What's new

Iran rejects Istanbul as venue of nuclear talks

Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
4,361
Reaction score
0
Iran’s discomfort with Istanbul as the venue of its nuclear talks with the six global powers has exposed the rift between Tehran and Ankara, apparently caused by Turkey’s support for Syria and its decision to scale down oil imports from Iran in accordance with the wishes of the United States.

After a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Iranian officials announced that Tehran was looking at Baghdad or even China as the venue of the upcoming talks slated for April 13. Iran has thus bluntly contradicted U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent assertion in Riyadh that Istanbul would be the venue of the crucial round of nuclear talks which have been stalled since January 2011. Even before Iran’s disenchantment with Turkey as the venue of the talks went viral over cyberspace and satellite channels, Ms. Clinton seemed to backtrack from her earlier stance. On Tuesday, she said, without commenting on the venue, that she expected the talks to “commence within the next several weeks”.

Analysts say that Iran’s about- face on Turkey is bound to embarrass Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. After his visit to Tehran last week and talks with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Turkish leader had reiterated his assertion that Iran was not engaged in developing atomic weapons. He had also defended Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy, and eloquently drawn attention to the “international community’s” double standards on Israel, which he alleged was sitting on hundreds of nuclear warheads.

Iran’s announcement has triggered a wave of speculation about the real reasons behind its decision. Observers say that Turkey playing host to the anti-regime Friends of Syria conference targeting Damascus, Iran’s key regional ally, has piqued the establishment in Tehran. On Wednesday, Iran’s defence minister said that the Istanbul conference, which pledged a $100 million aid package for the opposition, was meant to promote the regional interests of Israel.

Turkey’s decision to substantially reduce oil purchases from Iran, in line with American expectations, and increase imports from Libya, also does not appear to have gone down too well in Tehran. “We believe that this was the right step to take, to boost our commercial relationship with Libya and help with the normalisation of the country. We will accordingly reduce the amount of crude oil purchased from Iran,” said Taner Yildiz, Turkey’s energy minister.

Justifying Iran’s decision, foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, who had earlier declared Turkey as his country’s favoured destination for the proposed talks, said that new developments had taken place which Iran could not ignore. “Holding talks in Baghdad, and also China, as venue has been out there,” Mr. Salehi said after Wednesday’s cabinet meeting. “This is a course that both sides need to agree on ... İstanbul was our initial proposal as the venue for the talks. The Europeans initially rejected but then agreed. At the same time, we had other countries in mind.”

In Baghdad, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari confirmed that a visiting Iranian delegation on Tuesday had proposed Baghdad as the venue for the talks. Quick off the blocks, the Iraqis on Wednesday invited ambassadors of the six global powers to formally hand over a letter with the proposal.

Analysts say that the West may find it difficult to summarily dismiss Baghdad as the venue of the talks. The hosting of a major international conference would mean the emergence of perceived normality in Iraq, which can be packaged as an implicit justification of the U.S.-led invasion of the country nine years ago.
The Hindu : News / International : Iran rejects Istanbul as venue of nuclear talks
 
. . . .
It's both good and bad. Turkey is a regional partner and we should keep her that way, but Turkey's irrational and unrealistic comments about Syria and also Turkey's accusations that Iran is supporting PKK and hosting a NATO pre-warning radar in the Turkish soil all of them tell us that Turkey isn't an ally, so it should only be seen as a regional partner, and not anything more.
Moreover, the stance of Brazil is not clear this time and the stance of Turkey is ambiguous, so we should see if there can be any front like Iran-Turkey-Brazil in the new talks this time.

Brazil, Iraq or even Afghanistan could be candidates now. I seriously believe Afghanistan is a good choice for Iran. Pakistan is good as well.
 
. .
After a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Iranian officials announced that Tehran was looking at Baghdad or even China as the venue of the upcoming talks slated for April 13.

It would be awesome if they held the talks in China. :tup:

That way, it would be the Americans looking over their shoulder the entire time. :lol:
 
. .
Iranian officials must be consistent. This action does not fit a country who is proud of her thousands of years of state tradition. There is no relation between Turkey's Syria policy and which city the nuclear talks will be held. Just one week ago, Istanbul was the city which was offered by Iranian officials and they do perfectly know that Friends of Syrian People Meeting would be held in Istanbul when they offered Istanbul.
 
. .
Good news followed - Iran rejected three EU countries as well :)

PressTV - ?Iran rejects 3 European states as venue of talks with P5+1?

Iranian officials must be consistent. This action does not fit a country who is proud of her thousands of years of state tradition. There is no relation between Turkey's Syria policy and which city the nuclear talks will be held. Just one week ago, Istanbul was the city which was offered by Iranian officials and they do perfectly know that Friends of Syrian People Meeting would be held in Istanbul when they offered Istanbul.

Turkey reduced Iran's oil imports, bowing to US demands. It probably was the last straw and Iranians chose other venue.
 
. .
Good news followed - Iran rejected three EU countries as well :)

PressTV - ?Iran rejects 3 European states as venue of talks with P5+1?



Turkey reduced Iran's oil imports, bowing to US demands. It probably was the last straw and Iranians chose other venue.

It was an economical decision rather than political. Turkey has the capibility to resist US demands if it has to as it showed this by rejecting US request to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq in 1 March 2003.
 
.
It was an economical decision rather than political. Turkey has the capibility to resist US demands if it has to as it showed this by rejecting US request to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq in 1 March 2003.

Leave twisting to the politicians, Turkey played West hand more than helped Iran in the hour of need, and decision was made immediately after or during Turkey delegation visit (and announcement of cutting down oil imports from Iran). Hence Iran is choosing a friendlier venue, like Iraq or China, whats so hard to understand about it?
 
.
It was an economical decision rather than political. Turkey has the capibility to resist US demands if it has to as it showed this by rejecting US request to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq in 1 March 2003.

wake up ! politic = economic in west !
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom