(WSJ) Talks to Resume With Iran on Nuclear Program

The international community is set to restart talks with Iran on its nuclear program, the European Union’s top diplomat said Tuesday, opening a diplomatic channel at a time of increased tensions between Tehran and Western powers.

Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign-policy chief, on Tuesday wrote to Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, that the EU proposed resuming talks “as soon as possible.” The agreement was a response to a letter from Mr. Jalili in February asking for talks at the “earliest” opportunity.

The announcement comes a day after U.S. and Israeli leaders met in Washington to discuss Iran’s nuclear-development program. The U.S. and many EU states have accused Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has denied.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, * International News & Commentary, America/U.S.A., Defense, National Security, Military, Europe, Foreign Relations, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Politics in General, Science & Technology

5 comments on “(WSJ) Talks to Resume With Iran on Nuclear Program

  1. sophy0075 says:

    I remember reading the history books’ recollection of another time that a democratic government wasted its time talking to a dictatorship – I guess our government officials cut class the day that Chamberlain, Hitler, and Czechoslovakia were discussed. “Peace in our time” – NOT!

  2. paradoxymoron says:

    I wish that they’d talk to cancer, and get that to stop what it’s doing. They should also talk to the tides, while they’re at it.

  3. David Keller says:

    #1–Better yet, the majority of Britons were mad at Winston Churchill not Chamberlain, because Churchill was pointing out the falicy of appeasing tyrants. Then they made him PM to stop the tryrant, and then immediately fired him so they could get “free” medical care. Are there any echoes in the history room?

  4. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    #3 David Keller – interesting perspective, however there is another view:
    [blockquote]the majority of Britons were mad at Winston Churchill not Chamberlain, because Churchill was pointing out the falicy of appeasing tyrants[/blockquote]
    Well, the establishment certainly did not want to hear what he was saying, but I am not sure that was true of the majority of Britons. There is also an argument that the government knew what he was saying was true, but appeasement gave time [which was used] to restore our armed services and armaments which had been woefully allowed to run down. It means that when we did declare war, we were in much better shape militarily and the country was able to move onto a war footing.
    [blockquote]Then they made him PM to stop the tryrant, and then immediately fired him so they could get “free” medical care[/blockquote]
    It was the returning troops, who although grateful, voted him out. They didn’t want to go back to the world as it was before they left; rather to the world they had been fighting for. Of course a few years later, they voted him back in. Politics is fickle.

  5. NoVA Scout says:

    As PM advises, the foreign policy of Great Britain during the Munich period was more complex than is commonly understood in America. It’s didactic utility in the current situation is quite limited, I respectfully submit.