Ahmadinejad accepts uranium swap offer?

So according to reports, Ahmadinejad has said that Iran accepts the uranium swap offer. This isn't really news -- Ahmadinejad had expressed approval of the offer before, and was criticized for it by Mousavi, who is ostensibly the head of the "opposition" that the US is banking on (or not -- but that's another story...) And, even though the Iran hawks were quick to declare that the Iranians had rejected the offer and negotiations were at an end once their impose deadline of Jan 1st had ended, according to the IAEA the process was still continuing.

I believe that continues to be the case. The Iranians have fundamentally accepted the idea of an exchange, the only concern they have is about ensuring that the other side carries out its end of the bargain, and so they are negotiating over methods to ensure honesty on both sides by, for example, breaking down the exchange into separate batches.

And, as before, the US insists that there can be no derogation from the terms set out by them, take-it-or-leave-it, etc etc.

So in short, nothing has changed. As  far as I can tell, the only new thing is a statement by Ahmadinejad that if the US doesn't come through on the exchange, its no big deal since Iran can just continue enriching more uranium. That's probably true, but misses the point. The reason why this deal won't go through is because it is actually not any sort of compromise and will not meet the bottom lines of both sides as some of the proponents of the deal clamed (I think it was Dr. Gary Sick?) The bottom line of the Iranian side is that while they;re willign to make compromises on restricting enrichment (they always have been) they are not willing to give it up -- but the US side has made it clear that the deal is intended merely to deprive Iran of her stock of enriched uranium, thus buying more time for the US to continue the current policy of trying ti deprive Iran of her right to enrich Uranium in toto. So, the fundamental standoff continues.

Look folks, first of all I think we can all be pretty certain that that there is no way in hell that the US will ever allow any reactor fuel to go to Iran, deal or no deal. Exactly which US president will sign off on that order and face the backlash? None. So let me go on the record now, promising you my dear readers, that if the swap  deal goes through, and the time comes for the US to live up to its commitment under the bargain and provide Iran with reactor fuel, and if the fuel ever actually makes it into Iran, I will publicly eat my hat and will post photos on this blog. It just won't happen. Not in 6 months, not in a year, not in 5 years. We can be certain of that. I am willing to bet a million bucks.

I am also certain that this offer by the US was never meant to be accepted by the Iranians -- it was a ploy, designed to be rejected, thus allowing the US to paint Iran as the "intansigent" party and make further sanctions and eventually an attack on Iran more "sellable" to the public back home -- the Dennis Ross strategy. There's a long long history of Iran making compromise offers that would have addressed any real concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation, only to have the US totally ignore them and continue to move goalposts. Remember the Paris Agreement fiasco, when the Iranians actually suspended enrichment for more than two years in the hopes that the EU-3 would respond in accordance to the Iranian good faith gesture by recognizing Iran's rights? What happened then, remember? The US sumply boycotted the deal entire, the EU3 dragged their feet, falsely characterized the temporary Iranian suspension of enrichment as a permanent obligation, demanded that Iran abandon enrichment in violation of their own explicit agreement not to do so, and finally accused Iran of violating the Paris Agreement when Iran restarted enrichment. What did Iran get out of that? Nothing. Except proof that you can't simply hope that good faith will be met by good faith.

So let me predict something else for you: within a few hours, the US will declare that Ahmadinejad is merely trying to buy time and forestall sanctions, and this whole response by Iran to the offer is  merely an effort to split the "will of the international community" -- and various op-eds in the US media will sprout up speculating about secret Iranian intentions etc etc - and in short, they will simply dismiss the Iranian statements as irrelevant posturing.

Like I said, the Uranium exchange deal was an offer that was never meant to be accepted. The US side is out  to topple the regime, period. Get used that.

Comments

[stamboul]

"Look folks, first of all I think we can all be pretty certain that that there is no way in hell that the US will ever allow any reactor fuel to go to Iran, deal or no deal. Exactly which US president will sign off on that order and face the backlash?"

I may have misunderstood but I didn't think it would be the US providing reactor fuel to the Iranians. Under the intial terms of the deal mooted in October, wouldn't it have been France? Would the US Preisdent be in a position to formally block that?

[France and the others don't act without the OK of the US and any US president would have to OK the transfer of nuclear material to Iran. Ultimately, the power behind the sanctions is not France, it is the US and Israel.]

[Ali]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35220380/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

"West skeptical of Iran nuclear offer
Officials say Tehran will be measured in actions, not words
.
.
.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said he saw the surprise Iranian gesture as stalling rather than responding to an international offer that, if rejected, could lead to a fourth round of U.N. sanctions.

'My (personal) interpretation is that they are buying us time and they are losing it' themselves, Kouchner said at a joint press briefing with China's foreign minister. 'I am perplexed and even a bit pessimistic.'"

Looks like you were right except the responsibility for the making the accusation has been passed off to France.