14 November 2013, 19:50

Iran nuclear talks: will the dialogue continue or will it stalemate?

Iran nuclear talks: will the dialogue continue or will it stalemate?

Is there any substance to the hopes that the West and Iran will manage to iron out their differences before the next round of talks on November 20?

Agree or disagree discusses the forecasts for the future of the talks with Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, who's a writer, political commentator and an expert on Iran and prof. Colin Heaton who's an author and historian.

Download audio file

Download audio file

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich – a writer, political commentator and an expert on Iran.

I share the fact that the talks will not go anywhere, but for a totally different reason. I think that as long as the negotiators don’t recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium and attempt to bend the international law to super policies of today there will be no outcome from these talks.

During the shah’s era the US wanted to use Iran as a hub to produce uranium and sell it to other countries. So, now for them to come back and say Iran cannot sell uranium is a non-starter. We can’t dictate international law and change it according to our whim. I think the whole talks were about theatrics and what I don’t quite understand is why Iran would be optimistic about it. I don’t think there is any room for optimism. The whole history if the nuclear program of Iran is just an excuse to undermine the regime and get rid of it.

For 34 years the Western powers have recycled petro-dollars by building this image of a threat from Iran and now it is very hard to dismantle all this fear. It’s been revealed recently that Saudi Arabia can build a nuclear weapon at a moment’s notice. 9\11 hijackers, 15 out of the 19 of them were Saudis. And we believe that Saudis are safer than the Iranians, we are not afraid of Saudis’ nuclear weapon. This just doesn’t make sense.

I don’t really see a future to these talks because I think Iran is being asked to give up its rights, to subjugate itself. They will abide by the law, yes, but that doesn’t mean that they should be asked to do unreasonable things to please Israel.

 

Professor Colin Heaton – an author and historian.

That depends really upon what the Obama administration dictates that Secretary John Kerry does. Personally, I think that as long as other nations hold the line and stick to the international mandate on restricting Iran’s nuclear proliferation, I don’t think the talks will go anywhere and will maintain a stalemate status.

I think the French were the most important catalyst in that. The new French administration sees the danger and I think they understand that giving the green light to Iran with regards to abandoning Israel’s concerns is not a good way to go. If Iran get’s nuclear weapons, there is no doubt in my military mind that they would allow their surrogates to have access to these weapons to continue their anti-Western terrorist activity.

Any time you have a country whose appointed leader demonstrates a lack of understanding or empathy for non-Muslims, non-Persians (even the Saudis and the Yemenis are afraid of Iran), and when you have Arab states who are Muslim and yet not Persian afraid of their neighbour – that should tell you something. The people of Iran have to change their regime if they want to have a positive future in the world.

There is no potential for a serious breakthrough unless the Iranians allow impartial constant inspections of their sites. Iranians are going to have to really compromise a lot and I don’t see them compromising to the point to satisfy the Western powers.

  •  
    and share via