The ultimatum on Iran was quite clear: either accept the Western demand for non-proliferation or risk international isolation like in the first decade of the Islamic revolution.
Despite various forms of rhetoric before the crucial meeting with the three foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany, Iran's establishment eventually chose wisely and opted for non-proliferation rather than isolation.
"This is an everlasting disgrace and the people want the establishment to revise this humiliating decision," the Islamist daily Jomhuri Islami commented Iran's compliance with the demands by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Western countries.
President Mohammad Khatami, however, termed the agreement as "Iran's contribution to world peace" showing the country's serious will to remove all global concerns and create a basis of trust.
According to a joint statement by Iran and the three European states, Iran agreed to temporarily suspend its uranium-enrichment program voluntarily, prepare grounds for signing the additional IAEA protocol after parliamentary approval and cooperate with the agency on the unannounced and unlimited inspection of nuclear sites.
Iran had divided the settlement of the conflict into two parts: the technical part was to be settled with the IAEA, the political part with its main EU partners France and Germany, plus Britain as the closest European ally of the US, Iran's main opponent in the row.
The issue also had internal dimensions. Mohsen Mirdamadi, member of parliament and foreign policy expert of the reformist wing, made clear that the issue should in no way be referred to the UN Security Council which would have been the case if Iran had not followed the Oct. 30 ultimatum by the IAEA to clarify all nuclear activities.
The influential hardliners, however, preferred to follow the North Korean way and even get out of the NPT, risking political and trade sanctions.
The three key players in the issue, President Mohammad Khatami, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and former President Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani therefore chose the moderate cleric Hassan Rowhani in order to make the final decision acceptable to all political wings.
Rowhani, secretary of the National Security Council, personally held the final talks with Mohammad ElBaradei although the IAEA chief's main counterpart had previously been Vice-President Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh, who also heads Iran's Atomic Energy Organization.
Rowhani was also in charge to lead the technical talks in Teheran with the three European ministers. However, after the negotiations had continued for more than three hours with no agreement in sight, Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi unexpectedly joined the talks.
Insiders say that Kharrazi's appearance in the talks indicated that the political concessions to be made were beyond Rowhani's authority and only within jurisdiction of the establishment's foreign minister.
"Surely there have been more than only nuclear talks," said Iran's UN Ambassador Mohammad-Javad Zarif in a television interview.
"The US had planned a plot against Iran which we neutralized in time through this agreement," he added.
Iran's IAEA envoy Salehi said that not having accepted the nuclear agreement would have forced the country to face "more sensitive issues."
Former president Rafsanjani had said last month that all the pressures on the nuclear projects were brought to bear merely because of Iran's opposition to Israel's policies in the Middle East.
Observers believe that the nuclear agreement has, for now, taken the edge off the EU's demand to acknowledge the state of Israel and drop support for anti-Israeli militia groups.
"This agreement was just a tool for greater US aims in the region and for realizing their final goal which is and has always been toppling Iran's Islamic regime," the daily Jomhuri Islami said.
In the meantime, the state-television network IRIB questioned Iran's insistence that the agreement had been made "voluntarily and temporarily" and not forced by Western pressure.
"Of course the decision was made forcefully-voluntarily," a conservative local reporter commented sarcastically.
UN ambassador Zarif said that Iran fulfilled the European demand to establish "the basis of trust" and now it was up to Europe to fulfil their promises.
The EU promises include putting an end, at least in Europe, to Iran being branded as belonging to what the US called the "axis of evil". The EU also pledged to expand trade talks and aid the country in its effort to enter the WTO.
After signing the additional IAEA protocol, Iran also expects Europe to provide it with the necessary uranium and nuclear fuel for its civil nuclear projects.
"The EU is right now just happy to have defused renewed tensions in the region and prevented another dilemma such as in Afghanistan and Iraq. The rest is another lengthy process ahead of all sides," a European diplomat said in Teheran.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations