US, Europe Set Terms On Iran Nukes

U.S. and European negotiators at a key meeting of the U.N. atomic watchdog agency agreed Friday on the text of a resolution meant to curb Iran's access to technology that could be used to make nuclear weapons and setting an indirect deadline on Tehran to meet their conditions.

Diplomats said the resolution was formally submitted to the board of governors' conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency late in the day, paving the way for the meeting to approve it on Saturday.

Nonaligned nations — traditionally Iran's allies at the meeting —
had delayed proceedings Friday, forcing adjournment until Saturday. They had demanded the draft be softened to remove all references to the need for Iran to freeze all uranium enrichment and related activities.

A diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he believed that attempt had been rejected by the European Union, the United States, Canada and Australia, who had worked on the original text. But he said it was possible the version submitted had been slightly modified to accommodate both their wishes and Russian calls for cosmetic changes to the wording.

But even the original draft — without any changes — left open the possibility of new confrontation with the United States when the meeting reconvenes in November.

It demanded Iran suspend all uranium enrichment activities — but also recognized the right of countries to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, a phrase that left Tehran plenty of wiggle room.

Iran says it is already honoring a pledge to freeze enrichment, and Tehran's chief delegate to the meeting suggested his country would keep that suspension in effect at least until the November deadline set by the draft resolution.

But Iran says it is interested in enrichment only to generate power, denying accusations by the United States that it wants to produce weapons-grade uranium for nuclear warheads.

Hossein Mousavian, the chief delegate to the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors' meeting, suggested recognition of countries' right to nuclear technology for nonmilitary use meant Iran had the right to enrich, whenever it decided to end its partial freeze.

"For us, two or three months of (continued) suspension is not the issue," he told The Associated Press. "For us, the recognition of the right to Iran" to possess technology for nonmilitary use "is the most important issue."

He said the "decision-makers in Tehran" would soon decide whether to extend Iran's present freeze on enrichment. But he said any extension would be restricted to the suspension now in effect that on actual production of enriched uranium and not include related activities.

That would run counter to the demand in the draft that calls on Iran to "immediately suspend all enrichment-related activities," including making, assembling and testing centrifuges and the production of uranium hexafluoride, which when spun, turns into enriched uranium.

The draft also expressed alarm at Iranian plans to process more than 40 tons of raw uranium into uranium hexafluoride feed stock for enrichment.

Iran is not prohibited from enrichment under its obligations to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty but faces growing international pressure to suspend such activities as a good-faith gesture.

IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei said an Iranian decision to at least maintain its present, limited suspension freeze would "be a step in the right direction." But he said he preferred "full suspension."

The text said the November board meeting will decide "whether or not further steps are required." Diplomats familiar with the draft defined that phrase as shorthand for possible referral of Iran to the U.N. Security Council if it defies the conditions set in the resolution.

By giving the Iranians room to maneuver on enrichment, the text appeared to fall far short of what the Americans had wanted. Washington had pushed to drop mention of countries' right to peaceful nuclear technology and fought for an Oct. 31 deadline, with the understanding that if Iran failed to comply with the resolution's demands, the board would then automatically begin deliberations on Security Council referral.

A European diplomat familiar with the negotiations leading to the draft said, however, that Washington had to give in to united European opposition.

"I have seldom heard as many 'nos' as when Oct. 31 was mentioned," said the diplomat, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity. The Russians, Chinese and nonaligned nations were opposed to striking the right of countries to peaceful use of nuclear energy, he said.

The United States has for months sought to have Iran hauled before the Security Council, alleging that it continues to hide a secret nuclear weapons program. While European nations also share concerns about Iran's activities, the draft reflected their efforts to give Tehran more time to comply before turning to the Security Council, which has the power to impose economic and political sanctions.

"I don't see any reason for going to the Security Council," Mousavian said, arguing that enrichment was not prohibited by any agreement Tehran had with the IAEA.

The draft also called on IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei to submit a report by November reviewing the past two years of his Iran probe, and demanded Iran "resolve all outstanding issues and inconsistencies" feeding fears it may have a weapons program.

Amid the back-room negotiations, a row erupted between Washington and the agency, as a U.S. official expressed alarm about a possible nuclear weapons-related test site in Iran and accused the IAEA of keeping silent on its own concerns about the issue.

The official, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said the United States believed that Iran's Parchin complex, southeast of Tehran, is being used by the Islamic Republic to test high explosives, possibly for use with nuclear weapons.

Both Iran and the IAEA denied the accusations. ElBaradei said Saturday his agency does not "have any indication that this site had any nuclear-related activity."