WASHINGTON, Aug. 5, 2008

U.S.: Iran Response On Nukes Unacceptable

Sanctions Against Tehran Believed More Likely Following Reply From Iran Regarding West's Incentives Offer

  •  (AP / CBS)

  • Video Iran Nuclear Program Freeze?

    Officials have discussed a freeze on Iran's nuclear development program, which would then lead several Western nations to freeze any new sanctions against Iran. Elizabeth Palmer reports from Geneva.

  • Video Iran Produces Enriched Uranium

    The U.S. will negotiate with Iran despite the country's production of enriched uranium. The Bush administration previously refused to negotiate unless production was suspended. David Martin reports.

  • Timeline The U.S. And Iran

    Key events in once friendly, now contentious relationship between Washington and Tehran.

  • Timeline Iran Nuclear Chronology

    Events in development of Iran's nuclear program since it first came to light.

(AP)  Iran's response to an incentives package aimed at defusing a dispute over its nuclear program is unacceptable, U.S. officials said Tuesday, making the prospects of new sanctions against the country more likely.

The officials told The Associated Press that a brief one-page document Iran presented to European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana is not, as had been sought, a definitive reply to the offer from major world powers to suspend uranium enrichment and reprocessing in exchange for economic and other benefits.

Instead, the officials said it was a restatement of Tehran's earlier insistence on the right to conduct peaceful nuclear activities and essentially a transcription of portions of recent telephone conversations to that effect between Solana and chief Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili.

One official familiar with the document described it as "more obfuscation and delay" and not a "real response" to the package, which was presented earlier this year by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Solana's office has not yet characterized the Iranian reply.

The officials said the lack of a clear response meant that discussion of new sanctions against Iran could begin as early as Wednesday when senior diplomats from the six countries that made the offer will speak in a conference call to discuss the way ahead.

"We are looking for a clear, positive response from Iran and in the absence of that we're going to have no choice but to pursue further measures against them," said State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos.

The United States and others accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian atomic energy program. Iran denies the charge.

The EU diplomat said Solana had talked on the telephone with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, and more talks could be expected in the coming days.

The United States and its European allies fear Iran intends to use the technology to develop material for nuclear weapons under the cloak of a civilian nuclear power program. Iran denies that.

The U.N. Security Council has already adopted three sanctions resolutions against Iran. The United States, the European Union, and individual EU members have imposed their own financial measures against Iranian entities and individuals.

On July 19, the six nations - Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States - set an informal two-week deadline for Iran to either accept or reject the economic incentives in return for curbing its uranium enrichment.

On Sunday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said diplomacy was the only way out of the standoff and insisted he was serious about negotiations. Those comments came a day after he asserted his country would not give up its "nuclear rights," signaling that it would refuse demands to stop enriching uranium or at least not to expand its enrichment work.

Also Saturday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States would have no choice "but to begin again to prepare sanctions resolutions for the (U.N.) Security Council" if Iran did not halt the development of its enrichment program.

© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 148 Comments
by nincomp August 7, 2008 2:13 AM EDT
What if Iran offers the G-8 countries to dismantle their nuke programs?
Reply to this comment
by factsearcher August 6, 2008 11:38 PM EDT
This is a stalling game right now... Iran knows this administration doesnt have the Go card to seriously engaged in another war...besides we are streched as it is.
They are playing the game assuming Obama will be the next president...but if he''s not.... Iran, here we go!
Reply to this comment
by rickstas August 6, 2008 8:46 PM EDT
I can''t believe that ANYBODY would believe scumbag Bush or any of the human garbage in his corrupt administration.
Reply to this comment
by vietnam21 August 6, 2008 6:57 PM EDT
Time for George W Bushie to tell more lies to the American Public and lie about stuff and then justify attacking Iran.

FYI: George W. Bush 75% of Americans dont believe a word you say any more and think your a major looser and douschbag.

Posted by XmanBorg

Speak for your self, I think 75% of Americans are believe George Bush, I believe him..
Reply to this comment
by xmanborg August 6, 2008 6:51 PM EDT
Time for George W Bushie to tell more lies to the American Public and lie about stuff and then justify attacking Iran.

FYI: George W. Bush 75% of Americans dont believe a word you say any more and think your a major looser and douschbag.
Reply to this comment
by tbweb August 6, 2008 4:02 PM EDT
Iran could launch a series of missiles armed with nuclear warheads at Israel. The weapons are guided by Russian satellites.

Posted by Petro49L at 07:58 AM : Aug 06, 2008,,,

Russia doesn''t even have nationwide GPS in place yet! Guiding Iran`s missiles by Russian satellites is a stretch! lol
Reply to this comment
by tbweb August 6, 2008 3:19 PM EDT
Iranians can remove the Clerics if they wanted too...

Posted by trishab4 at 10:28 AM : Aug 06, 2008,,,

Of course, but at what price? How many deaths? The Clerics won`t go quietly into the night!

Reply to this comment
by vietnam21 August 6, 2008 3:17 PM EDT
A fourth set of SANCTION ????
Bunch off dump as# and a waste of time....
Reply to this comment
by kretos_d August 6, 2008 2:08 PM EDT
*** liberals they are traitor to israel
Posted by terrorislamv

*** YOU MAN
Reply to this comment
by txgrouch2006 August 6, 2008 2:00 PM EDT
YOU DO NOT LIKE THE USA IN THE MIDDLE EAST,,,

BLAME THE DEMONIC-RATS,,,

Posted by terrorislamv at 08:23 AM : Aug 06, 2008

"Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.

%u201DThe international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. "

Speech from the Oval Office by President William Clinton, explaining his attack on Iraq
reported by The Associated Press
Wednesday, December 16, 1998

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/clintontext121698.htm

BTW, Bill Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998.

WHAT A COINCIDENCE!!!
Reply to this comment
by trishab4 August 6, 2008 1:28 PM EDT
My Preference? A separation between Church and State Worldwide! Religion and Politics don`t mix well, the administration of Public Services by a particular religion is usually tainted by a preference for the ruling religions members. The administration of Public Services should be neutral. This does not imply that the State and Religions can`t work together, just that all rights and views must be respected, even the rights of the atheist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by tbweb at 07:48 AM : Aug 06, 2008

-We all have one in our Country. It''s called the United Nations based in NewYork with branches (agencies) in Geneva, Switzerland, and other locations in the world. I always refer to it as the best tribune for quarelling nations to settle their differences.

-The ''happening'' of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a result of neglect over human rights and abuses by the Shah''s rule. Same thing with Hamas, Fidel Castro etc... all popular-based movements that lasted as long as the People wanted them to stay. Don''t you agree! Shah has been removed because the people wanted so. Iranians can remove the Clerics if they wanted too...

Cheers!
Reply to this comment
by kretos_d August 6, 2008 1:13 PM EDT
US should declare war on iran for israel

Posted by terrorislamv

HA HA HA lol you zionists make me sick
Reply to this comment
by kretos_d August 6, 2008 1:12 PM EDT
IRAN IS NO THREAT TO AMERICA

WHY DOES AMERICA CARE?

WHO IS KEEPING THIS IN THE NEWS?

THE SAME IDIOTS THAT STARTED THE IRAQ WAR!

START WAR CRIMES TRIALS NOW...

Posted by bluestardad
Reply to this comment
by whiskyrokkr August 6, 2008 11:11 AM EDT
imprisonkarl
----------
You are my new "hero".
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad August 6, 2008 10:59 AM EDT
IRAN IS NO THREAT TO AMERICA

WHY DOES AMERICA CARE?

WHO IS KEEPING THIS IN THE NEWS?

THE SAME IDIOTS THAT STARTED THE IRAQ WAR!

START WAR CRIMES TRIALS NOW...
Reply to this comment
by petro49l August 6, 2008 10:58 AM EDT
Iran could launch a series of missiles armed with nuclear warheads at Israel. The weapons are guided by Russian satellites. Israeli defense systems would only destroy about half of the incoming bombs. It makes better sense negotiating with the Iranis. They need only one missile to strike a Jewish city. There is no reason to fulfill Hitler''s vision of an air raid on Jerusalem.
Reply to this comment
by tbweb August 6, 2008 10:48 AM EDT
-p.s. would you vote for the return of British Monarchy in the States? I doubt it! Or maybe you''''d prefer the return of the corrupt Shah!

Posted by trishab4 at 06:53 AM : Aug 06, 2008,,,

My Preference? A separation between Church and State Worldwide! Religion and Politics don`t mix well, the administration of Public Services by a particular religion is usually tainted by a preference for the ruling religions members. The administration of Public Services should be neutral. This does not imply that the State and Religions can`t work together, just that all rights and views must be respected, even the rights of the atheist.
Reply to this comment
by imprisonkarl August 6, 2008 10:46 AM EDT
obama441 --

Why the chicken-s#*t games? Afraid to post your own sewage?

Creatures like you are so transparent -- your sexual dysfunctions come thru loud & clear in your postings.

Studies have proven that individuals who exhibit overt racism, like you -- and are proud of it -- have deep-seated sexual dysfunction "issues."

The findings were based on the case history of a pre-WWII psychological assessment of a rather disturbed figure: Adolf Hitler.

You blend.
Reply to this comment
by obama441 August 6, 2008 10:40 AM EDT
F.UCKEN MEXICANS WE DON''T NEED YOU Posted by terrorislamv
Reply to this comment
by imprisonkarl August 6, 2008 10:29 AM EDT
terrorislamv --

Do the caretakers at your asylum know you''ve missed your meds and have access to computers?

Looks like *** Cheney''s planned invasion of Iran is right on track.

My guess is he''s holding off until the Rethuglican convention or shortly thereafter.

The invasion will be closely followed by a Cheney-engineered coup d''etat using Blackwater thugs, and Dumbya will be all too happy to retire to Texas where he can indulge himself in his sexual fantasies (you know he''s gay, right? -- always has been).

The "successful" formula that followed the invasion of Iraq will be repeated, with supply & reconstruction contracts doled out to special friends of the new regime, ensuring the endless rape of the US Treasury, with our children and grandchildren -- and even great-grandchildren -- becoming economic slaves ad infinitum.

Yes, Obama''s vision of America''s future is so much worse than the Neocon Fascist Plan. Remember, when fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag. And fascist tools like terrorislamv will be waving that flag more than anyone.
Reply to this comment
See all 148 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: