Iran’s demands from the P5+1

An IAEA delegation group, headed by Deputy Director General of the agency Herman Nackaerts will begin its second visit in two months to Iran on Wednesday.

IAEA delegation arrived in Tehran in early December 2012, but was not allowed to visit Parchin military complex where it is suspected that a nuclear-related test has been carried out.

Shortly after, Iranian top officials announced several times that if Western countries recognize Iran's rights to continue uranium enrichment, Iran would allow Parchin to be inspected.

Western countries don't reject Iran's right to have a peaceful nuclear program, their problem lies with worries about the program's probable military aspects. Iran's announced that preconditions for an inspection would be agreed upon at the end of negotiations (if not after), not at the beginning.

Iran also is demanding the elimination of all of sanctions against the country as a precondition for an inspection of Parchin. The elimination of international sanctions is a complicated legal process and needs several years time to be completely carried out (for example, Iraq's case after the collapse of Saddam Hussein). It would then take a long time if Iran waits for the removal of sanctions for constructive talks to begin.

On the other hand, none of the P5+1, nor the IAEA see a bright outlook for the resolution of Iran's nuclear dispute.

International sanctions against Iran have being been tightened and Iran's economy faces increasing problems.

However, it should be considered that Iraq's ruler Saddam Hussein didn't collapse even after unprecedented "oil for food" sanctions, which were implemented after its attack on Kuwait in 1991. Those sanctions were not removed until after Saddam's regime fell in 2003.

Iran probably would stand by its own position even as sanctions continue to tighten as much as Iraq's.

Iran recognizes Western sanctions as a tool for collapsing the Islamic regime and this view is completely believable. Western countries have not been fair with Iran yet, for instance, Iran halted uranium enrichment in 2003 for more than two years without any reward from the West.

The United State's hostility against Iran is not a new matter, its participation in a coup against Iran's first democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953 because he kept Iranian oil reserves from the United Kingdom in 1950 by nationalizing them, giving asylum to Iran's last king, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who left the country with billions dollar of gold, and refusing to return neither him, nor his stolen assets and other instances have caused Iran to distrust the US and European countries.

It seems both sides should start compromising on some vital issues to eliminate distrust. For instance, Iran could tolerate more internal opposition and provide free elections and general freedoms to improve its image. On the other hand, the U.S. can renew the Iranian airline fleet, or provide Iran with modern industrial technology. Iran can accept the NPT's Additional Protocol and the U.S. can help Iran produce radio-medicals. The Western country could remove some sanctions against Iran step-by-step and Iran could help them eliminate extremist Islamic terror groups in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

Iran can continue its nuclear program in the face of full and isolating sanctions for decades like what Saddam Hussein or North Korea did. The sanctions affect the Iranian people in reality, not Iran's nuclear program.


Dalga Khatinoglu /Trend/