Turkish / Persian / Arabic / English 4 Sha'ban 1431 / Saturday 17 Jul 2010 / 26 Tir 1389 a
Tehran - 00:09 / GMT - 19:39
Mainpage
All Stories
Politics
Economy
Social
World
Culture
Foreign Policy
Nuclear
Sports
Science
Art
Defence
Photo
Search
Contact us
About us
News number: 8904071532
19:53 | 2010-06-28
Nuclear
Printable Version Send to a friend
Ahmadinejad Announces Iran's Conditions for Future N. Talks
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday announced that following the recent developments, Tehran now has three conditions for continuing nuclear talks with the world powers.
"Continuation of the talks requires that parties to the talks with Iran declare their views about Iran's questions transparently," Ahmadinejad said in a news conference here in Tehran today.
"We ask them (Iran's negotiating partners) to announced their stance on the Zionist regime's (Israel) atomic bombs," Ahmadinejad said, explaining that Tehran will have different approaches for talks with those states which support and those which do not support possession of atomic bombs by the Israeli regime.
Commenting on Tehran's second condition for the talks, President Ahmadinejad asked the other sides involved in nuclear talks with Iran to announce their commitment to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) clearly and transparently.
As regards the third condition, Ahmadinejad said, "These countries should declare what they are seeking through talks with Iran. Do they want to befriend us or do they seek enmity?"
Meantime, Ahmadinejad called for new negotiating partners, and said more countries should be involved in the talks over Iran's nuclear issue.
The current talks involve Iran and the Group 5+1 (the five permanent UN Security Council member states plus Germany).
President Ahmadinejad further announced Iran's decision to postpone talks with the world powers until August in a move to punish the West.
"We will postpone the talks to the end of Mordad (mid August)… and we will resume negotiations then so that they behave themselves and learn how to speak with the other nations," he said.
Washington and its Western allies accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program, while they have never presented any corroborative evidence to substantiate their allegations. Iran denies the charges and insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.
The western powers adopted a new round of sanctions against Iran just days after Brazil, Turkey and Iran reached an agreement which could resolve one of the longstanding nuclear debates between Tehran and West.
The western approach and measure caused deep anger not only in Iran, but also in Brazil and Turkey which had both entered talks with Iran at West's request.
Both nations gave a negative vote to the US-sponsored sanctions resolution against Iran at the UN Security Council on June 9.
3 kommenttia:
Gavin Edwards - This guy is the president of a predominately Islamic country and he publicly proclaimed himself as The Mahdi. This is not a good combination if you are on the other side of it (in a nation of infidels). It's no wonder "the west" doesn't believe his claims that it is a civilian nuclear program.Jun 28DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
James Overheul - Interesting. Although far from supporting th chaos Iran causes, I can see the point as to why they are upset with Israels nukes.Jun 28DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
James Salsman - There is hope! http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66479/mohamad-bazzi/khomeinis-long-shadowJun 28DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - @Gavin Edwards, it's the first time i've heard the claim you made about his "proclaimation to be the Mahdi".
@James Overheul, considering the nuclear powers and the chaos they cause, to my knowledge, i'm not aware of any comparable chaos iran causes.Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Gavin Edwards - My bad. He actually didn't proclaim himself Mahdi. He prayed for the return of the Mahdi during his first speech to the United Nations.
http://www.meforum.org/1985/ahmadinejad-and-the-mahdi
Following that he made comments about how the US is "blocking the return of the Mahdi." Pitting us as the enemy of Islam.
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/12/07/ahmadinejad-u-s-blocking-return-of-mahdi/
good times...Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - @Gavin Edwards, i think that clarifies a lot. is there anything wrong with praying for the return of the mahdi, and what is the meaning of your comment 'good times'?Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Noelle Clearwater - Thomas is this article from Wikipedia accurate? thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MahdiJun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Noelle Clearwater - It seems to me that the President of Iran is setting clear boundaries for the talks to protect his nation. It makes complete sense to me. Israel is a threat to Iran. How can anyone criticize Iran's nuclear program and not force Israel to relinquish its weapons. It is irrational. It creates a terrible imbalance in that region. Regardless of what personal feelings one might have about Iran, it makes sense to address Israel's use of weapons too, particularly in light of recent events. Here is a supporting article. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=116470#axzz0sC8dLa3jJun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
John Hardy - Totally agree with Noelle. There's no point talking about nuclear non-proliferation until we talk about denuclearising Israel as well.Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport
spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - Noelle, it seems to hold with what I know about this belief, yes. The idea and symbol is a strong political and social idea among many muslim. You may also be aware that the idea of the 12 imam's and their significance is crucial to understanding the difference between Shi'ite and Sunni beliefs. In the Shia athan (call to prayer), one of the Imam's is mentioned, while Sunni's do not include this in the call to prayer.
The Iranian statement yesterday makes perfect sense - the arguments are usually very rational. In response to the CIA's latest fairy tale about there being enough material to produce two nuclear weapons within two years (is not enough of a ludicrous and tenuous speculation on its own?), Iran's president points out that it is not fair to point a finger at Iran for possible having a weapon in the future, while thousands of weapons already are in the possession of the USA and its allies.
If any state wants to point a finger at Iran for "HYPOTHETICAL" weapons, let those states FIRST make a clear statement about Israel (and I'd add, other nations with undisclosed weapons).Jun 29DeleteUndo
deleteReport spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - On the point of a state president making reference to his and his voters' religious beliefs, I'm not sure it proves the man to be insane - perhaps different. But let me point out that even the US declaration of independence makes reference to "God". In my opinion, I'm more willing to trust a man who states his beliefs and convictions plainly (notwithstanding the potential loss to his credibility), rather than a president who doesn't make it clear what his religious beliefs are - I'm not mentioning names.Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Noelle Clearwater - President Bush spent a good deal of time touting his religious beliefs and leaning on them as a reason to go to war in the Middle East. This is not myth. Everyone knows it to be true. Obama although I am not here to criticize him at the moment, also uses religion and scripture quite frequently. Although Jefferson had his own bible, none of the founding fathers of this nation were Christians. They were all Deists. This country is not founded on Christian principals but conservative politics has moved in that direction most definitely. http://atheism.about.com/b/2007/07/22/crusade-in-the-middle-east-bushs-religious-war-religious-presidency.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.htmlJun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
James Overheul - First off I don't like the man That being said I wouldn't want t be in an Arab country with Israel rattling nukes whenever they want. Both parties need to talk..I my opinion it is time for Israel to climb down off their preachy perch and act like a civilized nation. Would they be doing this without US backing?? Doubt it. The age old argument of my god vs your god is a sure recipe for world disaster. This looks like a kindergarten playground!Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - the sabre rattling is from one quarter, and only the israeli entity and its allies go off on "we are the promised people" tangents, and "this land is ours". as far as i have seen, iran is more willing to talk than anyone. the iaea has never inspected nor would any nation be allowed to send the iaea into israel's facilities - such a suggestion will be punished and any decision to do this would be vetoed. we have more evidence than mere rumour and speculation about the israeli aresenal of nukes than we have about iran.
this statement by iran is once again a diplomatic win win win. there's something about the truth that smacks of success.Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Abbas Tehrani - (sigh)...4get abt him.
when a president has no acceptibility in his own country,he has2spk like this in order 2pretend though he's very weak in his country internal problems,he's strong abt international issues.
there's no doubt that the reason of postponing is sth else,
this kind of spking,reminds me my dad punishments when i was child:
"Hey abbas,i'll postpone buying the bicycle to the end of summer… so that u behave urself and learn how to speak with ur parents,"...
and i always knew that the problem is money,
nothing else;)Jun 29DeleteUndo deleteReport spamNot spam
Thomas Clothier - what do u mean 'postponing'? there are sanctions being cranked up against iran for no legal reason. this is not about postponing but about diplomacy. no party enters talks under such ridiculous conditions. in fact, iran is being forced to talk or else be punished. punished for what? i wonder if you understand the situation on the global scale very well, abbas
Lähetä kommentti