The New York Times published an op-ed by Ali Vaez and Charles Ferguson entitled "An Iranian offer worht considering" in which then say that Ahmadinejad's offer to cease 20% enrichment in exchange for receiving fuel for the Tehran Research reactor is worth exploring.
They say that "running out of the 20 percent-enriched uranium it needs to operate the reactor, and that appears to be making it amenable to compromise", and that "There is also the concern that Ahmadinejad’s offer may be empty rhetoric." but they never state the obvious question: why did the US prevent Iran from acquiring the fuel in the first place? This was not a reactor that technically could in any way be used to make nukes, and was always under full IAEA monitoring anyway. If the US hadn't blocked the say of fuel for it, Iran would not have resorted to enriching to 20% in the first place.