Iran proposes restart to nuclear talks

This photo released by the Iranian President's Office, claims to show Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, second left being escorted by technicians during a tour of Tehran's research reactor centre in northern Tehran, Iran, Feb. 15, 2012. / AP Photo/Iranian President's Office

WASHINGTON - Iran has told world powers it is ready to resume talks as soon as possible over its disputed nuclear program, according to a letter obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, an offer that could reflect its difficulty in coping with tough U.S. and European sanctions, or amount to another delaying tactic as it moves ahead with activities that could bring it closer to developing an atomic bomb.

The letter from chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili was sent Tuesday, just a day before Iran claimed two major advances in producing nuclear fuel and indicated it was on the verge of imposing an oil embargo on European countries to retaliate for sanctions. The Obama administration dismissed the announcements as unimpressive and said Tehran's erratic behavior was indicative of the squeeze it is feeling as a result of hard-hitting economic measures against it.

"We voice our readiness for dialogue on a spectrum of various issues which can provide ground for constructive and forward looking cooperation," Jalili wrote in the letter to EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, the point of contact for the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, who are demanding that Iran freeze all uranium enrichment.

Iran defiant, but is it just a show?
Expert: Iran offers no surprises over nukes
U.S., EU eye risky move to cripple Iran finances

Ashton had written Jalili in October, offering Iran a new round of talks toward an agreement that "restores international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program." The West fears Iran seeks nuclear weapons, and speculation is rife that Israel may launch a pre-emptive strike to set back the program.

Jalili welcomed Ashton's statement of respect for Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy use and said that "by committing to this approach, our talks for cooperation based on step-by-step principles and reciprocity on Iran's nuclear issue could be commenced," according to a translated copy of the letter.

A "constructive and positive attitude towards Islamic Republic of Iran's new initiatives in this round of talks could open (a) positive perspective for our negotiation," Jalili wrote. "Therefore, within this context, I propose to resume our talks in order to take fundamental steps for sustainable cooperation in the earliest possibility, in a mutually agreed venue and time."

But Jalili's four-paragraph, one-page letter offered no concessions. EU and U.S. officials declined to comment Wednesday, saying they were still studying the letter.

In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad oversaw the insertion of the first Iranian domestically made fuel rod into a research reactor in northern Tehran. Separately, the semiofficial Fars agency reported that a "new generation of Iranian centrifuges" had started operation at the country's main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz in central Iran.

White House press secretary Jay Carney called these "provocative acts, defiant acts, statements that are designed to distract attention from the demonstrated impact that the sanctions are having, the demonstrated impact that the isolation of Iran is having."

"We are very confident that the sanctions have put enormous pressure on the Iranian economy and on the Iranian regime," he told reporters. "It is not unusual for Iran to try to distract attention from those uncomfortable facts and from its overall isolation by some burst of rhetoric or making some announcement."

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the Iranian uranium enrichment milestone is "not terribly new, and it's not terribly impressive."

"The Iranians have for many months been putting out calendars of accomplishments, and based on their own calendars, they are many, many months behind," she said.

Asked about Jalili's letter to Ashton, Nuland said the U.S. was speaking with its partners about it. Hinting at the contents of the Iranian response, however, she said: "It may be that they felt the need to bluster on their nuclear side even as they make clear that they do want to come back to the table for talks."

Some experts like David Albright, founder of the non-governmental Institute for Science and International Security, found no new evidence Iran is dramatically closer to building a bomb. (Watch David Martin's report on Iran's nuclear developments at left.)

"The announcement today certainly is an attempt to show Iranian resolve in the face of international opposition, but they say that every day, and this doesn't really add any credibility to that threat," Albright said.

"But it does show continuing progress that's building toward a capability that if Iran made a decision to build nuclear weapons it could implement fairly quickly," he added.

Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom, speaking to the Ohio Legislature on Wednesday, said the Iranian activity signaled the need for harsher sanctions on the Tehran regime.

"The world should realize if they won't stop them immediately, finally it might be too late. ... The time has come to impose more sanctions on Iran, tougher sanctions on Iran that might bring them to change their attitude. Until then, Iranians will continue," he said.

[gabenow]

Jeremy Bernstein of the New Yorker wrote an interesting piece on how Iran obtained nuclear weapons. Worth reading, for those interested: http://******/RvCmG

[FactNotRhetoric]

The Saudi Dictator wants us to overthrow Iran for him. The Saudi Dictator wants Washington to sacrifice thousands of American Lives, borrow and spend $Trillions of American Dollars, and sacrifice almost a million innocent Middle Eastern citizens and civilians, to overthrow Iran.

Iran's bluster is to keep the Saudi Dictator from convincing Washington to overthrow Iran for the Saudi Dictator.

If I were Iran, I would also be deadly serious about engaging in Nuclear talks, this will also keep the Saudi Dictator from overthrowing Iran at Washington's expense. It takes the wind out of the Saudi Dictator's FALSE FLAG claims that Iran is a nuclear threat.

The Saudi Dictator did the same FALSE FLAG to Washington in Iraq with a taxi driver as their expert that Iraq was creating nuclear weapons.

When the Saudis flew jets into the twin towers, the Saudi dictator also did a FALSE FLAG and blamed Uranium Rich Afghanistan as the evil demon so Washington would overthrow Afghanistan and hand it over to the Saudi Dictator.

The way Washington hands these countries over to the Saudi Dictator is by leaving "Saudi written Sharia Law" in the constitutions of each of these countries. "Saudi written Sharia Law" added to the constitution of any country, will kill any DEMOCRACY, and replace it with a bloody, genocidal, Hitler-Like, Saudi Dictatorship.

Washington left "Saudi written Sharia Law" in the constitutions of Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen and Kenya. Now the Saudi Dictator once again wants Washington to sacrifice American lives, and borrow $Trillions of American Dollars, to overthrow Iran.

[kcits]

I agree. We have to look at the costs in lives of our young people that would fight and the costs we would pass along to our children's children's children.

We are not the worlds police. There is no threat to the US from Iran even if they have a nuclear bomb. Its high time we take care of our own country and people before fighting wars that in the long run accomplish nothing.

[baileyccc]

I wonder why they are finally coming around?

[Bean-Eater22]

It's only a stall tactic.

[ricscore]

And the point would be?

[venusvegasvada]

Still playing games. I wouldn't trust them with a loaded PEZ dispenser.

They must have heard about their impending ouster from being able to access the "SWIFT" financial system.

I hope they press for the shut down and removal of all their nuclear centrifuges and material and a promise end to their quest of being able to manufacture fuel that is one grade short of bomb material. If they agree to that, that will show they have some comprehension.

[kcits]

Exactly why should we in the US expect Iran to give up on something that is guaranteed in a treaty we signed with them? If we do expect it, should we expect anyone to trust us on treaty's in the future?

The nuclear nonproliferation treaty gives all signatories the right to peaceful nuclear technology. The US and Iran are signatories.

20% is not one step short of weapons grade which needs to me 90% or better. 20% is what is needed in medical reactors, which we have stopped Iran from buying. So if they are in need of medical isotopes the only way to get them is to make the fuel.