Iran says nuclear talks failure would be 'disaster' | Reuters
Iran's foreign minister held rare private talks with his U.S. counterpart on Sunday and said it would be a "disaster" if Tehran did not turn a provisional agreement to defuse a decade-old dispute over its nuclear program into a permanent deal.
イランの核開発問題を巡って、イランと欧米など関係６か国は、イランが核開発を制限する見返りに欧米側が経済制裁を緩和する第一段階の措置を実行に移していて、今月１８日からは、オーストリアのウィーンで最終的な合意を目指す交渉が始まることになっています。
この交渉について、イランのザリーフ外相は、２日、ドイツで開かれた国際会議で、「歴史的なチャンスであり、われわれはこの機会を生かさなければならない」と述べ、交渉の進展に期待を示しました。
そのうえで、最終的な合意に向けては、「バランスのとれた解決策や信頼関係の構築が必要だ」と指摘しました。
これに先立ってザリーフ外相は、アメリカのケリー国務長官と会談し、ケリー長官は、合意に向けて率直な意見交換が必要だとしたうえで、核開発を制限する措置を着実に履行するよう求めました。
ウィーンで行われる協議で、イランと欧米など関係６か国は、まず、第一段階の措置が確実に実行されているかどうかを確認したうえで、今後の交渉の進め方などについて議論するとみられます。
‘US counter-productive rhetoric can cripple positive effects of Iran nuclear deal’ ― RT Op-Edge
Although the US has lifted some restrictions under a nuclear deal with Iran, US Secretary of State John Kerry stated that they are there to stay. An advisor to Iran's negotiation team, Kaveh Afrasiabi, told RT that Kerry’s comments do more harm than good.
“Secretary Kerry reiterated the importance of both sides negotiating in good faith and Iran abiding by its commitments,” under the initial agreement, an anonymous State Department official told Reuters on Sunday. “He also made clear that the United States will continue to enforce existing sanctions,” the senior official stated, describing a closed-door meeting between Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.
RT: Is this statement going to affect recently revived relations between Iran and the world powers imposing these sanctions?
Kaveh Afrasiabi: Mr. Kerry’s pressure tactic is a part of this two-prong course of diplomacy, the other prong being raising military threats. And this very dangerous verbal military threat that we saw in President Obama’s State of the Union address is really counter-productive, and it poisons the environment for the coming talks. And you know this may well backfire on the moderate Rouhani administration in Iran as well, which is under scrutiny by the Iranian hardliners.
RT: Should Tehran just ignore Kerry's words or react? What would you say as a former adviser to Iranian diplomats?
KA: Well, the Geneva agreement went into effect less than two weeks ago and we do not know yet what net effect is in terms of the newly released unsanctioned areas, such as with respect to the shipping insurance companies, or the airplane manufacturers, etc., that cannot export parts to Iran.
And this kind of statements by Secretary Kerry can have crippling effects in terms of deterring those businesses to do trade with Iran. And Iran can respond with a variety of ways.
RT: Surely one going into this meeting is trying to get best out of it, trying to broker some sort of a deal that will lift all sanctions, isn’t it?
KA: Precisely. And I think that reflects some ambiguity on the part of the United States which has traditionally over the past decade or so exploited the ‘Iranian nuclear crisis’ to sell arms to the Arab states in the Persian Gulf, to put pressure on Russia on its Southern flank, as well as to pressure Iran and so on.
And so you know it’s been cries of opportunity for the United States, and I think they have mixed feelings about ending it. And if they are sincere and honest about the next round of negotiations, good faith negotiations, then the US should send the opposite signal in terms of its willingness to lift all the associated sanctions which are mentioned in the concluding part of the Geneva agreement.
RT: But why isn’t Washington doing this? What is it trying to achieve by hitting Iran with words at this point or is it just political posturing?
KA: Well, I suppose that their thinking is that they brought Iran to the table by pressure and they need to escalate the pressure to gain maximum concessions. And US Secretary of State Kerry has been referring to dismantling aspects of the Iranian nuclear program, which is contrary to the Geneva agreement, and which was flatly rejected by the Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.
So I think that the US’s intention is to go beyond terms of the Geneva agreement, to table new demands by applying this two-prong pressure tactics.
RT: Talks between Tehran and the group of six will resume in just over two weeks? What do you think will come out of those negotiations?
KA: There is a very difficult and bumpy road ahead. And the United States find itself increasingly isolated with the European countries that are part of the negotiations sending the opposite signal of their willingness to ease the sanctions and to reach détente with Iran.
And yet we saw the US rebuffing the UN’s overture toward Iran and Syria and so forth. So much depends of political will in Washington and their willingness to engage in good faith negotiations. And right now we don’t quite see that.
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/d1021/20140202#1391337402
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/d1021/20140130#1391078488
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/d1021/20140127#1390820251
クリントン前国務長官、イラン追加経済制裁に反対表明 「包括合意の成功妨げる」 - MSN産経ニュース
２０１６年米大統領選挙への出馬が有力視されているクリントン前国務長官が、イランの核開発問題に関連し、現時点での追加経済制裁の決定に反対を表明した。米上院軍事委員会のレビン委員長が２日公表したクリントン氏からの書簡で明らかになった。
クリントン氏は１月２６日付のレビン氏あての書簡で、イランと米露など６カ国との協議が続いているなかでの追加制裁は「イランとの核問題に関する包括的な合意の成功を妨げる」との見方を表明。オバマ大統領が議会に追加制裁法案を審議しないよう求めていることを評価した。
仮に、米国が追加制裁に向けて動いたためにイランとの協議が頓挫したと国際社会が受け止めれば、ロシアや中国だけでなく友好国も経済制裁への協力をためらうようになるとして、議会に慎重な対応を求めた。
米上院（定数１００）では、イランが６カ国との間で合意した共同行動計画に違反した場合などに追加制裁を発動する内容の法案が提出され、民主党議員も含めた５９人が賛同している。しかし民主党のリード院内総務は審議に慎重で、オバマ大統領も法案への拒否権発動を明言している。
米紙ワシントン・ポスト（電子版）は２日、クリントン氏が追加制裁に慎重な態度を示したことで、イランとの協議が失敗した場合には「責任を免れなくなる」と指摘。大統領選に影響が出る可能性を示唆した。
