THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VIII, Issue # 94, June 5, 2006
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
EUROPE: "OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH IRAN
HAVE REACHED AN IMPASSE"
E3/EU Ministers
THE COLLAPSE OF EUROPE'S IRAN POLICY: THE FAILURE OF EUROPE'S POLICY OF RELYING ON TRADE, RATHER THAN
CONFRONTATION OR SANCTIONS, TO REVERSE THE IRANIAN POLITICAL REGIME'S SPONSORSHIP OF ISLAMIC TERRORISM,
ITS VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, & ITS ENDEAVOR TO DEVELOP A NUCLEAR MILITARY CAPABILITY -- THE E3 FOREIGN
MINISTERS & THE EUROPEAN UNION HIGH REPRESENTATIVE ADMIT THAT EUROPE'S POLICY OF ENGAGEMENT WITH IRAN
HAS FAILED
FULL STORY
MEQ Editors' Note: For more than a decade, the European Union has pursued economic engagement with the Islamic
Republic of Iran, arguing that trade, rather than confrontation or sanctions, could best reverse Tehran's terror sponsorship,
human rights abuses, and nuclear ambitions. Between 2000 and 2005, European trade with Iran almost tripled.
Rather than moderate its behavior, the Iranian government used the influx of hard currency from both trade and the rise in oil
prices to further its nuclear program. Two and a half years of diplomacy by Great Britain, France, and Germany ("the E3")
have little to show in terms of results. On September 24, 2005, the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy
Agency found Iran to be in "non-compliance" with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but declined to refer the Islamic
Republic to the UN Security Council. [1]
On January 9, 2006, the Iranian government announced that it would resume enrichment of uranium, ratcheting up the
diplomatic crisis. On January 12, 2006, the E3 Foreign Ministers and European Union High Representative Javier Solana
met in Berlin to discuss the Iranian government's decision to resume uranium enrichment. Their statement, reproduced below,
is the most tacit admission by European officials, to date, that their engagement with the Islamic Republic has failed. How
European officials will alter their strategy, though, after referring Iran to the UN Security Council, remains unclear.
E3/EU Ministers' Statement: E3/EU Ministers met today to consider the situation following Iran's resumption on
January 9 of enrichment-related activity.
Iran's nuclear activities have been of great concern to the international community since 2003, when Iran was forced to admit
to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it was building a secret installation to enrich uranium, which could be
used to produce material for nuclear weapons.
The IAEA Director General, at the time, found Iran's policy of concealment had resulted in many breaches of its obligation to
comply with the provisions of its Safeguards Agreement.
Under the IAEA's rules, this should have been reported to the Security Council then.
We launched our diplomatic initiative because we wanted to offer an opportunity to Iran to address international concerns.
Our objective was to give Iran a means to build international confidence that its nuclear program was for exclusively peaceful
purposes, and to develop a sound relationship between Europe and Iran.
Given Iran's documented record of concealment and deception, the need for Iran to build confidence has been and continues
to be the heart of the matter. It was Iran's agreement to suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities while
negotiations were underway that gave us the confidence to handle the issue within the IAEA framework, rather than refer it to
the Security Council.
We had strong support from the IAEA Board, which repeatedly urged Iran to suspend these activities and stressed that the
maintenance of full suspension was essential.
Last August, Iran resumed uranium conversion at Isfahan, in breach of IAEA Board Resolutions and the commitments she
had given us in the Paris Agreement of November, 2004.
The IAEA Board reacted by passing a resolution in September formally finding that Iran was in non-compliance with its
Safeguards Agreement, and declaring that the history of concealment of Iran's program and the nature of its activities gave
rise to questions that were within the competence of the Security Council.
Since then the IAEA has raised more disturbing questions about Iran's links with the [rogue Pakistani nuclear scientist] A.Q.
Khan network, which helped build Libya and North Korea's clandestine military nuclear programmes.
Nonetheless, in response to requests from many of our international partners and despite the major setbacks through
unilateral Iranian actions, we agreed to delay a report to the Security Council and go the extra mile in search of a negotiated
solution.
We held a round of exploratory talks in Vienna on December 21, 2005, to see if we could agree on a basis for resuming
negotiations. We made crystal clear that a resumption of negotiations would only be possible if Iran refrained from any
further erosion of the suspension.
Iran's decision to restart enrichment activity is a clear rejection of the process the E3/EU and Iran have been engaged in, for
over two years, with the support of the international community.
In addition, it constitutes a further challenge to the authority of the IAEA and international community. We have, therefore,
decided to inform the IAEA Board of Governors that our discussions with Iran have reached an impasse.
The Europeans have negotiated in good faith. Last August, we presented the most far-reaching proposals for cooperation
with Europe in the political, security, and economic fields that Iran has received since the Revolution.
These reaffirmed Iran's rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and included European support for a strictly civilian nuclear
program in Iran, as well as proposals that would have given Iran internationally guaranteed supplies of fuel for its nuclear
power program.
But Iran was to refrain from the most sensitive activities until international confidence was restored. Such a step would not
affect Iran's ability to develop a civil and nuclear power industry.
We proposed that the agreement be reviewed every ten years. The Iranian government summarily rejected our proposal, and
all the benefits that would have flowed from it, nor have they taken up proposals by others.
The Iranian government now seems intent on turning its back on better relations with the international community, thereby
dismissing the prospect for expanded economic, technological, and political cooperation with the international community
which would bring tremendous benefits for Iran's young, talented, and growing population.
This is not a dispute between Iran and Europe, but between Iran and the whole international community. Nor is it a dispute
about Iran's rights under the NPT. It is about Iran's failure to build the necessary confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature
of its nuclear programme.
Iran continues to challenge the authority of the IAEA Board by ignoring its repeated requests and providing only partial
cooperation to the IAEA.
It is important for the credibility of the NPT and the international non-proliferation system generally, as well as the stability of
the region, that the international community responds firmly to this challenge.
We continue to be committed to resolving the issue diplomatically. We shall be consulting closely with our international
partners in the coming days and weeks. We believe the time has now come for the Security Council to become involved to
reinforce the authority of IAEA Resolutions.
NOTE:
[1] "Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran," International Atomic Energy Agency,
GOV/2005/77.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
Military Weaponry & International Security:
Weapons of Mass Destruction & Arms Control
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
The foregoing statement was originally published in the Middle East Quarterly, Spring, 2006, and can be found on the
Internet website maintained by the Middle East Forum.
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
June 4, 2006
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VIII, 2006
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues