World powers maintained united front during nuclear talks with Iran in Moscow

Iranian stalling tactics, veiled threats by the six powers and odd PowerPoint presentations, but nary a word about Israel in the third round of nuclear talks with Iran.

Iranian stalling tactics, veiled threats from the six powers, an odd PowerPoint presentation about religious rulings by Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, and nary a word about Israel: That is some of what happened behind closed doors at Moscow's Golden Ring Hotel, where a third round of nuclear talks with Iran took place this week.

The intensive talks held in Moscow on Monday and Tuesday between Iran and the six powers - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - ended in failure. The six powers were unable to bridge their major gaps with Iran.

A Western diplomat who asked to remain anonymous in light of the sensitivity of the talks said that one major obstacle revealed by the Moscow talks relates to the underground facility for uranium enrichment in Fordo, near the city of Qum.

According to the diplomat, the Iranians responded only in a broad, vague fashion to demands that it limit its enrichment of uranium to a level of 20 percent and move such uranium outside the country, and they refused to discuss the Fordo plant at all. The Iranians claimed that Fordo is not a military facility, so it should not be included in the talks.

"We learned that Fordo is a taboo subject for the Iranians, and that it is the flagship of their nuclear project," the diplomat said.

After ending the second round of talks in Baghdad with the feeling that the six powers were desperate to forge an agreement, the Iranian delegates arrived in Moscow feeling confident. But Western diplomats, who realized that expectations had been raised too high in Baghdad, came to Moscow skeptical and cautious. The message they broadcast was that the powers want an agreement, but not at any price.

The Western diplomat said that several times during the Moscow talks, Western representatives conveyed veiled threats and warnings to the Iranian delegation. The message was that "we are not under pressure, and we prefer no deal to a bad deal."

Western delegates, he added, told the Iranians that "packing our bags and going home won't be a problem. That won't cause anything bad to happen to us. But if you are the ones to pack your bags and leave, you'll have a lot to lose."

The six powers presented tough terms to the Iranians, and they rejected Iran's request to conduct a fourth round of talks with higher-level representatives. "Another round of talks like this one will not lead to results, so we told the Iranians that there's no point in holding them," the Western diplomat said.

They did agree to arrange a meeting of jurists and nuclear experts to conduct a detailed review of the positions presented by both sides during the Moscow discussions. But the powers made it clear to the Iranians that they "want concrete actions, not just talks."

The Iranians were surprised that delegates from the six powers managed to maintain a united front throughout the discussions. The Iranians had hoped to bring the Chinese and Russian delegates into their corner. But during separate meetings with the Russian and Chinese diplomats, the Iranians heard the same message that was relayed consistently in the meetings with representatives from all six countries.

Throughout the Moscow negotiations, Saeed Jalili, head of the Iranian delegation, tried to carry out delaying tactics and evasive maneuvers. One odd moment occurred on the second day of the discussions, when the Iranians announced that they were willing to discuss an initiative broached by Russia's President Vladimir Putin regarding the nuclear dispute.

Delegates from the six powers began passing notes among themselves in an effort to ascertain what Putin's initiative actually said. Some of the diplomats in the conference room sent text messages to colleagues outside, asking that they conduct Google searches to see whether Putin had sponsored an initiative they didn't know about.

After a few minutes of searches, it became clear that the initiative in question was actually an article published by Putin four months ago, during his presidential campaign. Putin stated in the article that Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium under certain restrictions, to be monitored and enforced by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The agitated Russian delegation hastily explained that this article was not a formal diplomatic initiative and bore no relevance to the diplomatic negotiations then underway.

Carmel fire report exposes Israel's unpreparedness for potential Iran war

The decision-making problems revealed by the state comptroller's report on the 2010 disaster are particularly relevant in light of the failure of talks between Tehran and the West.

The problems revealed by the state comptroller's report on the 2010 Carmel forest disaster regarding the executive branch's lack of preparedness and the decision-making process among Israeli officials should come as no surprise - especially in light of last week’s comptroller report on the 2010 Gaza flotilla incident.

One issue addressed by the Carmel report is the home front’s preparedness for the possibility of an emergency situation - security-related or otherwise. The Fire and Rescue Services, whose failures were exposed in the report, are a significant part of the forces used during any emergency scenario. The firefighters’ skills and level of preparedness are critical, whether during a deadly forest fire or during a barrage of rockets from Lebanon or Iran.

