nuclear weapon - once it is operational. Iran says it would produce medical isotopes only.
According to the agreed text, Iran said it would not make "any further advances of its activities" on the Arak reactor, under construction near a western Iranian town with that name.
"Capacity at the Arak site is not going to increase. It means no new nuclear fuel will be produced and no new installations will be installed, but construction will continue there," Zarif told parliament in translated comments broadcast on Iran's Press TV.
When asked about this, French Foreign Ministry spokesman Romain Nadal said: "In the interim accord, the Arak reactor is specifically targeted and the end of all work at this reactor. In the agreement and the text, which has been approved by the Iranian authorities, the Arak reactor is clearly targeted."
Israel, widely believed to be the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East, has denounced the nuclear agreement with Iran as an "historical mistake" as it does not actually dismantle the program.
"The ink has not even dried on the agreement and already we are hearing provocative announcements from Iran, like this, whose coyness and ambiguity could well augur a breach of the deal," Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz told Reuters when asked about Zarif's statement.
DEAL "SILENT" ON KEY COMPONENTS
However, nuclear expert Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment think-tank said Zarif's statement seemed to be an attempt to reassure anti-Western hardliners in Iran that the Arak project will survive diplomacy with the powers.
"It doesn't matter whether Iran is doing excavation work or civil construction work around the reactor," Hibbs said.
"What matters for now is that there is no fuel production and testing, that there is no installation at the reactor. Freezing much more than that might be seen by hardliners as total suspension of the project and therefore unacceptable."
Other experts have said that an apparent loophole in the Geneva agreement could allow Iran to build components off-site to install later in the reactor.
"The agreement is silent on the manufacturing of remaining key components of the reactor and its continued heavy-water production," former chief U.N. nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen wrote in an analysis.
"Technically, such efforts are not reasonable if the goal is either to dismantle the reactor or modify it to a more proliferation-resistant, smaller light-water reactor as one of the alternative paths of producing isotopes for medical and industrial purposes," he said.
SOURCE: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/27/us-iran-nuclear-arak-idUSBRE9AQ0U120131127
Put GWB back in the WH.
We'll be at war with Iran in no time flat!
1) War (Isn't the answer, because then we're stuck with another Afghanistan/Iraq/Korea/etc)
2) Negotiate (Can't, because they're shady and will back'door you 1st chance they get). Middle-Eastern/Arabs cannot be trusted... ever. History speaks for itself.
3) Leave them to their own devices (Can't do that...see #2 above)
4) Help them achieve their goals (refer to #2)
What to do, what to do, what to do...
Turn the entire region into a glass-factory?
We'll be at war with Iran in no time flat!
1) War (Isn't the answer, because then we're stuck with another Afghanistan/Iraq/Korea/etc)
2) Negotiate (Can't, because they're shady and will back'door you 1st chance they get). Middle-Eastern/Arabs cannot be trusted... ever. History speaks for itself.
3) Leave them to their own devices (Can't do that...see #2 above)
4) Help them achieve their goals (refer to #2)
What to do, what to do, what to do...
Turn the entire region into a glass-factory?
It can't be when the UN says we need to go to war.
When do you stop one and start the other?
You can negotiate or you can fight. I don't see any other alternative.
I'm just trying to figure out how anyone thought we'd be able to negotiate anything with Iran. I don't think war is the answer, but thinking we (of all interested parties) could send a guy in and get this resolved makes the country look more brain damaged than ever.
If anyone can point me to the point in time where Iran became the pillar of peace negotiations I'd be forever grateful.
If anyone can point me to the point in time where Iran became the pillar of peace negotiations I'd be forever grateful.
Maybe it's not about domestic politics.
I doubt that it is.
And then there is always the alternative favored by the neocons - WAR.
I doubt that it is.
And then there is always the alternative favored by the neocons - WAR.
I haven’t completed reading a single article on the issue. Because to me, it reeks of BS . Since I haven't been following it, I don't know what Obama's stance is. I think if I was Obama, I would play it low key, distance myself from it, and have a "Proceed with Caution Attitude." If he doesn't, he will get splattered again when the @%!t hits the fan. Also most Americans do not trust Iran so, he has nothing to gain anyway. With his approval rating slumping I wouldn't think Iran would be a good choice to Gamble on for gaining popularity with Americans.
Obama and Kerry haven’t even finished patting themselves & each other on the backs, and their "deal" is already falling apart.
Iran is simply running out the clock until it has nuclear weapons.
Once they have them, all negotiations will end and Iran will become another North Korea (and the threats will begin).
Iran is simply running out the clock until it has nuclear weapons.
Once they have them, all negotiations will end and Iran will become another North Korea (and the threats will begin).
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
