Week in Review

DoctorZin provides a review of this past week's [5/14/06 - 5/20/06] major news events regarding Iran. (The reports are listed in chronological order, not by importance) READ MORE

Iran's Nuclear Program & The UN Security Council.

• Reuters reported that EU foreign ministers will meet on Monday to agree initiatives on Iran's nuclear program.
• Chron.com reported that Iran's president said Sunday that any European proposal that demanded an end to his country's uranium enrichment activities would be unacceptable.
• Reuters reported that Afghanistan has offered to mediate between Washington and Tehran in the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.
• Yahoo News reported that the European Union is preparing to make a "bold" offer to Iran, including possible security guarantees, to persuade it to curb its atomic plans.
• Reuters reported that the European Union is ready to share the most sophisticated civilian nuclear technology with Iran if it agrees to halt uranium enrichment on its soil.
• The Scotsman reported that U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for urgent action on the Iranian nuclear crisis saying: "The international community has to take very urgent steps to deal with these issues before we have a cascade of a proliferation of nuclear weapons."
• Yahoo News reported that European nations are considering adding a light-water reactor to a package of incentives meant to persuade Tehran to give up uranium enrichment.
• The New York Times reported that China said it supported European efforts to create a new package of incentives for Iran as a way of resolving the standoff over its nuclear program. The report added that Europe would not offer Iran security guarantees against potential threats by its neighbors.
• James S. Robbins, National Review Online reminds us of the failings of the CIA to accurately predict the time required for Russia, China, India, and Pakistan to become a nuclear power.
• Telegraph reported that Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has poured scorn on a European package of incentives designed to persuade the Islamic state to break off its nuclear program, saying that to accept them would be like trading chocolate for gold.
• Xinhua reported that Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said that Tehran would offer economic incentives to the European Union in return for its recognition of Iran's right to enriching uranium for peaceful purposes.
• Yahoo News reported that a top-level meeting of the U.N. Security Council's five permanent members and Germany to discuss the Iranian nuclear standoff has been postponed while the United States seeks to harden proposed penalties if Tehran does not give up uranium enrichment.
• China Daily reported that French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy urged the international community to present a united front in confronting Iranian efforts to develop nuclear weapons.
• Khaleej Times Online reported that European nations want to offer Iran security guarantees as a key incentive to freeze its nuclear enrichment program but added “When Iran rejects the offer, few will be left with any doubt that Iran wants nuclear weapons. If they don’t take their chance, then we’re going to get tough.”
• The Jerusalem Post reported that the next six-nation meeting on Iran will take place next Wednesday.
• The Guardian reported that the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, warned that the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program was a "crisis" that the international community had to address urgently.
• Fox News reported that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "immediate sanctions... will lead Iran to withdraw and become a second North Korea."
• BBC News reported that doubts have been raised about how technically advanced Iran's nuclear program is, after it emerged Tehran may have used material from China.
• Jerusalem Post reported that the World Council of Churches called on Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program and recognize the state of Israel. The report added: the United States proposed that the 65-nation Conference on Disarmament negotiate a new treaty banning production of the nuclear material needed to make atomic bombs.
• Telegraph reported that Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former Conservative foreign secretary, said that western countries should be ready to consider military action against Iran if diplomacy and sanctions fail to curb Teheran's uranium enrichment program.
• Rooz Online reported that the new EU3 package designed to lure Iran into accepting a moratorium on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities includes a section that deals with human rights.
• The Financial Times reported that western intelligence agencies are likely to speed up their estimates of when Iran could develop a nuclear weapon.
• Xinhua reported that German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said economic sanctions against Iran are possible.
• ABC News reported that European countries have asked the United States to consider selling new airplanes to Iran as part of a proposed package of incentives aimed at resolving the nuclear crisis with Tehran.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Mohamed ElBaradei will press Washington to moderate its stance on Iran in a meeting this week.
• The New York Times discussed the effects of Iran's having closed the curtains on its nuclear programs.
• USA Today citing a draft proposal being considered by the five Security Council nations plus Germany said the draft of the resolution on Iran includes: bans on travel visas, freezing assets and banning financial transactions of key government figures and those involved in Iran's nuclear program; an arms embargo, and other measures including an embargo on shipping refined oil products to Iran.
• The New York Times reported that the United States and Europe are divided over the latest phase of their negotiating strategy on Iran, with the Bush administration resisting a new European offer that includes a proposal for a Middle East security "framework" for Iran.
• DEBKAfile reported that many in Washington are concerned that the EU3 incentive program for Iran has too many hidden dangers.
  

Iranian regime preparing to force Islamic dress on Iranian people?

• YNet News reported that the Iranian parliament authorized most of the clauses of the "national uniform law" suggested by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad before parliament. The law is supposed to replace what is termed "Western" dress from the streets of Iranian cities, and advance "Islamic" dress.
• Chris Wattie, National Post claimed a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear colored badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.. This report was later withdrawn.
• Amir Taheri, The New York Post provided much more detail on the new law. This is original source for the original National Post story. My thoughts on this report.
• Chris Wattie, National Post published this report after the National Post pulled her earlier story.
• Agence France-Presse reported that Iran's only Jewish MP strongly denied the report in the National Post.
• Andrew G. Bostom, The American Thinker provided some historical background to the dress code debate.
• Michael Rubin, The Corner published some additional background.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that Jewish leaders, the Israeli government and chancelleries of free countries are scrambling to find out whether there is truth to the report.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that since Iran is denying reports that it has passed legislation requiring its religious minorities to wear cloth strips to single them out from the rest of the Muslim population, can the world breath a sigh of relief? Hardly.
  

More on Iran's President letter to Bush.

• Rooz Online reported that Iranian Press reaction to Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush. The conservative Keyhan newspaper claimed that “90 percent of people of America” agreed with the words of Ahmadinejad’s letter.
• Reuters reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is writing a second letter to Pope Benedict.
• Edwin Feulner, The Heritage Foundation weighs in on Iran's letter to President Bush.
• MEMRI reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to U.S. President George Bush emulates the letter written in 1989 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's to then U.S.S.R. president Mikhail Gorbachev.
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, FrontPageMagazine.com argued that President Bush should respond to Ahmadinejad's letter. He should treat it as an opportunity to address the Iranian people, talking over the heads of the media and taking his case directly to the people.
• Youssef Goleyjani, Iran va Jahan wrote the letter that George Bush never wrote, a point by point response to Ahmadinejad.
• Hillel Fradkin, Weekly Standard gave his reasons why the letter that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, sent to President Bush is a declaration of war on the United States.

Iranian President seeks to join Russia and China's Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

• RIA Novosti reported that the Iranian president plans to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Shanghai on June 15.
• The Wall Street Journal reported that central Asia, site of the 19th-century "Great Game" for supremacy between the British Empire and czarist Russia, is emerging with its oil and gas riches as the first strategic battleground of the "Multipolar Era" among the U.S., China. Moscow and Iran.
• RIA Novosti reported that a deputy speaker of the Russian parliament proposed that Iran be granted full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
  

Iran's leaders latest statements.

• Iran Focus reported that Iran’s former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani accused the West of launching a “psychological war” against the Islamic Republic.
• Mail & Guardian reported that Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei lashed out at world media coverage of the Islamic republic's nuclear program.
• Haaretz reported that former Military Intelligence chief Aharon Ze'evi claimed that Ahmadinejad has been overheard promising the "end of history in two or three years."
• YNet News reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad mocked opponents of his country's nuclear program saying: "Those who are saddened by the progress and happiness of others suffer from mental and psychological problems..."
• Mehran Riazaty reported that Iranian leaders are saying that "our friends are in charge of government in Iraq and Afghanistan."
  

Iranian unity weakening?

• Rooz Online reported that the core of the Iranian hardliners constitutes the Iranian Taliban and that they are taking control of all the social structures and at the same time the institution that selects the leader.
• Rooz Online reported on the ideological activities of 9,000 Passdaran Revolutionary Guards Corps and Bassij that aims to organize those who have a similar political outlook.
  

Human Rights and Freedom of the Press in Iran.

• Petition Online published the English text of the Call for Solidarity with the imprisoned Iranian philosopher and writer Ramin Jahanbegloo.
• BBC Monitoring reported that the authorities in Iran are reportedly making new plans to disrupt broadcasts from abroad intending to increase the number of jamming stations in Tehran and other cities from 50 to 300 within two years.
• Rooz Online reported the Iranian press claimed that Ramin Jahanbegloo, the prominent Iranian scholar and philosopher is one of the key elements in the so-called "soft overthrow" of the Islamic republic.
• Rooz Online reported that the new EU3 package designed to lure Iran into accepting a moratorium on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities includes a section that deals with human rights.

Iran's Oil Weapon.

• Pravdaprovided a Russian perspective on the coming Iran Oil Exchange, the fifth Stock Exchange of its kind in the world. The Iranian Exchange will be unique, as all trading will be conducted in Euros. How will the opening of the Oil Exchange affect the rate of the dollar?
• UPI reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that starting in July Iran will abandon dollar payments for its oil and natural gas exports in favor of euros.
• The Washington Post argued why Iran is unlikely to use oil as a weapon.
  

Rumors of War.

• The Washington Times the Pentagon is updating its options for attacking Iran to set back Tehran's nuclear program, but Pentagon advisers say they do not think Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command has presented formal military options.
  

The State Department sends "a message to Iran" via Libya.

• The Age reported that Senior US officials have acknowledged that the move to restore full diplomatic ties with Libya is aimed in part at influencing Iran to give up uranium enrichment.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that when America and Libya come to reopen their embassies in Washington and Tripoli, Arab democrats will be demoralized and the families of those killed by acts of Libyan terror will be disgusted.
  

Support for Internal Regime Change in Iran.

• Amir Taheri, Arab News challenged the perception that the internal opposition to the present Iranian regime is marginal. Pointing to recent new reports, Iran's urban working class that has just started to flex its muscles. It showed its force with the biggest May Day demonstration ever seen in the Middle East. The participants made no secret of the fact that they were unhappy with the Khomeinist system as a whole.
• The Wall Street Journal suggested four things the Bush administration can do to alter Iran's calculations in their bid to develop nuclear weapons. A must read.
• Ramin Parham, National Review Online argued that the Islamic regime in Iran has not lost sight its most imminent and present danger to its existence: its own people.
• Los Angeles Times reported that U.S. officials have recently taken a series of steps to increase pressure on Iran, most recently creating new offices in the State Department and Pentagon specifically to bolster opposition to the Tehran government.
  

Iran's Troublemaking in Iraq.

• DEBKAfile reported that in the past two weeks, Iran has been pumping into Iraq two types of extra-lethal weapons in very large quantities.
• Iraq the Model reported that Iran's revolutionary guard corps is supplying Zarqawi's al-Qaeda in Iraq with Russian-made anti-aircraft weapons including the infrared guided, shoulder-born missile Sam 7 (Strela) in addition to other weaponry like machineguns and improved IEDs. Photo.
  

Gulf States agree to help the US destabilize Iran.

• Middle East Newsline reported that the Gulf Cooperation Council has quietly agreed to help the United States in efforts to destabilize Iran.
• Reuters reported that Iran's neighbors -- including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates -- are talking to the United States about ways to bolster their defenses.
  

US/Iran talks?

• CNN News reported that Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser under former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, said Sunday that the United States should open direct talks with Iran over its nuclear program.
• Rooz Online reported that "reformist" analysts believe the US will likely be pressured to change its current posture and hold direct talks with Iran over the nuclear issue, but would do it multi-laterally and sit across Iran at a table which would also include the three European countries on its side and even seriously consider security guarantees for Iran in exchange for an end to its nuclear enrichment program.
• Yahoo News reported that White House national security adviser Stephen Hadley on Sunday responded to calls for direct talks with Iran saying: "We think the framework we have is even better, we have a number of countries that are engaged with Iran on this issue, we are supportive of those discussions."
• Christopher Hitchens, Slate argued that Bush should respond to Ahmadinejad's letter, but he should speak directly to the Iranian people.
• Wretchard, The Belmont Club examined the current debate on whether the US should enter into direct talks with Iran. But the current debate has forgotten the effect of direct talks on the pro-democracy movement inside of Iran.
• Henry A. Kissinger, The Washington Post says it is time for the US to define its Iran strategy.
• Ilan Berman, The New York Daily News argued that direct talks with mullahs will backfire.
• David Frum, National Post gave six reasons why direct negotiations with Iran are a bad idea.
• Karim Sadjadpour, Patrick Clawson, Council on Foreign Relations also debated: Should the U.S. Negotiate Directly with Iran?
• Monsters and Critics.com reported that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice rejected a call by Henry Kissinger for Washington to negotiate with Iran.
  

Iran and the International community.

• Islamic Republic News Agency reported that Venezuela's visiting President Hugo Chavez said "We pray to `Allah' that no war would be launched against Iran!"
• The India Times reported that the US has again asked Pakistan to abandon the seven billion dollar gas pipeline planned to Pakistan.
• Breitbart.com reported that Venezuela is considering selling its fleet of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Iran.
• Reuters reported that Jordanian officials accused Hamas of plotting to stage attacks on its soil using smuggled weapons, including Iranian rocket launchers.
• Yahoo News reported that Iran is enlisting Syria and Hamas as allies in the battle over its disputed nuclear program and why it may not matter.
  

The US Congress.

• Yahoo News reported that Senate Democrats sent President Bush a letter urging him to direct the nation's intelligence agencies to prepare an updated National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.
  

Must Read reports.

• Rooz Online reported that Dr Hassan Rowhani, the former chief of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and current advisor to ayatollah Khamenei, recently "met a group of American strategists who can convince the American government of their views. They are the same strategists who succeeded in resolving the 1986 nuclear crises between the US and the Soviet Union.”
• Fouad Ajami, US News & World Report argued that Iran's "revolution" is not in a "final phase" but has instead entered an "apocalyptic phase," as Bernard Lewis, the great historian of Islam, recently warned.
• ASUCLA Student Media reported that Shirin Ebadi at UCLA was met with as much opposition Monday night. The 2003 Nobel Peace laureate came to UCLA to speak of her new book, but several protesters interrupted her speech claiming Ebadi is a spy for the Iranian regime.
  

The Experts.

• Amir Taheri, Arab News challenged the perception that the internal opposition to the present Iranian regime is marginal. Pointing to recent new reports, Iran's urban working class that has just started to flex its muscles. It showed its force with the biggest May Day demonstration ever seen in the Middle East. The participants made no secret of the fact that they were unhappy with the Khomeinist system as a whole.
• Amir Taheri, The NY Post discussed the cost to the Iranians for its 29 year war with the US. The U.S. is now four times richer, in constant dollars, than it was in 1979. Iran, however, is almost 50 percent poorer.
• Amir Taheri, Commentary Magazine reported the many positive developments in Iraq missed by most in the media.
• Amir Taheri, The New York Post provided much more detail on the new law. This is original source for the original National Post story. My thoughts on this report.
• Michael Rubin, The Corner published some additional background.
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, FrontPageMagazine.com argued that President Bush should respond to Ahmadinejad's letter. He should treat it as an opportunity to address the Iranian people, talking over the heads of the media and taking his case directly to the people.

Photos, cartoons and videos.

• Michael Ledeen, The Corner distributed a link a video of the leader of Tehran's bus drivers' organization (it is forbidden to call it a union) after a torture session in an Iranian prison. He apologized for having to send it. Not for children.
  

The Quote of the Week.

Haaretz reported that former Military Intelligence chief Aharon Ze'evi claimed that Ahmadinejad has been overheard promising the

"end of history in two or three years."

Tags: iran, news, iraq, nuclear, military,

Sunday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 5.21.2006:

EU3 Draft Resolution on Iran - What it contains.

• USA Today citing a draft proposal being considered by the five Security Council nations plus Germany said the draft of the resolution on Iran includes: bans on travel visas, freezing assets and banning financial transactions of key government figures and those involved in Iran's nuclear program; an arms embargo, and other measures including an embargo on shipping refined oil products to Iran.
• The New York Times reported that the United States and Europe are divided over the latest phase of their negotiating strategy on Iran, with the Bush administration resisting a new European offer that includes a proposal for a Middle East security "framework" for Iran.
• DEBKAfile reported that many in Washington are concerned that the EU3 incentive program for Iran has too many hidden dangers.

Senate Dems want an updated NIE on Iran.

• Yahoo News reported that Senate Democrats sent President Bush a letter urging him to direct the nation's intelligence agencies to prepare an updated National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.

Video: The Torture of Tehran's Bus Drivers Union leader.

• Michael Ledeen, The Corner distributed a link a video of the leader of Tehran's bus drivers' organization (it is forbidden to call it a union) after a torture session in an Iranian prison. He apologized for having to send it. Not for children.

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• Hillel Fradkin, Weekly Standard gave his reasons why the letter that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, sent to President Bush is a declaration of war on the United States.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that since Iran is denying reports that it has passed legislation requiring its religious minorities to wear cloth strips to single them out from the rest of the Muslim population, can the world breath a sigh of relief? Hardly.

Tags: iran, news,

Iran is already far beyond yellow badges

David Horovitz, The Jerusalem Post:

Iran is denying reports that it has passed legislation requiring its Jews to wear yellow cloth strips to single them out, its Christians to wear a red version and Zoroastrians a blue one.

Some are unpersuaded. The Simon Wiesenthal Center's Rabbi Marvin Hier, for instance, is adamant "that the national uniform law was passed and that certain colors were selected for Jews and other minorities." But Teheran is adamant and scandalized. The reports of such Nazi-echoed branding "are slanderous accusations… a smear campaign," according to an outraged Iranian government spokesman.

So that's all right then? We can all relax? Hardly. READ MORE

Whether or not President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Islamist regime are yet publicly marking out their non-Muslim second-class citizens is not the point. Iran has moved much further already. It is deep into a relentless campaign to delegitimize Jews and other infidels everywhere. It has leapt over a first step of denigrating its own minorities to the second step of denigrating them the world over.

In Ahmadinejad's world view, and in his vicious daily rhetoric, Israel has no right to exist, and will be wiped out, because the Jews have no right to a country of their own. And if a world without the United States seems unrealistic now, then it is a dream, he tells his followers, that must not be abandoned.

Some world leaders, with a misplaced sense of what their own self-interest requires, persist in discounting Ahmadinejad as an immature leader who talks a good war but wouldn't dare get into one. Such willful self-delusion unfortunately ignores the facts of Iran's well-developed missile program, its global terror network and, most troubling of course, its self-hyped progress toward a nuclear capability.

In the Nazi-era 60 and more years ago, mass killing required a veritable industry and a great deal of time - and thus the creation of a wide environment that would tolerate if not participate in it. Man's fiendish capacity for improving its ability to kill itself has ensured a series of terrible advances since then. Today, when the will for genocide is there, the way is easier and swifter.

This weekend's news reports, true or false, should not be shocking anyone into action. The shock should long since have registered. Israel may be on the front line, but the whole world is facing a regime that threatens all of our most basic freedoms, and that is dangerously far down the road to obtaining the means to realize the threat.

It may not be too late to stop Iran without a resort to military intervention. But it will certainly be too late if concerted international action is not initiated very soon.

The EU Incentives Proposal for Iran Is Rife with Hidden Dangers

DEBKAfile:

US undersecretary of state Nicholas Burns was being polite when he said Friday, May 19, that Washington was still looking at the European proposal of incentives, and promised to deliver the US response at the next US meeting with European negotiators in London this coming Thursday. He was referring to the EU proposal to persuade Iran to abandon uranium enrichment, the heavy water plant under construction at Arak and its ambitious nuclear “research” projects. These concessions would assure the world that Tehran was not pursuing nuclear weapons.

But the package has already been repeatedly rejected by Iran, dismissed as “nuts and chocolates for gold.”

According to DEBKAfile’s sources in the US capital, Washington also finds it unacceptable and has informed the Europeans that their package poses more dangers - even than the consortium Moscow proposes for a joint venture to enrich uranium up to low levels in Russia. READ MORE

The Bush administration accuses the Europeans of going behind America’s back to assemble an apparently innocuous proposal which is rife with hidden dangers.

In the first place, not one, but several light water reactors are on offer. In the second, Iran will get an almost unlimited supply of fuel rods containing enriched uranium (up to 60%) for powering these reactors. Furthermore, the spent fuel contains fission products and plutonium which has military uses.

To tempt the Bush administration to endorse the deal, DEBKAfile’s American sources report the Europeans have topped it up with a perk which is presented as a huge bonanza for the US treasury: the sale to Iran of hundreds of new American passenger planes to restore its decrepit airline fleet.

However, Washington has not swallowed the bait. The economic incentives on offer to Iran are deemed generous enough. According to our sources, they include a massive financial-technological shot in the arm to bring Iran’s oil industry up to date. The 27-year American embargo, in effect since the Islamic revolution, has left Iran way behind the times in oil production technology. Because of obsolete equipment, its wells are under-exploited and spillage is extensive. The Iranians cannot execute deep drillings, develop new fields or construct modern pipeline networks.

In return for giving up their clandestine nuclear ambitions, Tehran is now being offered, with US assent, the most advanced oil production technology available in the world. The Bush administration has even agreed to complement the Iranian fuel cycle - as long as enrichment is kept to low levels and the process is transparent, meaning wholly accessible to international inspections, including snap visits.

US objections to the incentive plan restructured by the Europeans center on three points:

1. It undoes Washington’s achievement in persuading Moscow to drag its feet on completing the Bushehr reactor until Iran signs a guarantee to return the spent fuel rods to Russia. This, Tehran has so far not done; the European offer would let the mullahs off the hook and nullify the Washington-Moscow accord.

2. With the most advanced French and German uranium enrichment technologies in hand to power the light water reactors, there would be nothing to stop Iran racing ahead to overcome present difficulties and produce weapons-grade fuel in quantity.

3. The EU-Iran negotiating base ahead of formal negotiations is too high. Tehran will no doubt squeeze more concessions from the Europeans before they end.

As matters stand now, Washington’s dialogue with the Europeans appears to be a lot tougher than its undercover talks with the Iranians.

Reading Ahmadinejad in Washington

Hillel Fradkin, Weekly Standard:

Will the United States declare war on the Islamic Republic of Iran? For months, this question has been the theme of diplomatic and public discourse--with horror usually expressed at the idea. But it now seems that we have this backwards. For the import of the letter that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, sent to President Bush in the first week of May is that Ahmadinejad and Iran have declared war on the United States.

Many reasons are given, but the most fundamental is that the United States is a liberal democracy, the most powerful in the world and the leader of all the others. Liberal democracy, the letter says, is an affront to God, and as such its days are numbered. It would be best if President Bush and others realized this and abandoned it. But at all events, Iran will help where possible to hasten its end. (The full text of the letter, translated into English from the original Persian, can be found here). READ MORE

Neither the Bush administration nor its many critics appear to appreciate the significance, ideological and practical, of the letter. Nor do they appear to appreciate the remarkable boldness of Ahmadinejad personally. For the formal characteristics of the letter as well as its substance have ancient and modern analogs--letters of Muhammad to the Byzantine, Persian, and Ethiopian emperors of his day warning them to accept Islam and his rule or suffer the consequences, and a letter from Khomeini to Mikhail Gorbachev along similar lines. Thus, Ahmadinejad presents himself as the true heir of Muhammad and Khomeini and may even be suggesting that he is a founder himself. At the least, he presents himself as the spokesman and leader of Islam and the Muslim world in its entirety, transcending the Shiite/Sunni divide. Both this boldness and this claim are consistent with the whole series of pronouncements and actions Ahmadinejad has taken in the brief period since he was elected last summer. But the letter, in its form and substance, raises this to a new and much higher level of clarity and power as well as menace.

The Bush administration and its critics have ignored all this. They have chosen to view the letter within a narrower prism--the question of negotiations or rather non-negotiations over Iran's enrichment of uranium. For the administration, the letter contained "nothing new" in this regard. For Bush's critics, it was an "opening," one that could best be exploited if the United States were to drop its resistance to direct participation in negotiations with Tehran.

This reaction is not entirely surprising. Ahmadinejad's letter does have a bearing on the struggle over Iran's pursuit of enriched uranium. Its long catalog of alleged U.S. crimes against Muslim interests and states specifically, and against Africa, Latin America, and the poorer parts of the world more generally, mimics the standard litany of anti-American complaints. It is intended to further undermine support for the United States and weaken its position in the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program. In this it may have some success. But for these purposes, it need not have presented its critique in a religious and ideological mode, up to and including the charge that Bush is a hypocrite in his claim to be "a follower of Jesus Christ." That is, Ahmadinejad could have done without the theological "meanderings" about which both the administration and its critics complained. Indeed, for these purposes it would have been better if he had. Bush's critics--including most recently Russia's Vladimir Putin--like to charge him with hypocrisy, but they are by and large not concerned with Christian standards. And above all, the attack on liberal democracy could not be assumed to appeal to secular critics.

Yet Ahmadinejad did decide to approach the world, Muslim and non-Muslim, theologically--to insist that nuclear proliferation is not only an issue of policy but also of theology, indeed of the most fundamental and important issues of theology. He defends the right not only of Iran to nuclear technology but also of all Muslim countries as Muslim. Indeed they have not only a right but a duty to pursue such technology. The issue must be understood in the light of the most fundamental and important conflict in the world today as Ahmadinejad sees it--a fundamental conflict between Islam and its rivals, most immediately liberal democracy as embodied in the United States, but also Christianity.

All of this can be seen partially but still somewhat dimly in Ahmadinejad's emphasis on Christian hypocrisy, which may in this context mean two things: violations by self-professed Christians of the standards and teachings of historic Christianity, or the violation by historic Christianity of the true teachings of the Prophet Jesus. The latter is a traditional Islamic view of the defect and even crime of historic Christians. In calling upon Bush, as Ahmadinejad does emphatically, to embrace the "teachings of the prophets," he is calling upon him not only to abandon liberal democracy but Christianity as well--to embrace Islam, to which all the world must ultimately submit, and which is gathering momentum in our time.

THIS IS THE WAY THE LETTER will be understood and received by many Muslims, both inside and outside Iran. Far from being simply meandering, the letter manages to interweave appeals to two different audiences, the non-Muslim and largely secular world and the Muslim world. Its objective--to prosecute the war on behalf of Islam--unites the two. To that end, it aims to divide and weaken Islam's adversary--the non-Muslim world--and to rally the Muslim world behind Ahmadinejad. In both respects it seems so far to be succeeding. Ahmadinejad followed the publication of the letter with a visit to Indonesia, the largest and most moderate of all Muslim countries and also very far removed from Iran's usual sphere of concerns. Iran invested heavily in ensuring that he received a warm and even triumphal reception there. Ahmadinejad seems to have received praise from Indonesian officials and the leaders of other Muslim countries in the region, as well as from clerical figures, including the head of Indonesia's Islamic State University, generally regarded as a leader of moderate Islam. Ahmadinejad has not only declared war but has taken an interim victory lap.

But, it may be asked, So what? So what if Ahmadinejad has declared that Islam is in fundamental, even mortal, conflict with the rest of the world? Formally that has always been the position of the Iranian Revolution. So what if he declares that Iran and the Muslim world are now on the march and have seized the initiative? The power of Iran may be measured in concrete ways and is, for now, limited and may remain so if we can only reach agreement on halting uranium enrichment. Are Ahmadinejad and Iran not further limited by his disability that he is a Shiite in a Muslim world that is overwhelmingly Sunni? And so what if Ahmadinejad implicitly lays claim to the mantle of Khomeini? Will he not ultimately be constrained by the very regime Khomeini established and built, in which he is presently subordinate to others--the regnant ayatollahs, including Khamenei the Supreme Guide--with a greater claim on authority? Will not the latter constrain him, if only out of self-interest and their own ambition to rule?

So what, in short, if Ahmadinejad wants to see the world in theological terms and to believe Islam is on the march and he is at its head? So what if he sees fit to burden us with these theological musings? The world, when all is said and done, is something else, and his views are out of touch with its reality and even, may it be said, delusional.

These objections would be more persuasive if we could forget that we have within living memory experience of revolutionary leaders--for that is what Ahmadinejad emphatically is--who faced apparently great odds in coming to personal power and great odds in taking on the powers of the world and nevertheless achieved both. Such people come up with practical if brutal solutions to their apparent disabilities. For us, who are ever so prudent and cautious, it would be safer to entertain the possibility that Ahmadinejad is a man who may also find solutions to the obstacles in his way, a man who finds great opportunities to be exploited and has the cunning and the will to do so.

Indeed, there is substantial evidence that he has already begun. Although subordinate to higher authority in the Iranian regime, he came to office in that regime at a time when its morale was low. He has managed to revive its spirit, especially among the cadres, like the militia, on whom it depends. It is a serious question whether his superiors--who ever since the rise of the reform movement in 1997 have been preoccupied by fear of collapse--do not need him as much as he needs them.

It is true that Ahmadinejad presently occupies a subordinate office, a deficiency reinforced by the fact that he is not a jurist, let alone an ayatollah, and thus lacks the credentials for supreme rule as defined by the principle of the regime--"the rule of the jurisprudent."

But he may be in the process of addressing that difficulty by enlisting a source of authority--the Hidden Imam--consistent with and even superior to that principle. Ahmadinejad has presented himself as the herald or "prophet" of the Hidden Imam--the ultimate, if absent, ruler and authority for so-called Twelver Shiism--and has gone so far as to claim that he had a vision of the Imam, at the U.N. of all places.

It remains to be seen what further use Ahmadinejad may make of this status and the kind of authority it may convey and with what success. It would amount to a further radicalization of Khomeini's original radical break with the tradition of Twelver Shiism, which opposed and still opposes the political engagement of clerics. Formally it is constrained by the regime Khomeini founded, but emotionally it is a plausible extension. At least one ayatollah is reported to have declared in recent days that Ahmadinejad's letter was the "hand of God."

