MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov) - It is not Iran that should return to the negotiating table and impose a moratorium on uranium enrichment, as the UN Security Council resolutions require.
It is the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany that are supposed to accept the new reality surrounding Iran's nuclear program, and start talks with it. This is Tehran's attitude to the recent proposals from the Six.
The foreign minister meeting of the Six in London on May 2 was meant to elaborate new "improved" proposals for Iran on cooperation, including in the nuclear sphere, in exchange for its renunciation of uranium enrichment. As a host, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs David Miliband voiced these proposals, which symbolize a new approach to Iran.
He did not reveal the details and the gist of the new approach, most likely with the consent of the Six. He said that in London the Six revised and renewed its proposals made in 2006. They covered three spheres - Iran's nuclear program, trade and economic cooperation, and security guarantees. Leaks to the media suggest that the improved proposals offer Iran considerable preferences in high technologies, in particular, in the nuclear and oil and gas industries, and aircraft building taking into account the promised security guarantees.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that at the last meeting the Six was supposed to honor its commitments to Iran, which were voiced in the special statement by the foreign ministers of the Six in the last UN Security Council resolution (#1803). The Six was supposed to develop additional positive incentives, which would show Iran advantages of cooperating with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the UN Security Council, and would encourage it to give up nuclear enrichment.
The Six carried out its commitments, but not without a hitch. It is clear that the United States and the European Union (EU), which insisted on tougher sanctions, met Russia and China halfway this time (both Moscow and Beijing unequivocally spoke out against tougher sanctions). It is no accident that in summing up the results of the meeting, Miliband paid special attention to the common position of the Six. He quoted its unanimous opinion that Iran's continued uranium enrichment poses a serious threat to regional stability, and that Iran should assume a number of clear-cut commitments on responsibility to the world community.
The problem of Iran's responsibility to the world community is nothing new. The Security Council raised it in June 2006 when it first started looking for ways to resolve Iran's nuclear problem at the negotiating table.
Since then, the Security Council has adopted three resolutions on the program on the basis of the Six's proposals. All of them provide for sanctions against Iran if it does not stop uranium enrichment. But Iran has called these resolutions illegal and refuses to comply with them.
There is hardly a way out of this impasse. Iran does not want to suspend its uranium enrichment program even for resuming talks with the European Big Three (France, Germany and Britain). Tehran does not cite any technological arguments that would rule out the suspension of uranium enrichment - apparently because there are none. The Iranian Foreign Ministry is simply warning that it considers the word moratorium "taboo," and is asking the Six to avoid it. In other words, Tehran has long decided to start from scratch, and resume talks without any preconditions.
What will happen if neither side agrees to unilateral concessions?
The answer to this question would be obvious if all the members of the Six agreed on the extent beyond which talks with Iran become pointless. In other words, they have to agree on the admissible limits of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program, and on adequate measures, which should be applied to Iran if it fails to implement its international commitments.
Tehran will ignore the demands of the world community until the Six agrees on these issues.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
