Latest Breaking News

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)

58. Lavrov: Win-win Iran deal only became possible after Rouhani came to power

Mon Nov 25, 2013, 07:25 AM

Nov 2013

The nuclear deal agreed between Iran and the P5+1 group is a win-win situation for everyone, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, adding that it only became possible after Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani, came to power.

“The very long and difficult negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program have ended, an agreement has been reached, and this deal crowns [our] longstanding relations, during which we’ve seen both ups and downs,” Lavrov told journalists.

The agreement means that “we agree with the necessity to recognize Iran’s right to the peaceful atom, including the right to enrichment, with the understanding that all questions we currently have for the program will be [settled] and the whole program will be put under the IAEA’s strict control,” he said. “It’s the final aim, but it’s already fixed in today’s document.”

http://rt.com/news/lavrov-iran-deal-agreement-223/

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

69 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

AP SOURCE: NO RIGHT TO ENRICH IN IRAN DEAL [View all] bananas Nov 2013 OP

This is probably the greatest foreign policy achievement of recent times... shaayecanaan Nov 2013 #1

Israel and Saudi Arabia do not agree, it appears. Laelth Nov 2013 #28

That was then, this is now Brother Buzz Nov 2013 #42

Well advised. n/t Laelth Nov 2013 #43

Voilà Brother Buzz Nov 2013 #60

Thank you for that post. n/t Laelth Nov 2013 #61

Again, the european whites won by brute force cosmicone Nov 2013 #2

There's no right to enrich in the NPT, to any level. nt bananas Nov 2013 #4

WRONG. Iran has the right to enrich up to certain levels, just not to develop a nuclear weapon on point Nov 2013 #18

WRONG. The NPT doesn't mention certain levels of enrichment, it doesn't mention enrichment at all. bananas Nov 2013 #20

If it doesn't mention enrichment at all dipsydoodle Nov 2013 #29

IAEA has never found Iran in violation of the NPT Ash_F Nov 2013 #45

IAEA: "Iran's failures and breaches constitute non-compliance"; UNSC resolutions are legally binding bananas Nov 2013 #48

Nowhere in there is a finding of violation. Ash_F Nov 2013 #53

They were in violation for almost 20 years before they were caught. bananas Nov 2013 #55

That is not a violation of the NPT. Ash_F Nov 2013 #57

No right under NPT. Sand Wind Nov 2013 #5

There's no explicit right to an abortion under the US constitution either... shaayecanaan Nov 2013 #12

The NPT requires intrusive inspections and monitoring. bananas Nov 2013 #22

That is complete rubbish shaayecanaan Nov 2013 #25

Incorrect and correct. The relevent section is vague, hence debate on interpretation. DRoseDARs Nov 2013 #6

And I'll give you "best response" award for the day! nt 7962 Nov 2013 #9

Oh for petes sake take that load somewhere else or add the sarcasm thingy. 7962 Nov 2013 #8

Who was irrational here, exactly? Scootaloo Nov 2013 #11

Iran was irrational. bananas Nov 2013 #21

I think that's not the word you're looking for. Scootaloo Nov 2013 #41

But not higher than what is needed for medical uses, by my understanding Ash_F Nov 2013 #13

No need to build medical facilities 200 hundred feet under a mountain 7962 Nov 2013 #30

Uranium enrichment facilities are not medical facilities Ash_F Nov 2013 #44

Again, no reason to build it 200 ft underground if its PRODUCT is only for medical use 7962 Nov 2013 #47

It is only the right wing spreading the the lie that it can only be used for weapons. Ash_F Nov 2013 #54

The Iranians themselves never mentioned medical use at the start 7962 Nov 2013 #59

A 850k patient afterthought? Ash_F Nov 2013 #62

You want to trust the Iranians, fine. Go ahead. Whats the risk? 7962 Nov 2013 #63

When you start off with a lie it makes it hard for people to listen to the rest of your arguement Ash_F Nov 2013 #64

I did not LIE. When the subject of medical use was brought up, I answered that factually. 7962 Nov 2013 #65

Let's look at post #8 again. Ash_F Nov 2013 #66

Wrong. Because in the beginning, they said it was for peaceful use; for power generation. 7962 Nov 2013 #67

Sounds like you did not read the article Ash_F Nov 2013 #68

And once again, you dont build medical facilities 200 ft underground 7962 Nov 2013 #69

You and Bibi can throw a pity party together. Waaaaah. nt geek tragedy Nov 2013 #19

Bring some beer n/t cosmicone Nov 2013 #34

yup. delrem Nov 2013 #24

Kerry just got a question about Israel's response and about the response form the US Congress. davidpdx Nov 2013 #3

Couldn't resist is likely the case karynnj Nov 2013 #7

That is a long day davidpdx Nov 2013 #14

Oh shit Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Nov 2013 #10

I can see it now....... davidpdx Nov 2013 #15

Kick. (nt) pinto Nov 2013 #16

CNN - 6 month deal, can enrich for non-weapon purposes... jtuck004 Nov 2013 #17

"The first step, let me be clear, does not say that Iran has a right to enrich uranium," Kerry said bananas Nov 2013 #23

but it allows them to keep enriching uranium (nt) shaayecanaan Nov 2013 #26

I suspect Iran might just tell them to fuck off. They reportedly have 19000 centrifuges, jtuck004 Nov 2013 #37

Nope, Iran agreed to cut back it's enrichment program. nt bananas Nov 2013 #49

Cut it back could mean no longer working on weapons-grade enrichment, not stopping. n/t jtuck004 Nov 2013 #50

enrich to 5% max, and get rid of their 20% stockpile bananas Nov 2013 #51

And it doesn't sound like the WH is all that sure of it either... jtuck004 Nov 2013 #52

Two points. Laelth Nov 2013 #27

Not quite shaayecanaan Nov 2013 #31

Yes, Israel and SA are dependent upon us. Laelth Nov 2013 #32

As the link in #17 says, noted in #23, Kerry has said this publicly too muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #33

If Secretary Kerry said that, and it appears he did ... Laelth Nov 2013 #36

If Saudis align themselves with Israel cosmicone Nov 2013 #35

Saudi Arabia is already in trouble. Laelth Nov 2013 #38

Destruction of the Saudi Monarchy cosmicone Nov 2013 #39

Perhaps. Laelth Nov 2013 #40

If SA fell into civil war NickB79 Nov 2013 #46

In my mind this sticking point epitomizes how utterly stupid these negotiations are. crim son Nov 2013 #56

Lavrov: Win-win Iran deal only became possible after Rouhani came to power dipsydoodle Nov 2013 #58