Iran refuses to give more details on weapons programme
Agence France Presse
05-Jun-2008 (5 comments)

Iran's contested atomic drive has dominated the four-day board meeting, which ended here Thursday, after agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei complained in his latest report that the Islamic republic was withholding key information that could shed light on the so-called alleged studies.

These include nuclear research, engineering work and testing carried out until a few years ago that may have had a possible military dimension.

recommended by News Goffer


News Goffer

Toofan and Abarmard

by News Goffer on

Of course you realize the three of us are all talking about the same thing. My only difference with the two of you is that I'm afraid Iran has lost so many chances for diplomacy through posturing (arbadeh keshi) and with three resolutions approved against it, it's hardly in a good position to negotiate now. Perhaps a temporary retreat is the best avenue at this time. I'm afraid the current course will not lead to Iranians' getting more points (or any points at all). It might in all likelihood, bring them a military attack instead.

P.S. I read an article by Omid Memarian which talked about Larijani's new position as Speaker of the Parliament. In it, he made a reference to Larijani's failure as head of the negotiating team on Iran's nuclear issue, first because he was inexperienced on international diplomatic protocols, and second because even after he learned those protocols at high cost to Iran, Ahmadinejad made every attempt to undermine and discredit Larijani. Take a look here: //


The problem

by ToofanZeGreat on

is that Iran wants to hold back some of their cooperation, especially when it comes to test sites that are involved with missile tech and the military. If the IRI gives away these sites, it will be like drawing out a map for the US to bomb in the future, pluss you want to have your own "incentives" when you negotiate with the EU and the US. The Additional protocol is one of them. In return, the US must give guarantes not to harm or attack Iran in a official treaty with Russia s a mediator and an observer to the pact.

Even if the US gave guarantes that it would not harm Iran, I would not trust it, we wrote an accord in Algiers where the US promised to stop doing so, years after, it seems like we were talking with air in Algiers as US financed Al Qaida groups like Jundullah blow up busses in Iran.


Good points

by Abarmard on

Based on right or wrong I said what I said. Base on the bullying power is another story. True that Iran does not have a good image, but to say "for diplomacy have been blown by Iranian representatives" is wrong. Iran is more than willing to work with the US, in the frame work that Iran will benefit from the situation, a logical demand.

Iran stopped its nuclear activites for about two years during the Khatami, and what did they gain? Nothing changed. The issue seems to be deeper than the Nuclear issue and this N issue seems to be an excuse.

Iran can be molded, can be worked with, as long as they can stand tall and say that we gained something...Which the US would never want to see.

I wish for Iran to calm down, but I do understand their position also.

News Goffer


by News Goffer on

Salam. The reason they should is that there have already been three UN Security Council resolutions against them. The reason they should is that through their inaction and lack of effective diplomacy, they put themselves in a very precarious position already. The reason they should answer and come clean now is because there are those in this world who are looking for exactly this kind of excuse to bomb Iran.

The bottom line is not "that Iran has no obligations based on the NPT or the UN, to provde any additional evidence for their program." The bottom line is that a slogan-driven foreign policy obviously does not work; diplomacy does. When all chances for diplomacy have been blown by Iranian representatives and Ahmadinejad himself, it gets really difficult to talk reason and bring up the US and Israel's shortcomings as opposed to defending Iran's actions. Remember how they were defying the warning calls until they got those three resolutions passed against them? Now they are in a pickle and unfair as it might be, they will need to use wisdom and diplomacy to get out. Seventy million people's lives and liveliehoods ride on this Abarmard.

That's why they should.


Why should they?

by Abarmard on

Has the US and Israel provide enough evidence to continue their harrassments for Iran? You can't just pick and choose your laws. It has to be universal for all. Bottom line is that Iran has no obligations based on the NPT or the UN, to provide any additional evidance for their program.