Iran ready for “full’ cooperation with IAEA: envoy

[bemildred]

MOSCOW - Iran’s ambassador to the UN’s nuclear watchdog said here Friday that Tehran was ready for “full” cooperation with that agency and was prepared to answer all questions about its nuclear program, RIA Novosti news agency reported.

“Iran plans to continue its full cooperation with the IAEA. We are ready to eliminate all outstanding doubts about our nuclear dossier,” the envoy, Ali Akbar Salehi, was quoted as saying in a speech to participants at a security conference in Moscow.

Salehi’s comments came a day after a senior UN nuclear inspector put off a trip to Iran in what diplomats in Vienna said was a clear sign that Tehran is failing to give the UN atomic agency key concessions it demands.

RIA Novosti reported that he also said the Iranian leadership was prepared to place its nuclear facilities under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but it provided no direct quotation from him to this effect.

Khaleej Times

[Javaman]

1. But doesn't he already have to allow the IAEA full access?

I'm probably wrong on this, but I had thought, acccording to international agreement any nation using Nuclear Energy as a source of power has to give full access to IAEA.

Am I wrong in this notion?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. When's the last time the IAEA visited the U. S.?

[Javaman]

14. From what I understand, all the time. Now back to my question...

Hasn't Iran complied with IAEA? And isn't that how we found out that they only have a very tiny amount of fuel grade nuclear material? 3.5% pure to be exact and not the 80%+ that is needed for weapons.

[oblivious]

15. Iran stopped the snap inspections in February when reported to the UN.

Now the IAEA still has complete access to nuclear sites, but visits must be arranged in advance.

So Iran is now following the basic requirements of the NPT, but no longer following the additional protocol, which the IAEA wants them to do to build confidence. I guess we can assume Iran will again allow snap inspections, with the justification that they are not really giving in to bullies since they were only 'reported' to the Security Council, not 'referred'. This means the dossier is still in IAEA hands, not the Security council's hands.

The big question is whether they will stop uranium conversion. They are allowed to continue this under the NPT, and so far it has been done with IAEA inspectors present.

[Javaman]

24. Thanks for the info...

your last sentance: "They are allowed to continue this under the NPT, and so far it has been done with IAEA inspectors present." is where I got my stories confused.

All clear now. :)

[ronnie624]

19. Self delete

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Full cooperation is unacceptable to the criminal bush regime.

The NPT allows enrichment of uranium by 'non-nuclear' nations. By continuing to abide by the terms of the NPT, which include full cooperation with the IAEA, the Iranian regime is clearly asking for war.

[Rose Siding]

3. The bushbots have rejected Iran's offers since 03

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_04/008657.php

The Cheney WH has its script and they're sticking to it.

[Village Idiot]

4. I believe the idea is to abrogate the NNPT...

...enabling the USA to build the next generation of nuclear weapons...

[leftchick]

5. too late. The Iran war has already begun

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/15.html#a7928

[bemildred]

6. What is going on now is just fooling around.

There does seems to be low-level and spook-oriented warfare going on,
with both the US and Iran participating, but it doesn't really mean
much (IMHO).

The fellow is probably right about the decision being made, certain
parties clearly want to get a war going. But I suspect that no date
has been selected yet, and it is still possible that none ever will be.

If they start bombing, then the shit will hit the fan.

[leftchick]

7. "the gates of hell will open"

I heard someone on CNNI say that earlier this week regarding and Iran strike and I agree. I wish I was as confident as you are. I have a bad, bad, BAD feeling about Iran. :(

[noonwitch]

9. I do too

Something does have to be done-Iran cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. They have made it pretty clear that they intend to use it on Israel. We can't stand by and let that happen (not that the Israelis will stand by). I think we should let the Israelis bomb their nuclear factories and then back the Israelis in the UN, while helping Iranian moderates work on a coup plan.

But I have no doubt Bush will find a way to make a mess of it, the way he has with Iraq and Afganistan.

[leftchick]

10. none of what you suggest is based on reality

1. Iran is at least 5-10 years away from producing ONE nuclear weapon. ONE.

2. The US has been standing by and letting it happen since 2003 when Iran offered to talk nukes with bushco** and was turned down.

3. The Israelis can not bomb their facilities because no one is sure where they all are.

4. The idea that "Iranian moderates" would overthrow the government through a coup after a bombing is laughable. A strike on Iran would have the exact opposite reaction from the population and the region.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

12. IMHO, your last sentence is the only valid point in your post.

[PaulaFarrell]

21. I don't think they have made it clear they would bomb Israel

Wild rhetorical statements do not constitute an actual threat. Iran has never attacked another country in modern history, and an attack on Israel of any sort would be suicidal. I don't want to see nukes in Iran or anywhere, but it was Israel that started that game in the Middle East.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. The Mother of All Gates of Hell!

:think:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

13. Hersh noted a while ago that he thought U. S. Special Forces...

...have been in Iran since 2004. That tactic parallels what we heard from Hersh prior to the "official" invasion of Iraq. As usual, Hersh's contacts are at high levels deep inside the NeoCon Junta.

"Fooling around"? Unfortunately, once the NeoCons reach this stage of activity, they are never just "fooling around".

[cantstandbush]

8. "Full cooperation" does not mean they will stop enrichment. Nor should

they.

[annabanana]

16. This will get NO, repeat, NO coverage..

It does not jive with the terra build-up story....

[baby_mouse]

17. So what ? nt

[phusion]

18. bookmark this n/t

[magellan]

20. Another step toward invasion

This is reading like a play-by-play on the lead up to "Operation Iraqi Freedom". I suspect that a year or two from now we'll be learning the Iranians had no nuclear weapons program, an interim government replete with US puppets will be in place, and I'll be reading a girl blog from Teheran to learn the truth of the daily horrors being perpetrated against the Iranian people by occupation forces....

[Orsino]

23. “Iran plans to continue its full cooperation..."

i.e., no change in policy. Empty words, as befitting an ambassador--with a misleading headline.