|
Obama has underlined the need to give time for diplomacy alongside sanctions and fired back at his critics for "beating the drums of war." But the president also will need some signs of a possible breakthrough to show Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he is to fundamentally change the Israeli calculus. And unless the Iranians break from the mold set at previous gatherings, he will be hard pressed to do so. Speaking earlier this month in Istanbul, Clinton said Iran could demonstrate its seriousness in a number of ways. She suggested that Iran end its production of highly enriched uranium, which at 20 percent can more easily be transformed into bomb-making material. She also urged Tehran to ship out its existing stockpile of this uranium to another country and open up its facilities to "constant inspections and verifications." The most feasible model for a deal may involve an arrangement Iran agreed to in Geneva in 2009, and then quickly walked away from. It involved the Islamic republic shipping out its highly enriched uranium in exchange for nuclear fuel rods. Although Western officials see the contours of such an agreement as still viable, they say it must be updated to represent more than two years of continued Iranian enrichment. Another compromise could see Iran suspend its higher enrichment if the West holds off on some sanctions. Failure of the process raises the possibility of a military attack that could lead to severe repercussions in the region and around the world. Even if it is the U.S. that chooses to intervene, Iran's retaliation could come through attacks on Saudi oil infrastructure, attempts to block the strategic strait of Hormuz, or proxy terrorist activity against U.S. allies such as Israel or in instable states such as Lebanon. Conflict also could drive up oil prices beyond their $100-plus per barrel level today and raise gasoline costs worldwide. For that reason, the U.S. and its European partners are prepared to show some
-- but not much -- patience if they can create a framework for progress. It's an approach that aims to avoid the all-or-nothing stakes of previous meetings that have consistently left world powers with nothing. But they'll have to get to something quickly.
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor