Vital Perspective

Rice Flight Delayed, Motives Questioned; No Progress Expected on Sanctions

The P-5 + 1 will convene in London later today to discuss future steps over Iran's nuclear program, but Secretary Rice's punctuality problems will inhibit any real progress from taking place. Rice will attend the meeting but will arrive an hour late due to mechanical problem with her military aircraft. The meeting will start without Rice and as a result, the foreign ministers are not expected to make a decision today on imposing sanctions against Tehran.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormick said the officials are likely to hold a conference call on Monday or Tuesday to discuss the issue further. Saying he could not predict what decision would ultimately be made, McCormack said: "At the earliest it wouldn't be until then."

Unfortunately the pace of diplomacy doesn't show any sign of quickening. Russian FM Sergei Lavrov has called for more diplomatic efforts to resolve the nuclear standoff, and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said negotiations with Iran would still be possible, even when the Security Council discusses possible sanctions. Earlier, Solana said "endless hours" of talks with Iranian officials have made little progress. Interestingly, some have suggested that the mechanical failures of Rice's aircraft are a farce, and that because of Russian objections to sanctions, the U.S. wanted to avoid a potentially embarrassing result from the London meeting.

P-5 + 1 Back Down from Consequences for Iran, New Compliance Deadline Set

With Iran still resisting a freeze on its nuclear activities, the P-5 + 1 have decided to set yet another deadline --the fourth in as many months-- in hopes that Iran will finally agree to terms paving the way for substantive talks on its nuclear program.

Under the plan, reached by Secretary Rice and her counterparts over a late-night dinner Tuesday, Iran will have until early October to agree to suspend its nuclear activities as the negotiations take place, diplomats said. At the meeting, Rice backed off the U.S. demand that the Security Council begin imposing sanctions over Iran's failure to meet previous deadlines.

Originally, the P-5 + 1 offered to discuss an array of incentives with Iran if it froze its uranium enrichment program and demanded an answer by the end of June. That slipped to July, and then the end of August was set as the deadline in a Security Council resolution. American officials believe the deadline of the first week of October is firm, but at least one European diplomat suggested the possibility of slippage remains.

Originally, Iran was told that no talks could start until it suspended the nuclear program. Officials are discussing a change in sequence that would have talks begin without the U.S., then having Iran declare its willingness to suspend its program at the same time that action in the Security Council is halted, and then having the U.S. join the talks once the suspension is verified. Rice has said that she would attend the first meeting as the U.S. representative to the talks.

Sr. Administration Officials Discuss UN General Assembly Plans for Bush, Rice

This afternoon we got glimpse into President Bush's and Secretary Rice's plans for the opening of the 61st UN General Assembly next week. As most people are aware, Bush will address the General Assembly on September 19 and is expected to focus on events in the Middle East, on Darfur and the democracy agenda.

A senior administration official speaking on the condition of anonymity in a conference call earlier today said that among other meetings before his speech not relevant to our focus, Bush "will have a bilateral meeting with the prime minister of Malaysia. This is important, aside from the substance of what they will discuss, I think, to demonstrate Malaysia is a democratic country with a moderate form of Islamic government, and the idea is here -- that is, Malaysia is a very good demonstration of how Islam and democracy are fully compatible concepts."

The speech itself on September 19 "will lay out his positive vision for the Middle East and the bright democratic future that we see for the Middle East in contradistinction to some who have an almost backward-looking vision for that region." Immediately following the speech Bush will meet with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.

Rice will have a much more extended trip to New York. The day before Bush's speech, Rice will attend the Iraq compact conference hosted by Secretary-General Kofi Annan. On the 19th, she will accompany Bush to meetings with French President Jacques Chirac on a series of issues related to the Middle East, namely Lebanon, Iran, Sudan-Darfur and, of course, Israel-Palestinian issues. There will also be a meeting with Annan before his speech, and a dinner with the foreign ministers of the P-5 plus Germany and Italy afterwards.

The day after the speech when Bush heads back to Washington, Rice will attend an important Quartet meeting on the Middle East peace process. The following day she'll meet with NATO foreign ministers to discuss the situation in Afghanistan in preparation for the NATO summit in November. On Friday she's scheduled for another P-5 meeting as well as a meeting of foreign ministers and political directors from the G-8. At some point in the week she'll meet with Talabani as well.

Rice Hosts Israeli FM Livni, Discusses Lebanon, Iran, Palestinian Unity Govt

Secretary Rice and Israeli FM Tzipi Livni met today in Washington, and apparently will continue their dialogue this evening over dinner. They held a brief joint press availability that give us some insight on the U.S. and Israeli view on the various situations in the region from Lebanon to Iran to a possible Palestinian unity government (however unlikely that is) and its ramifications for the Quartet and the flow of international aid to the Palestinian Authority:

SEC. RICE: Good afternoon. I'm very pleased to welcome Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to the United States, also deputy prime minister. Tzipi and I have had a number of opportunities to meet here and also in the Middle East. We've had a wide-ranging discussion, including discussing Resolution 1701 on Lebanon and the need for its full implementation. We have discussed the situation in Iran, Iran's destabilizing activities in the region and also concerns about the Iranian nuclear program. We have talked about the two-state solution and how to think about moving forward on Israeli-Palestinian issues.

I also wanted to say to Minister Livni and to the Israeli people that the United States continues to call for the unconditional and immediate release of the Israeli soldier in the Palestinian territory and the Israeli soldiers held in Lebanon. We pray for their safety and for their well-being, but the international community has made very clear that they should be released and released unconditionally.

Thank you for coming.

MIN. LIVNI: Thank you, and thank you for the invitation. And my visit comes at a very special time when we mark the attacks of September 11th. I think that this was a day in which the world was divided in two between those who mourned and those who celebrated, and Israelis cried with the Americans that day. And since then, Israel, under the leadership of the United States of America and other nations, are fighting terrorism.

My visit here also comes a few weeks after Resolution 1701 was adopted by the Security Council.

I think that Resolution -- I believe that Resolution 1701 represent the interest of the region, and it represent the interest of the region in order to promote a process and to change the situation in the region. And this is also a result of the determination of the United States and personally Secretary Rice, and determination not to come back to the dangerous status quo that we faced before the attack -- unprovoked attack -- on Israel.

IAEA Reports on Iran's Continued Defiance; UNSC Must Swiftly Enact Sanctions

We've just received a copy of the IAEA report being distributed to diplomats at the UN today on Iran's nuclear program. Read the whole IAEA report exclusively here on Vital Perspective. As Sean McCormack, spokesman for the State Department said today, over the past three months Iran has "continued along the pathway to developing a nuclear weapon, continued in their defiance of the international community."

The IAEA report details the progress that Iran has achieved, noting the continued testing of P-1 centrifuges with UF₆ and the installation of a second 164-centrifuge cascade. It also details Iran's continued stonewalling and lack of cooperation with the IAEA. According to the report, Iran has not made any new information available on their P-1 and P-2 centrifuge programs. Iran has not provided a copy of a 15-page document describing procedures for the reduction of UF₆ to uranium metal, which is critical to understanding the full scope of offers made by 'foreign intermediaries.' Iran has not been forthcoming with clarification on is plutonium separation experiments. Iran has not issued multiple entry visas to weapons inspectors on time. Iran refuses to discuss Project Green Salt, address verification and transparency issues, suspend enrichment related activities or act in accordance with the Additional Protocol. As a result, the IAEA still cannot make a determination as to the nature of the Iranian nuclear program.

It is crucial that the Security Council move swiftly and decisively to enact sanctions against the regime. Unfortunately, it looks as if John Bolton is going to have his work cut out for him. The Chinese ambassador said today that there was still more time for dialogue with Iran, as opposed to sanctions. Responding to that issue today, Bolton said "the foreign minister of China, some months ago, agreed with the foreign ministers of the other permanent members of the Security Council in Germany that if Iran did not fully suspend its uranium enrichment activity they would support coming to the Council to seek economic sanctions.  And I would assume that the governments in question would live up to the commitment that their foreign ministers have made."

Russia Backing Away From Responsibility to Adopt Sanctions Against Iran

Tehran's non-response to the P-5 + 1 incentive package appears to have achieved its goal of divide and conquer. Earlier this week, MediaLine reported that the Iranian response calls on European nations to break with the U.S. and return to the negotiating table rather than moving for sanctions in the Security Council. If you consider Russia to be Europe, then the report was dead on.

Earlier today, Russia flatly rejected -- for now -- any talk of sanctions against Iran. This is the exact opposite message that John Bolton has been sending out that the U.S. will push for swift penalties against Tehran for failing to comply with the Security Council's deadline to suspend uranium enrichment by August 31.

"I know of no instances in world practice and previous experience in which sanctions have achieved their aim and proved effective," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov told reporters. "Moreover, I believe that the question is not so serious at the moment for the UN Security Council or the group of six to consider any introduction of sanctions. Russia stands for further political and diplomatic efforts to settle the issue." Ivanov is regarded as close to President Vladimir Putin.

While not a major point of contention with us at the moment, we'd like to point out that sanctions have proved effective in the past. A 1991 study calculated that sanctions had proven effective 34% of the time, however, the study included only two comprehensive sanction regimes imposed by the Security Council against Southern Rhodesia and South Africa. The Security Council has imposed economic sanctions just 14 times in its history.

Here's the reality of this situation: We're dealing with a vulnerable, highly unpopular, minority regime. Iran is a net exporter of crude oil, but an importer of refined oil. Iran's economy is highly dependent on the goodwill of the West, which also provides the machinery and manufacturing goods essential for Iran's economy, already suffering from high unemployment. Economic sanctions would deal a blow to Iran's economy by driving up costs and risk premiums. The Iranian economy can be crippled, and we believe that economic sanctions would work against the regime.

Of further importance is Russian intransigence in the face of the legally binding Chapter VII Security Council resolution. UNSCR 1696 says that the Security Council: "Expresses its intention, in the event that Iran has not by that date complied with this resolution, then to adopt appropriate measures under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations to persuade Iran to comply with this resolution and the requirements of the IAEA, and underlines that further decisions will be required should such additional measures be necessary;"

Article 41 of Chapter VII says: "The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

Clearly, Iran stands to be in violation of UNSCR 1696 come August 31, and we expect the next report from the IAEA to affirm that position. Just as clear is that Russia is disregarding its duty as a responsible permanent member of the Security Council to pursue the implementation of sanctions as outlined above. When the Resolution was adopted, the P-5 expressed its intention to do so in the event that Iran was not in compliance. With the condition precedent soon to be met, Russia is required to pursue the condition subsequent -- sanctions -- against Iran.

Member of Iran's Shoura Council Explains Nuke Response with Lies, Threats

Last evening, Dr. Talal Ridha Talani, a member of Iran's Shoura Council, discussed Tehran's nuclear program on Al Alam TV. It's loaded with lies, mischarecterizations and threats to the West that go unchecked by the reporter. We've highlighted some. Below is the full text of the interview as translated from the original Arabic:

Q: Now, and, in order to shed some more details, clarification and analysis, about Iran's reactions to the Western suggestions today, Dr. Ridha Talani, member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and member of the Shoura Council in Iran, is joining us in the studio.

Dr. Talal Ridha Talani, welcome to our program. Iran is adamant about its right to enrich uranium despite the possibility that it might be facing - in less than a week from now, diplomatic, economic and other forms of punishment. Iran is still insisting on its right to continue the uranium enrichment program, even during these negotiations (with the West). What is behind Iran's insistence to continue its uranium enrichment program?

Dr. TALAL RIDHA TALANI: In the name of God, the beneficent and merciful. Since Iran is considered a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty for the prevention of the spread of nuclear weapons, according to the fourth section of this agreement, all member states have the right to enrich uranium. Iran is still a member of this agreement and has been committed to its provisions since 32 years ago.

The past and current Iranian enrichment activities have been and continue to be under the close supervision of the United Nations' Nuclear Agency. The cameras of this agency continue to monitor and its representatives continue to investigate our activities. Therefore, we see no new legal or field evidence that make it necessary for us to stop our enrichment program.

We continue to insist on our right to use this enrichment program for peaceful and scientific purposes. There is no logical reason to stop this enrichment program. Iran must be regarded just like any other member country. Iran insists on being treated so, without ambiguities or doubtful questioning. We continue to cooperate with the Western countries and we approved their initial suggestions after studying all details.

Q: Dr. Talal Ridha Talani- The Secretary-General of the United Nations stated that Iran may loose a historical chance if it refuses the Western suggestions. Are we to understand from this statement by the United Nations Secretary-General and similar statements made by other international officials that the refusal of Western suggestions will mean the closure of all doors leading to political negotiations and the beginning, perhaps, of a new harsher phase of pressures on Iran?

Dr. TALANI: The United Nations Secretary-General must be careful about making statements which may damage the fragile international system and sensitive international agreements. We are dealing with legal issues that are grounded in international agreements. On these bases, we are ready to negotiate.

But, they insist on putting us in a very sensitive position - either at zero or at one hundred in terms of possession. They assert that we must not posses any nuclear program at all. This means the existence or total absence of a nuclear enrichment program for us. When we are only required to say yes or no to their suggestions, we will not play by theses rules. This position is unacceptable to us.

During all of the past phases we were not able to arrive at final agreements because of the above concerns. As long as the negotiations were going on, there was hope that things might change. This matter was discussed today at the Supreme Council for the National Security of Iran. We decided to deliver a strong message to all permanent members of the Security Council conveying our position and demands for further clarifications to the Western suggestions.

Q: Ok. Iran has a fundamental position about the continuation of the enrichment program. The United States declared that if this week passes without arriving at an agreement, Iran will face hard sanctions. In the case that pressures become harder on Iran, as threatened by the United States, will Iran undertake some actions to stop the inspections, to prevent the arrival of inspectors at places they want to search? There are rumors among some media that Iran has already begun such steps and is already preventing the arrival of these inspectors.

Iran's Divide and Conquer Diplomatic Strategy to Continue Nuclear Program

There's only one way to describe Iran's diplomatic stategy: divide and conquer. Iran has rejected the Security Council's demand to suspend its uranium enrichment activities and instead vowed to push ahead with its nuclear program. The announcement came in response to a July 31 Security Council resolution that gave Iran 30 days to stop its nuclear activities or face possible economic and diplomatic sanctions. MediaLine reports that the Iranian response calls on European nations to break with the U.S. and return to the negotiating table rather than moving for sanctions in the Security Council.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's adviser, former Iranian FM Ali Akbar Velayati, was quoted as saying that "the international pressure on Iran may increase, but that is an insignificant matter compared to our technological progress in the nuclear field." He said that, "if one weighs the international pressure on the one hand and the long-term Iranian interest in nuclear energy for peace on the other hand, the result received is incomparable." Russia and China, both of which hold vetoes in the Security Council, are on record as supporting continued negotiations rather than sanctions.

Facing Series of Options Following UNSCR, Iran Proposes IAEA Withdrawal

Iran repeated its refusal on Sunday to suspend uranium enrichment activities as called for in the recently passed Security Council Resolution 1696, which makes it mandatory under Article 40 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter "to take the steps required by the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors… which are essential to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear programme." Instead, Tehran is threatening to withdraw from the IAEA.

Iran is facing a difficult choice: it can acquiesce to the Security Council demands; ignore the Security Council demands and hope for the best; continue to play for time; suspend inspections or rescind the Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA; or withdraw from the IAEA and/or NPT. One thing should not be in doubt: it will persist in its quest for nuclear weapons, if not under IAEA inspections then clandestinely. That's was clear following parliamentary speaker Gholam-Ali Hadad-Adel's remarks to the parliament in Tehran.

"Iran doesn't accept suspending its uranium enrichment," he said. "If the result of our being part of international organizations and the IAEA is to be deprived of our absolute right, there is no reason for us to continue to be part of such organisations."

Given Iran’s determination to secure a military nuclear capability, the moment of truth is approaching, not only for Iran but also for the Security Council. Unless the Council imposes severe penalties (Iran has until August 31 to halt enrichment and reprocessing activities or face possible sanctions), Iran will use any available time to complete the construction of its uranium enrichment plant and start producing weapons-grade enriched uranium.

Although Iran's program can be suspended or reversed at almost any given time, it becomes more difficult to do so as their work progresses. The first significant step has been taken at the UN, by threatening Iran with sanctions. The time for the next step is nearing, but if P-5 members such as Russia and China refuse to do so, they will play directly into the Iranians’ hands. As Ephraim Asculai of the Jaffee Center for Stategic Studies says, failure to impose sanctions, beginning with suspension of direct trade in scientific and technical materials, equipment and know-how that could assist in the quest for nuclear weapons and then moving, if necessary, to even more severe measures such as an embargo on refined oil products, would signal to Iran, rhetoric notwithstanding, that the rest of the world is actually prepared to live with an Iranian nuclear weapon.

Analysis: Resolution 1701 Language Achieves Israel's Fundamental Goals

Now that we've had some more time to absorb the newly passed UN Security Council Resolution 1701, here's some of our thoughts:

With its acceptance, Israel obviously thinks it contains the essential elements to build a more stable and secure situation for them and that it will prevent Hezbollah from being able to create the sort of regional crisis we have witnessed in the past month.

Looking at the preamble, we see that the Security Council clearly puts the blame on Hezbollah, calls for the unconditional release of the Israeli hostages, and calls for the implementation of UNSCR 1559.

Further down into the operative paragraphs, UNSCR 1701 calls for the cessation of all Hezbollah attacks, gives UNIFIL an improved mandate to take "all necessary action" to prevent hostile activities of any kind in its area of operations, calls that there be no armed groups, foreign or domestic (reads like UNSCR 1559), establishes an arms embargo on any groups other than the Lebanese army, and forbids Hezbollah from returning to southern Lebanon below the Litani River.

Thus, UNSCR 1701 contains the fundamental elements which Israel set out to achieve: the return of its hostages, the removal of Hezbollah as a threat to Israel and the implementation of UNSCR 1559. Now all that needs to happen, which is no given, is implementation by the international community.

Of course, as we said yesterday, "none of this matters if Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the terrorist Hezbollah organization, does not accept it. If the rocket attacks continue, if Israeli civilians are forced to live their lives in bomb shelters, if the IDF is attacked from their positions within Israel, then Israel can and will exercise its legitimate right to self-defense, and this resolution will have achieved little if anything at all. So by all means, Israel must accept this resolution. As Secretary Rice has said in the past, following this resolution, "We will see who is for peace and who is not."