IRAN: World powers ponder draft nuclear resolution as ElBaradei pleads with Tehran
Los Angeles Times / Borzou Daragahi
25-Nov-2009 (one comment)

Late-breaking developments today in the international standoff over Iran's nuclear program:

The Times has obtained a draft United Nations Security Council resolution  scolding Iran for its nuclear research program.

Also, at a press appearance, International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who ends a 12-year tenure next week, practically with pleaded Iran to accept an international proposal to trade in its potentially dual-use enriched uranium for fuel rods for a Tehran medical reactor.

"There is a golden opportunity for Iran right now ...  to shift gears from confrontation to cooperation," he told reporters in Vienna, headquarters of the atomic energy watchdog.

>>>
recommended by Shifteh Ansari

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
Dan Huck

Iran agrees to swap weaponizable for non-weaponizable U.

by Dan Huck on Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:19 PM PST

Do I have this wrong?

Iran agrees to swap weaponizable (with extensive processing) low-enriched uranium for the non-weaponizable fuel rods.

Contrary to the Associated Press interpretation of the  proposal being an "effective rejection" of the UN brokered plan, Iran's plan assumes the West's intentions were honest, i.e., to make sure Iran has the enriched uranium it needs for it's reactor to produce the medically-related products. A side benefit which should reduce the nervousness of the west resultant from Iran having so much potentially weaponizable uranium on hand would result. The weaponizable low-enriched uranium would go out at the same time the non-weaponizable fuel rods would go in to Iran. Depending on how quickly France might be able to produce the fuel rods with enriched uranium of their own, the Iranian supplies would be replaced with the far less problematic fuel rods.

This proposal simply guarantees both sides will remain honest in the transaction. The only problem we might have with that is if our intentions were in reality dishonest; i.e., if we did not have the intention of following through with the agreement.

It would be easy to read Dr. ElBaradei's statement suggesting a swap on Iranian territory would be a non-starter for that reason, rather than anything concerned with non-performance on the part of the Iranians.

He said "You need to [take] the material from Iran to defuse the crisis and to open space for negotiations. What we ask Iran is to take minimum, minimum of risk for peace and to have an agreement not based on distrust, but based on trust."

Is he saying to Iran 'Yes, we'll do this swap, but give us your Uranium so we're comfortable, and then we'll do a little more negotiating.' ?

That's what it sounds like to me - something like those games we used to see on TV where something was put under an upside down cup on a table, along with a couple of other cups which had nothing under them, and then they are moved around with a few quick moves, and presto, you pick up the cup you are sure your treasure is under, and it's not there!


  •