Iran upbeat on nuclear visit, delays EU (embargo) Bill

[Ghost Dog]

... Less than one week after the EU's 27 member states agreed to stop importing crude from Iran from July 1, Iranian lawmakers were due to debate a bill later Sunday that would cut off oil supplies to the European Union (EU) in a matter of days.

Iranian lawmakers postponed discussing the bill.

"No such draft bill has yet been drawn up and nothing has been submitted to the parliament. What exists is a notion by the deputies which is being seriously pursued to bring it to a conclusive end," Emad Hosseini, spokesman for parliament's Energy Committee, told Mehr.

"Some MPs had an idea that should be studied by the energy committee before being drafted as a bill. We hope our discussions will be finished by Friday."...

/... http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/01/29/uk-iran-idUKTRE80S01E20120129

The Reuters article discusses the IAEA inspectors' visit, with Iran House Speaker Ali Larijani describing it as a test of the IAEA. "The route for further cooperation will be open if the team carries out its duties professionally, otherwise, if the IAEA turns into a tool (for major powers to pressure Iran), then Iran will have no choice but to consider a new framework in its ties with the agency." Reuters refers to "Western diplomats, who have often accused Iran of using such offers of dialogue as a stalling tactic while it presses ahead with its nuclear program" - I suppose the meaning here is clear enough to DUers - as doubting in advance that Iran will provide the "full cooperation required."

What exactly is this "full cooperation" of which they speak? A report I saw on RT last night referred to Iran being required by these same "Western diplomats" to "prove their nuclear program is peaceful (ie. not military)," - which struck me as highly reminiscent of the requirement placed on Saddam's Iraq to prove they had no WMD and as such is a requirement logically-impossible to fulfil.

[ronnie624]

1. "prove their nuclear program is peaceful"

I see that nonsense all the time. It's clearly illogical, both legally and scientifically, and there is no such obligation in the NPT. Signitories of the NPT are required to declare their intentions with regard to developing nuclear technology and open their facilities to inspection by the IAEA.

Article IV:

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

And from the preamble:

Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,

Incidentally, the U.S. does not allow inspections of facilities it regards as essential to national security

[link:http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html|

[JJW]

2. OIL

Just like Iraq, they have oil that the US wants to control. So there will be war.

[Ghost Dog]

3. So it appears.

The question for 'traders' would be exactly, in MSM terms, when? There's an entertaining (comments) ZeroHedge thread on this here: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/iran-blinks-delays-vote-european-crude-export-halt-even-us-escalates-military-developments-agai

ZeroHedge concludes:

... Alas, ... we are rather confident that Iran's latest gambit to show a modicum of goodwill behind the scenes will soon be extinguished.