Now, in light of the failure of the talks between Tehran and the West in Moscow, and due to the growing fears of an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites, this issue is as relevant as ever.

There are experts who tell us that the threat of missiles on the home front is not as serious as it seems - that following the Home Front Command's instructions, alongside improved deterrence, will reduce the likely damages from an attack. But defending the home front is dependent on how well the various rescue services function, especially in light of the fact that they work independently of one another.

The report shows that a lack of training materials and drills for firefighters, a low operational level and a gap in equipment - all of these were known to the decision-makers before the disaster. Many more problems occurred among officers in the police and senior firefighters during the fire, including arriving at the scene, the lack of ability to put together credible situation reports and a lack of control over forces.

A year and a half after the Carmel disaster, the gaps in the home front’s preparation can still be felt: public bomb shelters are still in bad condition, millions of shekels are lacking for defensive measures (while huge amounts are being budgeted in order to prepare for offensive aspects), and the lack of preparation kits for more than a third of the population is even more worrisome in light of the prospect of chemical weapons trickling out of Assad’s Syria.

There is no doubt that much is being done in the home front in the wake of the failures exposed after the Second Lebanon War and later the Carmel fire. It is doubtful, however, if enough has been done since then to fix the oversights. “I have a hard time believing that Netanyahu and Barak don’t understand the ramifications of a possible Iranian attack on the Israeli home front. It is impossible that they are knowingly ready to fail,” said a former senior official, who currently serves as an advisor to the Israeli leadership.

Alongside the politicians’ evasions, the attacks which have since become routine on State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss and the blame game among all those involved were the explanations given Tuesday over the ways in which Israel’s firefighting services have dramatically improved since the disaster. The discussion, like the one over the home front preparedness, is reminiscent of the ongoing disagreement over the fitness of military reserves. The IDF has put more of an emphasis on equipping and training reserve units after the trauma of 2006.

But Lindenstrauss’ monitoring reports still reveal many worrying gaps. On Tuesday, a Knesset Committee held a discussion on the issue. Reserve officers told MKs hair-raising stories from their personal experiences. In contrast, IDF representatives explained that the situation has never been better.

Now try a thought experiment: Based on life experience in Israel, which stance is more believable? The worries of civilians and the revelations of the comptroller's report or the soothing words of the authorities?

U.S. think-tank sees more "sanitization" work at Iran military site

The Parchin site is at the center of Western allegations that Iran has conducted experiments that could help develop atom bombs.

A U.S. security institute published new satellite imagery on Wednesday which it said appeared to show further activity to clean up an Iranian military site which the UN nuclear watchdog wants to inspect, including removing earth.

Parchin, which Iran says is a conventional military complex, is at the center of Western allegations that Iran has conducted experiments - possibly a decade ago - that could help develop atom bombs. Iran denies any such ambition.

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) published the latest satellite picture a day after Iran and six world powers failed to make any progress on their decade-old nuclear dispute during two days of talks in Moscow.

Iran has so far refused to grant the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to the Parchin facility as part of the UN agency's long-stalled investigation into suspected nuclear bomb research in Iran.

Western diplomats say they believe Iran may be trying to clean the sprawling site of any incriminating evidence before possibly allowing IAEA inspectors to go there.

Iran has dismissed the allegations, but IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano earlier this month said satellite images indicated that buildings were being demolished and soil removed at Parchin, about 30 km (20 miles) southeast of Tehran.

"I think there is real concern for what the Iranians are doing at Parchin," one Western envoy said on Wednesday.

Iran dismisses allegations

ISIS last month published imagery which it said increased concerns that Iran was trying to "destroy evidence" of suspected past research relevant for developing a nuclear weapons capability, including the razing of two small buildings.

On Wednesday, the think-tank posted a picture from June 7 on its website which "shows what appears to be further sanitization activity" at the site in the Parchin complex where Iran is suspected to have conducted high explosive tests.

"The image shows heavy machinery tracks and earth displacement throughout the site," ISIS, which monitors Iran's nuclear program closely, said.

Debris from one of two razed buildings that were visible in a May 25 image "has now been consolidated into piles", it said.

"There is evidence of earth moving machinery and excavation activity near the second demolished building north of the building suspected to contain the high explosive testing chamber," ISIS added.

ISIS founder David Albright after testifying at a congressional hearing in Washington on Iran, told Reuters that the "cleansing activity" shown in the satellite imagery increases mistrust about Iran's nuclear activities.

