Under the proposed agreement, Iran would send its stockpile of 1,200 kilos (2,640 pounds) of low enriched uranium to Russia and on to France, where it would be refined for later use in Tehran's medical research reactor.

In the short term, this would prevent it from being further enriched to become weapons-grade nuclear fuel and reassure Western capitals, which allege that Tehran is planning to build an atomic bomb.

But any such deal will not address the United States, France and Britain's key demand -- that Tehran renounce for good its own enrichment programme that could one day be put to military use.

US President Barack Obama's National Security Advisor James Jones said the deal would be a setback for Iran's alleged weapons programme, but would leave it with a "breakout capability" to rapidly step up enrichment.

"But there should be no doubt: suspension of Iran's enrichment program remains our goal," he said on Tuesday.

In France, where President Nicolas Sarkozy has been a strong advocate for tougher UN sanctions if Iran fails to halt enrichment, officials agreed.

"It will improve the atmosphere, but it's not in itself a resolution to the problem. A suspension in uranium enrichment is the only thing that interests us," a European diplomat told AFP on condition of anonymity.

Another official, describing how France would receive Iranian uranium in the form of metal plates from Russia and turn it into four reactor cores for the research centre, described the agreement as a "gesture of trust".

"Getting the uranium out obviously lessens the pressure, but it does not resolve the problem, because the Iranians will retain the ability to enrich 80 to 100 kilos per month," he said, also speaking on condition of anonymity.

Both diplomats described the deal, overseen by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as a step forward in a long-term process aimed at getting Iran to abandon attempts to refine its own nuclear material.

Experts think that Iran would need between 1,000 and 1,700 kilos of 3.5 percent enriched uranium of the type it is expected to agree to send out to Russia before it could produce the much more refined fuel needed for a bomb.

Hawks in Washington and Israel will push for air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities if they believe Tehran is getting closer to getting the bomb, but even this might not end the programme.

"A military attack might win us some time," Professor Simon Serfati of Norfolk University in the United States, said recently at a seminar at the French Institute of International Relations.

But he warned that there could be up to 500 targets for such a raid, making it improbable that all could be identified and destroyed, while rifts in the international community would prevent tighter sanctions.

For Serfati, the only option left to Washington and Paris is a "strategy of deterrence -- threatening Tehran with considerable reprisals -- and of defence, putting in place a ballistic missile shield."

Tehran has insisted that it is not developing a bomb and that it has every right to continue enrichment on its own. The IAEA said Thursday it had received Iran's response to the proposed deal.

earlier related report
Key US panel approves new Iran sanctions
Iran's main gasoline suppliers, including British, French, Swiss and Indian firms, may face tough US sanctions under a bill that sailed through a key House of Representatives panel Wednesday.

By a voice vote, the House Foreign Affairs Committee approved legislation aimed at tightening the economic vice on the Islamic republic over its suspect nuclear program, which the West charges hides an effort to get atomic weapons.

The measure would empower US President Barack Obama to effectively block firms that supply Iran with refined petroleum products, or the ability to import or produce them at home, from doing business in the United States.

The vote came amid expectations that Iran on Thursday would deliver its much-awaited response to a UN-brokered nuclear deal aimed at defusing mounting tensions over Tehran's atomic ambitions.

Democratic Representative Howard Berman, the committee's chairman, said the "urgency" of freezing Tehran's nuclear drive outweighed the "distasteful prospect" of inflicting considerable economic pain on the Iranian people.

Berman said he hoped "to maximize the chances that Iran, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, will be prevented from acquiring the capacity to produce nuclear arms" and warned "we have very little time to lose."

Because of a lack of domestic refining capacity, oil-rich Iran is dependent on gasoline imports to meet about 40 percent of domestic consumption.

Iran gets most of its gasoline imports from the Swiss firm Vitol, the Swiss/Dutch firm Trafigura, France's Total, the Swiss firm Glencore and British Petroleum, as well as the Indian firm Reliance.

The new legislation would expand the criteria under which a company could face US economic sanctions under a 1996 law targeting investments over more than 20 million dollars in Iran's oil and gas infrastructure.

The measure would also target firms that help Iran import gasoline, including companies that fund the shipments, shipping firms, or their underwriters.

While the bill enjoys overwhelming support among US lawmakers, it allows Obama to waive the sanctions on national security grounds -- something all of his predecessors have done under the 1996 legislation.

Jeffrey Feltman, acting US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, later told the committee that the Obama administration was ready to apply "increased pressure if negotiations stall or prove fruitless."

"The opportunity for engagement is genuine, but it will not be open ended if Iran continues to refuse to fulfill its obligations. We are not going to talk simply for talking's sake," he said.

Feltman also said that the US State Department had opened a preliminary investigation into whether about 20 firms were in violation of existing US sanctions laws on Iran.

But he cautioned that US officials had already found that Iran sometimes trumpets agreements that turn out not to be real.

A small group of dissenters on the committee opposed limiting the US president's options.

Republican Representative Jeff Flake warned against efforts to "tie the hands" of the White House, saying that decades of unilateral US sanctions on Cuba had "diminished the prospects" for US diplomacy there.

"I fear we will go down that road here," he said.

Democratic Representative Barbara Lee said the measure would "undermine" Obama's authority.

And Republican Representative Ron Paul asked rhetorically "how would we react if someone closed down our oil imports?" and warned that sanctions "are an act of war."

But Democratic Representative Gary Ackerman said Iran's nuclear program was deeply destabilizing and stressed: "If you don't want war, it seems to me that you must back the toughest possible sanctions."

Share This Article With Planet Earth

del.icio.us	Digg	Reddit
YahooMyWeb	Google	Facebook

Related Links
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com
Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com
All about missiles at SpaceWar.com
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News