Tweet
They're claiming they'll "inflict pain" upon anyone country which opposes their quest for nuclear weapons and votes/voted to refer their case to the Security Council. Logically the only thing they can do is withhold oil though that would hurt them much more then it would hurt anyone else since the Iranian economy is in the crapper and they survive mainly on oil revenue.
Personally, I think it is all hot air. The Iranians are in the wrong, they know they're in the wrong, and all they can really do is make ideal threats. Even the Russians and the Chinese are in on this so it seems sanctions are going to happen. That said I don't think sanctions will work. If the Iranian government is hell bent on getting nuclear weapons no matter what it costs their people, their economy, and their political position then they will get them unless they are removed militarially which won't happen. That said sanctions are a useful tool because it can show the Iranian people how poorly their leaders have done in managing the nation's economy and that (over time) build up popular resentment against the one party Islamic state and increase the calls for change.
What do folks think? Will the Iranians go through with their claims to "inflict pain" on the people who oppose them or are they just wind bags like the North Koreans? Should the UN deal with Iran's breaking of NNPT requirements and failing to live up to UN resolutions?
U.S.: Iran remarks 'provocative'
VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- The United States has dismissed Iran's comments that it can inflict "harm and pain" on Washington for its role in pushing for U.N. Security Council action over Tehran's refusal to halt its nuclear program.
The White House said on Wednesday Iran continued to move in the wrong direction and would be better served to make the decision to work with the international community.
"I think that provocative statements and actions only further isolate Iran from the rest of the world," White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters traveling with President George W. Bush to hurricane-affected states along the Gulf of Mexico, according to The Associated Press.
Washington is seeking international pressure to force Iran to stop its nuclear program, which U.S. officials believe is aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran says its program is for civilian purposes.
Earlier Iran, the world's No. 4 oil provider, said it would review its oil export policy if the Security Council tackles its case. European Union countries said this was now inevitable as Tehran had flouted demands to prove its program was peaceful.
Javad Vaeedi, the deputy head for international affairs of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, blamed the United States for closing the door on diplomatic solutions to the situation.
"In this stage we are trying to avoid confrontation," Vaeedi said.
He hinted that if Iran is subject to U.N. sanctions, it could cause problems for the United States.
"The United States may have the power to cause harm and pain but it is also susceptible to harm and pain," Vaeedi said. "So if the United States wishes to choose that path let the ball roll."
After weeks of talks and diplomatic maneuvering over the crisis, the international community Wednesday moved one step closer to taking action against Iran.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, formally presented his report to the United Nation's nuclear watchdog on Wednesday, the final day of the IAEA board of governors' meeting in Vienna.
The report raised questions about Iran's claim that its pursuit of nuclear technology is for peaceful purposes only.
Under the terms of an agreement reached last month, the matter of Iran's nuclear dossier will be handed over to the U.N. Security Council now that ElBaradei has presented his report to the board.
The 12-page report states that the Iranians are testing 20 centrifuges and enriching uranium in 10 others, well shy of the thousands that would be required to produce enough fuel for nuclear weapons.
The report showed that "the leaders in Iran have done nothing to raise international confidence" about what Tehran says is a peaceful nuclear energy program, according to Greg Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA.
"Quite the contrary, their behavior has only contributed to mounting international concerns about its pursuit of nuclear weapons," Schulte said in a statement.
"The time has now come for the Security Council to take action."
Over the past few months, Iranian officials have made veiled threats about what it would do if the matter is handed over to the council, which could issue sanctions against the Islamic republic.
A modified Russian proposal, considered by some diplomats to be the last shot at diplomacy before the Security Council addresses the issue, went nowhere on Tuesday.
High-level diplomats close to the IAEA told CNN's Matthew Chance that the proposal to let Iran enrich a small amount of uranium on its soil was floated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during his trip to Washington on Tuesday.
But Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters after their meeting that no such proposal was discussed, or even existed. They both stood by the original Russian plan to enrich uranium on Russian soil and then ship it to Tehran.
Rice said the United States would not back away from its position "that enrichment and reprocessing on Iranian soil is not acceptable because of the proliferation risk."
While Russia and the United States, both permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, announced their solidarity in finding a diplomatic solution to the crisis, a rift could emerge should the council consider sanctions.
Russia and another permanent council member, China, have voiced their opposition to sanctions. Lavrov would not address the issue in Washington, saying no proposal for sanctions was under consideration.
Talks between Iran and the EU3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- stalled in January when Iran began small-scale uranium enrichment and ended its voluntary cooperation with the IAEA, which had been conducting surprise inspections.
The United States and European Union demanded that Iran reconsider its decision, but Tehran accused the West of holding it to higher standards than it does the rest of the world.
Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.
VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- The United States has dismissed Iran's comments that it can inflict "harm and pain" on Washington for its role in pushing for U.N. Security Council action over Tehran's refusal to halt its nuclear program.
The White House said on Wednesday Iran continued to move in the wrong direction and would be better served to make the decision to work with the international community.
"I think that provocative statements and actions only further isolate Iran from the rest of the world," White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters traveling with President George W. Bush to hurricane-affected states along the Gulf of Mexico, according to The Associated Press.
Washington is seeking international pressure to force Iran to stop its nuclear program, which U.S. officials believe is aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran says its program is for civilian purposes.
Earlier Iran, the world's No. 4 oil provider, said it would review its oil export policy if the Security Council tackles its case. European Union countries said this was now inevitable as Tehran had flouted demands to prove its program was peaceful.
Javad Vaeedi, the deputy head for international affairs of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, blamed the United States for closing the door on diplomatic solutions to the situation.
"In this stage we are trying to avoid confrontation," Vaeedi said.
He hinted that if Iran is subject to U.N. sanctions, it could cause problems for the United States.
"The United States may have the power to cause harm and pain but it is also susceptible to harm and pain," Vaeedi said. "So if the United States wishes to choose that path let the ball roll."
After weeks of talks and diplomatic maneuvering over the crisis, the international community Wednesday moved one step closer to taking action against Iran.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, formally presented his report to the United Nation's nuclear watchdog on Wednesday, the final day of the IAEA board of governors' meeting in Vienna.
The report raised questions about Iran's claim that its pursuit of nuclear technology is for peaceful purposes only.
Under the terms of an agreement reached last month, the matter of Iran's nuclear dossier will be handed over to the U.N. Security Council now that ElBaradei has presented his report to the board.
The 12-page report states that the Iranians are testing 20 centrifuges and enriching uranium in 10 others, well shy of the thousands that would be required to produce enough fuel for nuclear weapons.
The report showed that "the leaders in Iran have done nothing to raise international confidence" about what Tehran says is a peaceful nuclear energy program, according to Greg Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA.
"Quite the contrary, their behavior has only contributed to mounting international concerns about its pursuit of nuclear weapons," Schulte said in a statement.
"The time has now come for the Security Council to take action."
Over the past few months, Iranian officials have made veiled threats about what it would do if the matter is handed over to the council, which could issue sanctions against the Islamic republic.
A modified Russian proposal, considered by some diplomats to be the last shot at diplomacy before the Security Council addresses the issue, went nowhere on Tuesday.
High-level diplomats close to the IAEA told CNN's Matthew Chance that the proposal to let Iran enrich a small amount of uranium on its soil was floated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during his trip to Washington on Tuesday.
But Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters after their meeting that no such proposal was discussed, or even existed. They both stood by the original Russian plan to enrich uranium on Russian soil and then ship it to Tehran.
Rice said the United States would not back away from its position "that enrichment and reprocessing on Iranian soil is not acceptable because of the proliferation risk."
While Russia and the United States, both permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, announced their solidarity in finding a diplomatic solution to the crisis, a rift could emerge should the council consider sanctions.
Russia and another permanent council member, China, have voiced their opposition to sanctions. Lavrov would not address the issue in Washington, saying no proposal for sanctions was under consideration.
Talks between Iran and the EU3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- stalled in January when Iran began small-scale uranium enrichment and ended its voluntary cooperation with the IAEA, which had been conducting surprise inspections.
The United States and European Union demanded that Iran reconsider its decision, but Tehran accused the West of holding it to higher standards than it does the rest of the world.
Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.
Personally, I think it is all hot air. The Iranians are in the wrong, they know they're in the wrong, and all they can really do is make ideal threats. Even the Russians and the Chinese are in on this so it seems sanctions are going to happen. That said I don't think sanctions will work. If the Iranian government is hell bent on getting nuclear weapons no matter what it costs their people, their economy, and their political position then they will get them unless they are removed militarially which won't happen. That said sanctions are a useful tool because it can show the Iranian people how poorly their leaders have done in managing the nation's economy and that (over time) build up popular resentment against the one party Islamic state and increase the calls for change.
What do folks think? Will the Iranians go through with their claims to "inflict pain" on the people who oppose them or are they just wind bags like the North Koreans? Should the UN deal with Iran's breaking of NNPT requirements and failing to live up to UN resolutions?
. It would be a PR nightmare for the U.S. to bomb them.
Comment