"I tend to think that something has taken place there and they are trying to hide it," Albright said.

Iran has dismissed allegations aired about Parchin as "childish" and "ridiculous" and earlier this month accused the IAEA of behaving like a Western-manipulated spy agency.

An IAEA report last November said Iran had built a large containment vessel in 2000 at Parchin in which to conduct explosives tests that the UN agency said were "strong indicators of possible weapon development".

It said a building was constructed around a large cylindrical object, a vessel designed to contain the detonation of up to 70 kg of high explosives. Diplomatic sources say the suspected tests likely took place about a decade ago.

ISIS said: "If Iran has nothing to hide, its activities at this site add a further layer of suspicion and negatively impact efforts to build confidence in the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program."

Former Iran negotiator: Islamic Republic unlikely to accept West's offer in upcoming round of nuclear talks

Hossein Mousavian, who was a senior member of Iran's nuclear negotiating team between 2003 and 2005, dismisses West's proposal as 'diamonds for peanuts.'

Iran's heavy water nuclear facilities near the central city of Arak

A former Iranian negotiator on Friday dismissed as "diamonds for peanuts" a proposal by world powers that Tehran halt higher-grade uranium enrichment and close an underground nuclear site in exchange for reactor fuel and civil aviation parts.

Hossein Mousavian, now a visiting scholar at Princeton University in the United States, said he did not believe Iran would accept the offer when the two sides hold a new round of discussions in Moscow on June 18-19.

It will be the third meeting since diplomacy restarted in April after a 15-month hiatus.

"I do not expect too much, said Mousavian, a senior member of Iran's nuclear negotiating team in 2003-05. If the major powers are not ready to move on the critical issues of gradually removing sanctions on Iran and recognizing its right to refine uranium, "I'm afraid the Moscow talks also would fail," he told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Mousavian held his post before conservative President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over from his reformist predecessor Mohammad Khatami in 2005. Western envoys who know Mousavian say that at the time he appeared to be genuinely interested in reaching a deal with the West.

The six powers - the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia - want to make sure Iran does not develop nuclear bombs. The Islamic Republic wants a lifting of sanctions and recognition of what it says are its rights to peaceful nuclear energy, including enriching uranium.

European Union officials said on Monday that Iran had agreed to discuss a proposal to curb its production of higher-grade uranium at the meeting in the Russian capital, an apparent attempt to reduce tensions ahead of the talks.

The development followed more than two weeks of wrangling between Iranian diplomats and Western negotiators over preparations for the closely watched round of negotiations.

Mousavian said Iran was ready for a "big deal" on the decade-old nuclear dispute, but political constraints in the United States ahead of November's presidential election and other factors meant the other side was not.

"President Obama has very limited room to maneuver in an election year," Mousavian said. Barack Obama's Republican opponents have attempted to paint him as soft on enemies of the U.S.

In the immediate term, the powers want Tehran to cease enriching uranium to 20 percent fissile concentration, because such production represents a major technological advance en route to making weapons-grade material.

They put forward a proposal on how to achieve this at a round of talks in Baghdad in May, in which Tehran would stop production, close the Fordow underground facility where such work is done, and ship its stockpile out of the country.

In return, they offered to supply the Islamic state with fuel for a medical research reactor in Tehran, which requires 20-percent uranium, and to ease sanctions against the sale of commercial aircraft parts to Iran.

No agreement was reached in Baghdad but the seven countries agreed to continue discussions in Moscow.

"I believe this is diamonds for peanuts," Mousavian said, adding that Iran already had fuel rods. "Therefore this is not something great to offer Iran."

The International Crisis Group think-tank said the powers' offer "was deliberately ungenerous" and likely to have been meant as an opening bid in what they regarded as a longer process of negotiations.

But a U.S. nuclear expert, David Albright, said Mousavian's comments showed the "difficulty of negotiating" with Iran.

The agreement sought by the powers in Moscow would be a small but important step which does not solve the Iran nuclear issue, said Albright, of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) think tank. "Iran should expect only a small incentive in return - the fact of the matter is that these actions are equivalent to peanuts for peanuts," Albright said in an email.

Mousavian said, however, that Iran was ready for confidence-building measures regarding its enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, which it started in 2010 and has since expanded.

He said his own proposal was that Iran would agree to eliminate such material from its stockpile, either by converting it to fuel, exporting it or lowering its enrichment concentration to 3.5 percent - the level usually required for power plants.