The renewed talks between Iran and Western governments about the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program are a direct result of new conditions that have been created in recent months. The most important change is the increasing pressure on Iran due to harsher sanctions imposed on it, as well as the general assumption that Israel could attack if diplomatic efforts fail. This pressure motivated Iran’s leadership to suggest renewing negotiations while moderating its declarations regarding its nuclear program. It also provides the West better bargaining chips for negotiating with Iran.
Meanwhile, the U.S. administration is prepared to grant Iran certain concessions, mainly in agreeing, in principle, to letting Iran develop its own nuclear program on the condition it proves it is intended for civilian purposes and not for producing nuclear weapons.
To this end, the U.S. has drafted a number of demands. As we know, Iran has a large stockpile of uranium, currently enriched to low levels of 3 percent. If this uranium is enriched to the required levels to produce a nuclear weapon, Iran would have enough for three to four atomic bombs. It also has a smaller amount of uranium enriched to levels of 20%, which can’t be used to make a weapon but would make the process of enriching to military levels significantly quicker if the decision were made to do so.
The American demands are not fully known, but they do include at least two central requirements: shutting down the Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which was dug into the side of a mountain near the city of Qom and is especially difficult to attack; and removing the uranium enriched to levels of 20% out of Iran.
Read the article in full at Israel Hayom.
QUOTE OF THE DAY
Burt: ‘Time for Iran to answer IAEA questions’
Minister for the Middle East, Alistair Burt: ”After 18 months and 10 meetings between Iran and IAEA still no agreement on the process. Time for Iran…
Read moreCOMMENT & OPINION
16/04/2012
Israel Hayom: What could spur Iran to make concessions, by Ephraim Kam
The renewed talks between Iran and Western governments about the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program are a direct result of new conditions that have been created in recent months. The most important change is the increasing pressure on Iran due to harsher sanctions imposed on it, as well as the general assumption that Israel could attack if diplomatic efforts fail. This pressure motivated Iran’s leadership to suggest renewing negotiations while moderating its declarations regarding its nuclear program. It also provides the West better bargaining chips for negotiating with Iran.
Meanwhile, the U.S. administration is prepared to grant Iran certain concessions, mainly in agreeing, in principle, to letting Iran develop its own nuclear program on the condition it proves it is intended for civilian purposes and not for producing nuclear weapons.
To this end, the U.S. has drafted a number of demands. As we know, Iran has a large stockpile of uranium, currently enriched to low levels of 3 percent. If this uranium is enriched to the required levels to produce a nuclear weapon, Iran would have enough for three to four atomic bombs. It also has a smaller amount of uranium enriched to levels of 20%, which can’t be used to make a weapon but would make the process of enriching to military levels significantly quicker if the decision were made to do so.
The American demands are not fully known, but they do include at least two central requirements: shutting down the Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which was dug into the side of a mountain near the city of Qom and is especially difficult to attack; and removing the uranium enriched to levels of 20% out of Iran.
Read the article in full at Israel Hayom.
DAILY NEWS BRIEFING
Top Story: Ya’alon tells CIA chief Israel won’t tolerate Syria weapons transfer
CIA Director John Brennan paid a surprise visit to Israel on Thursday evening and went straight…
LATEST ANALYSIS
BICOM Analysis: Arab League announcement in Washington
Representatives of the Arab League have announced in Washington their support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which would be based on 1967 borders but include a “comparable and mutual agreed minor swap of the land.” This analysis assesses the significance of this development.
SPOTLIGHT
Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process
This spotlight section brings together our latest analysis, updates, podcasts and resources on the Israeli-Palestinian peace…
LATEST PODCAST
Toby Greene discusses the issue of an academic boycott of Israel
With the news that Prof Stephen Hawking has withdrawn from speaking at the President's Conference in…
Analysis & Daily News Sign up
Register to receive our free news summary and analysis emails.