AT ALL EVENTS, there is little evidence that his ostensible superiors are inclined to restrain him. Ayatollah Khamenei gave a talk prior to the letter that endorsed Ahmadinejad's policies without reservation. Moreover, Ahmadinejad's supporters in the Basij militia and other "revolutionary" institutions have announced and begun to implement a purge of "opponents of the revolution" in key places, including the universities. In the presently unforeseeable event that his superiors tried to force a showdown, it is not clear who would have more "troops."

Outside Iran, Ahmadinejad encounters a world of opportunities. The non-Muslim countries are very much divided over Iran's ambitions, acting either hesitantly or at cross purposes. Even his main adversary, the United States, seems divided and uncertain.

The Muslim world, for its part, is rich with the opportunities created by great longing, great resentment, and great anger. Those longings (for a more glorious role for Islam) and those resentments (over the fallen estate of Islam) have been brewing for a long time. For those in the Muslim world moved by these sentiments, the attacks of September 11, 2001, offered the satisfaction of a victory and produced admiration for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

But Osama also promised further victories, that this was the beginning, not the end, of the new Islamic jihad. And in this he has not been successful, presumably because of the vigor of American and allied attacks on al Qaeda in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Even in Iraq, where al Qaeda under the direction of Abu Musab al Zarqawi keeps up the battle, it has not yet achieved its aim of driving American forces out and may not. Moreover, its engagement in Iraq has had liabilities for al Qaeda, which were the substance of al-Zawahiri's letter of last summer. Al Qaeda as such may be in decline.

In these circumstances, Ahmadinejad has attempted to step into bin Laden's place as the leader of the radical Islamic movement, as the man with the will and capacity to challenge and threaten the United States. Ahmadinejad has already enjoyed some success in parts of the Muslim world. This has been accompanied by the resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and especially Palestine, where Hamas won control of the Palestinian Authority. This has permitted him to assert, as he does in his letter, that the forces of radical Islam--or, as he would have it, simply Islam--are on a roll. Ahmadinejad has bent every effort to support and join forces with Hamas and may well succeed. And, as always, he has Hezbollah in Lebanon at his disposal.

From all these developments, the radical movement has gained renewed confidence in the claim, first put forward by Osama bin Laden, that its adversaries, principally the United States, do not have the stomach for a long fight, or even a short one. Islam's enemies can and will be pushed back and defeated by radical forces, because the latter, unlike their enemies, do not fear death and even welcome it. They can even, as Ahmadinejad recently said, accept the possibility of nuclear war as a necessity of the struggle. Altogether the spirits of the radical Islamic movement are high, and Ahmadinejad is the most powerful voice of that spirit.

This renewed ideological vigor and confidence present us with a host of difficulties in addition to the more material problem of the prospective Iranian bomb. It remains to be seen what we can and will do to keep the mullahs from obtaining nuclear bombs. Were we to be successful by diplomacy--unlikely--or by military action--ruled out of bounds by many--it would certainly affect the ideological struggle, as well as be a great good in itself. It would do so because it would be a defeat, and a significant one, for radical Islam. But given the temper of the man and the needs of the Iranian regime, it would not end ideological and other kinds of warfare.

For the moment all this is unknown. But what is known, or what should be known and deeply grasped, is that everything Ahmadinejad--and for that matter the radical movement as a whole--does is guided by an ideological vision and commitment. It needs to be addressed as such. For the moment and not only for the moment, this requires that liberal democrats declare that they have no intention of abandoning their way of life and see no need to do so, since they are fully prepared to defend it and because that way of life provides the resources--political, economic, and military--to defend itself.

It is necessary to inform Ahmadinejad and his radical allies that they are in for a real fight. This may not suffice to lead them to question their fundamental assumption and inspiration that we are on the run. But it may give pause to the many Muslims and non-Muslims standing on the sidelines, who see radical success and do not see American or Western resolve.

Of course the best person to make the first such declaration is President Bush--not as a Christian but as the world's leading liberal democrat. And not to Ahmadinejad, for whom a direct reply would be a victory, but to the Iranian people, the Muslim world, and the non-Muslim world.

Hillel Fradkin is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and coeditor of Current Trends in Islamist Ideology.

Western Powers Disagree on Elements of Iran Proposal

Steven R. Weisman, The New York Times:

The United States and Europe are divided over the latest phase of their negotiating strategy on Iran, with the Bush administration resisting a new European offer that includes a proposal for a Middle East security "framework" for Iran if it gives up its nuclear activities, diplomats from each side said Friday.

The diplomats said the administration was also resisting the idea of protecting European companies from punishment by the United States for violating its sanctions if they did business with Iran, as called for in the European proposal. READ MORE

The disagreements on these issues are clouding the possibility of a deal with Iran on its nuclear program, even as tensions have increased over Tehran's refusal to change its behavior, the diplomats said. In addition, they said, Europe, the United States and Russia have not agreed on the need to impose sanctions on Iran if it continues to defy the West.

The diplomats and other officials requested anonymity because, following diplomatic protocol, they are not authorized to speak publicly about ongoing negotiations.

The European proposals for how to deal with Iran were transmitted to the United States only on Thursday, American and European officials said. A senior administration official said the proposals were being studied by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and others.

"The U.S. has received a European proposal but has not yet responded to it," said the official, adding that the American answer would be conveyed next Wednesday at a meeting of senior envoys in London. Also to be discussed are sanctions if Iran continues activities believed in the West to be part of a weapons program.

"What we have is a general agreement among the Europeans, Russians, Chinese and ourselves to make the Iranians choose between a positive path and a negative path," the official said, adding that both incentives and possible sanctions would be discussed in London.

The United States, Europe, Russia and China are trying to negotiate an approach on Iran, a challenge made even more difficult by persistent rebuffs from Iranian leaders. This week President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reported to have described what the West was preparing as akin to nuts and candy in exchange for gold.

The envoys were supposed to have met Friday to discuss the European ideas, but disagreements on the details were said to have postponed the session until next week. Some European officials say talks may continue into the summer.

Hard-liners in the Bush administration and other countries, particularly Israel, are worried that time is wasting and that Iran is about to reach a "point of no return," when it will have the technology and expertise to produce weapons on its own, even though that may take years. In the proposed European package for Iran, there is still no agreement with Russia on sanctions. Russia has said it will not endorse a United Nations Security Council resolution that would make Iran's compliance mandatory.

According to several European officials, Russia's refusal was the focus of a testy exchange between Ms. Rice and the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, when they met for dinner with other envoys on May 8 in New York. Previous accounts have described the heated nature of their exchange, but new details emerged Friday.

According to two officials, Mr. Lavrov said statements about Iran by R. Nicholas Burns, the under secretary of state for political affairs, were "pathetic," prompting Ms. Rice to come back and say such talk was unacceptable. Later, Ms. Rice was said to have asked Mr. Lavrov whether his comments meant an end to talks on the matter.

Mr. Lavrov was said to have replied no, and European diplomats now say Russia may eventually support a threat of sanctions — provided they are not imposed automatically if Iran defies the Security Council's demand for cooperation.

European officials say there is a consensus among them that Mr. Lavrov was angry because of an earlier speech by Vice President Dick Cheney denouncing Russia for its increasingly authoritarian and bullying behavior. Several wondered whether Mr. Cheney, worried about the direction the Europeans were taking the talks, was not in fact trying to antagonize Russia to discourage it from cooperating on Iran.

American officials say that it is no secret that Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld are deeply distrustful of the European effort. Instead, they support efforts to topple the Iranian regime from within, though not through military action.

Similarly, administration hardliners do not like any kind of security guarantees for Iran, including talk of a Middle East "regional" framework put forward by the Europeans. While details are sketchy, the Europeans said the plan would include some sort of guarantee that the government would not be overthrown, through either outside attack or subversion. Europeans say Ms. Rice has made it clear that she is more sympathetic to the idea.

The Europeans are also persisting in the view that there will eventually have to be talks between the United States and Iran on security matters. But both they and American officials say there is no call for such negotiations in the current proposal. Administration officials say that if such a proposal were in the European package, it would be rejected outright by the United States.

The only contact likely with Iran would be through the United States ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, who is authorized to talk to Iranians about only the situation in Iraq. Mr. Khalilzad said in an interview Friday that he had not been in touch with Tehran and that he is not authorized to make contact until after an Iraqi government is formed.

"Since I've served as ambassador, I have not met secretly or openly with any Iranian official," said Mr. Khalilzad, who took office in April 2005. He was responding to speculation that had appeared in some news reports. "We would be prepared to meet with them once the government of national unity is formed."

Security Council May Alter Involvement in Iran

USA Today:

World powers are considering dropping U.N. Security Council involvement in Iran's nuclear file if Tehran agrees to suspend uranium enrichment but could push for sanctions backed by the threat of force if the Islamic state refuses, diplomats said Saturday.

Citing from a draft proposal being considered by the five Security Council nations plus Germany, one of the diplomats said it could still undergo revision before the six nations sit down Wednesday to approve it. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to reveal elements of the draft.

The proposal says the international community will "agree to suspend discussion of Iran's file at the Security Council," if Tehran resumes discussion on its nuclear program, suspends enrichment during such talks and lifts a ban on intrusive inspections by the U.N. nuclear watchdog.

It also offers help in "the building of new light-water reactors in Iran," offers an assured supply of nuclear fuel for up to five years and asks Tehran to accept a plan that would move its enrichment program to Russia.

If Iran does not cooperate, however, the draft calls for bans on travel visas, freezing assets and banning financial transactions of key government figures and those involved in Iran's nuclear program; an arms embargo, and other measures including an embargo on shipping refined oil products to Iran. While Iran is a major exporter of crude it has a shortage of gasoline and other oil derivatives.

"Where appropriate, these measures would be adopted under Chapter VII, Article 41 of the U.N. Charter," says the draft, referring to provisions that add the implicit threat of military force to a Security Council resolution. READ MORE

That section — backed by the United States, France and Britain — remains controversial, however, and the head of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency plans to urge the Bush administration next week to ease its push for tough Security Council action.

Diplomas said that Mohamed ElBaradei would meet with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and other top U.S. officials to press the administration to moderate its stance.

Several of the diplomats — all of them accredited to the Vienna-based agency — told The Associated Press that ElBaradei's Washington meetings would be Tuesday, a day before the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany convene in London.

The Americans have swung behind new attempts by France, Britain and Germany to persuade the Iranians to give up enrichment — which can be used to generate nuclear fuel or for making weapons. But the U.S. insists that the Iran package include the threat of a Security Council resolution that is militarily enforceable if Tehran refuses.

Russia and China — the two other permanent Security Council members — oppose any resolution that even implicitly threatens force.

One of the diplomats said on Friday that Washington remained opposed to proposals by some European nations that the Iranians be offered U.S.-backed security guarantees effectively removing the threat of American-backed attempts at regime change, the diplomat said.

Concern has built since 2002, when Iran was found to be working on large-scale plans to enrich uranium. Iran insists it is only interested in generating electricity, but the international community increasingly fears ulterior motives.

A series of IAEA reports since have revealed worrying clandestine activities and documents, including drawings of how to mold weapons-grade uranium metal into the shape of a warhead.

Iran heightened international concerns by announcing April 11 that it had enriched uranium with 164 centrifuges. It has informed the IAEA that it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges in the last quarter of 2006.

Experts estimate that Iran could produce enough nuclear material for one bomb if it had at 1,000 centrifuges working for over a year.

Democrats Ask Bush for Iran Intel Update

Yahoo News:

Senate Democrats, saying they want to "avoid repeating mistakes made in the run-up to the conflict in Iraq," sent President Bush a letter Friday urging him to direct the nation's intelligence agencies to prepare an updated National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.

"We must have objective intelligence untainted by political considerations or policy preferences and a comprehensive debate in the Congress about the best short and long-term approaches to resolving the international community's differences with Iran," the Democrats' letter said.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, has accused Iran of failing to answer questions about its nuclear program. In late March, it reported Tehran to the Security Council and gave it one month to address the demands.

The Bush administration has been at the forefront in sounding a warning about Iran's nuclear abilities and potential ambitions.

The Democrats, while wary of a repeat of the Bush administration's warnings about alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which turned out not to exist, stressed in their letter that they, like the administration, are seriously concerned about Iran's intentions.

"An Iranian nuclear weapons program would be a significant threat to international peace and security," they wrote to Bush. READ MORE

"Iran's refusal to conclusively explain or halt its uranium enrichment and other nuclear activities and its acquisition of ballistic missiles, coupled with the troubling rhetoric of its president, presents serious challenges to security in the Middle East and requires the United States to energetically pursue a diplomatic solution.

"The international community must not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, and Iran must know that it ultimately will not succeed in undermining international peace and stability," said the letter.

The letter was signed by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin of Illinois, Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, Armed Services Committee ranking member Carl Levin of Michigan and Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Joe Biden of Delaware.

Torture in Tehran

Michael Ledeen, National Review Online:

I am sorry to have to post this, a video of the leader of Tehran's bus drivers' organization (it is forbidden to call it a union) after a torture session in an Iranian prison.

But it seems otherwise impossible to convince Western leaders that we are confronting a monstrous evil, that seeks to destroy or dominate us by all possible means. The sort of horror you see on this video is repeated every day, sometimes leading to execution, sometimes to further sadism. READ MORE

Secretary Rice: do you really believe you can negotiate with such people? Can it be right to curry favor with the European appeasers for the price of the systematic torture and murder of those Iranians who seek freedom?

President Bush: why have you not instructed your people to give vigorous support to the Iranian democratic opposition? what on earth are you waiting for?

One thing is for sure. If we wait for the Department of State or the craven officials at the National Security Council to lead the Iran revolution, it is not going to happen.

Saturday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 5.20.2006:

A roundup of reports on Iran's new Islamic Dress Code.

• Chris Wattie, National Post claimed a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear colored badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.. This report was later withdrawn.
• Amir Taheri, The New York Post provided much more detail on the new law. This is original source for the original National Post story. My thoughts on this report.
• Chris Wattie, National Post published this report after the National Post pulled her earlier story.
• Agence France-Presse reported that Iran's only Jewish MP strongly denied the report in the National Post.
• Andrew G. Bostom, The American Thinker provided some historical background to the dress code debate.
• Michael Rubin, The Corner published some additional background.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that Jewish leaders, the Israeli government and chancelleries of free countries are scrambling to find out whether there is truth to the report.
  

US mapping out plans to support the Iranian opposition.

• Los Angeles Times reported that U.S. officials have recently taken a series of steps to increase pressure on Iran, most recently creating new offices in the State Department and Pentagon specifically to bolster opposition to the Tehran government.

Iranians struggle with Iran's new Taliban.

• Rooz Online reported the Iranian press claimed that Ramin Jahanbegloo, the prominent Iranian scholar and philosopher is one of the key elements in the so-called "soft overthrow" of the Islamic republic.
• Rooz Online reported that the core of the Iranian hardliners constitutes the Iranian Taliban and that they are taking control of all the social structures and at the same time the institution that selects the leader.
• Rooz Online reported on the ideological activities of 9,000 Passdaran Revolutionary Guards Corps and Bassij that aims to organize those who have a similar political outlook.
• Rooz Online reported that the new EU3 package designed to lure Iran into accepting a moratorium on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities includes a section that deals with human rights.

Western intelligence agencies reconsidering Iran's nuclear timeline?

• The Financial Times reported that western intelligence agencies are likely to speed up their estimates of when Iran could develop a nuclear weapon.

Bush should respond the Ahmadinejad's letter?

• Kenneth R. Timmerman, FrontPageMagazine.com argued that President Bush should respond to Ahmadinejad's letter. He should treat it as an opportunity to address the Iranian people, talking over the heads of the media and taking his case directly to the people.
• Youssef Goleyjani, Iran va Jahan wrote the letter that George Bush never wrote, a point by point response to Ahmadinejad.

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• Xinhua reported that German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said economic sanctions against Iran are possible.
• ABC News reported that European countries have asked the United States to consider selling new airplanes to Iran as part of a proposed package of incentives aimed at resolving the nuclear crisis with Tehran.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Mohamed ElBaradei will press Washington to moderate its stance on Iran in a meeting this week.
• Monsters and Critics.com reported that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice rejected a call by Henry Kissinger for Washington to negotiate with Iran.
• The New York Times discussed the effects of Iran's having closed the curtains on its nuclear programs.

Tags: iran, news, nuclear

ElBaradei to meet Rice next week to discuss Iran

The Jerusalem Post:

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency plans next week to urge the US administration to ease its push for tough UN Security Council action against Iran, diplomats said Friday.

The diplomats, who demanded anonymity in exchange for divulging the confidential information Friday, said IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei will press Washington to moderate its stance during planned meetings with top US officials including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. READ MORE

The initiative by ElBaradei, who has repeatedly called for negotiations instead of confrontation over Iran's refusal to give up uranium enrichment, comes at a crucial time.

Top foreign ministry officials of the five Security Council nations plus Germany plan to meet Wednesday in London to review a package of planned incentives for Iran to agree to renewed talks on the issue - and penalties if it continues to insist on its right to enrichment.

EU asks US to consider plane sales to Iran

ABC News:

European countries have asked the United States to consider selling new airplanes to Iran as part of a proposed package of incentives aimed at resolving the nuclear crisis with Tehran, diplomats said on Friday.

The Europeans have also proposed a regional dialogue that some hope could eventually draw the Washington and Tehran, adversaries for a generation, into direct talks. READ MORE

The package was formally presented to the United States, Russia and China shortly after it was agreed on Thursday by Britain, France, Germany and European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, one diplomat told Reuters.

When the United States first signed on to a European initiative in early 2005 aimed at persuading Iran to abandon nuclear weapons-related activities, it agreed to consider selling airplane spare parts as an inducement to Tehran.

But Iran, under sweeping U.S. sanctions for three decades, has also asked for planes to modernize its aging fleet.

One question for Washington now is "could we go beyond spare parts and consider providing Iran with new planes, which would necessarily need acceptance by the U.S.," a senior European diplomat told reporters.

Another European diplomat said the package "will have some element concerning airplanes … The proposal is framed toward what the Iranians told us they were interested in last year before negotiations ended."

The United States and major powers are involved in a diplomatic stand-off with Iran over its nuclear program — which the West says is aimed at producing nuclear weapons but which Tehran insists is purely a peaceful energy program.