Bush Threatens Iran With U.N. Action
Iran Says it Welcomes Dialogue but Not U.S. Conditions

By William Branigin and Karl Vick
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 1, 2006 12:45 PM

President Bush today warned Iranian leaders to drop their "obstinance" and accept U.S. conditions for negotiations on Iran's nuclear program or face action in the U.N. Security Council.

Speaking to reporters after a Cabinet meeting in the White House, Bush responded to Iran's initial reaction to a U.S. proposal for talks outlined yesterday by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

In Tehran, Iranian officials issued a wary but apparently less than final reply today to the Bush administration's offer to join European talks with Iran, saying they welcome a dialogue but reject U.S. conditions that Iran first suspend its efforts to enrich uranium and reprocess spent nuclear fuel.

Bush told reporters he had spoken to the presidents of Russia and China about the issue and explained the U.S. position. He said he received "a positive response" from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"The choice is up to the Iranians whether or not they're going to listen to the world demand, and if they do, we got something to talk to them about," Bush said. "And if they don't, we expect Russia to participate in the United Nations Security Council."

Bush said: "Now, it's going to be up to the Iranians to make their decision. And if they choose not to verifiably suspend, we have laid the groundwork for an effective international response."

Asked for his reply to Iran's rejection of the U.S. demand that it first suspend uranium enrichment, Bush said: "My reaction is the choice is theirs, and we'll see whether or not that is the firm position of their government. And if that's what they decide to do, then the next step, of course, will be . . . for our coalition partners to go to the United Nations Security Council."

Bush added: "I want to solve this problem diplomatically and I want to solve it peacefully." But he said Iranian leaders must understand "that if they choose not to suspend" enrichment and reprocessing activities in a verified way, "if they continue their obstinance, if they continue to say to the world, 'We really don't care what your opinion is,' then the world is going to act in concert. And the next step of acting in concert is to go to the United Nations Security Council."

Iran's initial response came as Rice and top diplomats from the four other Security Council permanent members, plus Germany, convened in Vienna to hammer out details of a package of incentives and penalties aimed at prodding Iran to give up any nuclear arms ambitions.

"Iran welcomes dialogue under just conditions but won't give up our rights," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said in remarks quoted by Iranian state television. "We won't negotiate about the Iranian nation's natural nuclear rights, but we are prepared, within a defined, just framework and without any discrimination, to hold dialogue about common concerns."

The comments were in response to Rice's statement yesterday that the United States was prepared to join three European Union nations -- Britain, France and Germany, known as the EU3 -- in talks with Iran once the Tehran government suspended its programs to enrich uranium and reprocess nuclear fuel, activities that the Bush administration says are pat of a covert attempt to develop atomic weapons.

Mottaki dismissed Rice's remarks as presenting no "new and rational solution" to the dispute, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). "The remarks were a litany of phrases" intended to prevent further isolation of the United States and distract attention from U.S. problems in Iraq, the agency quoted him as telling reporters.

Saying that the United States "should be accountable for thousands of mistakes it has made in Iraq and the entire region," Mottaki charged that "those who have committed crimes in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo" are in no position to judge Iran, a "democratic state," the news agency reported.

Later, the spokesman for Iran's Foreign Ministry followed Mottaki's comments with a measured response, emphasizing that Tehran considers the demand for suspension of fuel-cycle activities a sticking point.

"We believe that under the current circumstances, negotiations without any precondition would be best solution to put an end to the Tehran-Washington logjam," spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told IRNA. The agency said Asefi foresaw "no obstacle" to talks that occur on "equal footing."

Rice announced the U.S. policy shift at a State Department news conference yesterday, warning that if the Iranian government chooses not to negotiate and keeps pursuing its nuclear ambitions, "it will incur only great costs."

"We urge Iran to make this choice for peace, to abandon its ambition for nuclear weapons," Rice said. Refusing to do so, she added, "will lead to international isolation and progressively stronger political and economic sanctions."

A senior administration official said there is substantial agreement from Russia and China -- two nations that have resisted sanctions against Iran -- on an escalating series of U.N. penalties that would be imposed if Iran does not comply. He said negotiators are expected to finalize a package that includes potential sanctions for noncompliance, as well as benefits if Iran accepts a deal being crafted by several nations during a meeting in Vienna today. Rice left for the meeting shortly after her announcement.

The Bush administration previously refused to engage in direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program, preferring to let the EU3 conduct negotiations. But Germany lately has increasingly urged Washington to deal with Tehran directly, as have a growing roster of foreign policy experts and at least two U.S. senators.

"I thought it was important for the United States to take the lead, along with our partners, and that's what you're seeing," President Bush told reporters. "You're seeing robust diplomacy. I believe this problem can be solved diplomatically, and I'm going to give it every effort to do so."

John R. Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., called Javad Zarif, his Iranian counterpart, before Rice's announcement to inform him of the administration's willingness to engage in direct talks. Rice's remarks were also given to the Swiss ambassador to the United States for transmission to Iran.

The Iranian statement reflected the two strains that have guided Iran's nuclear diplomacy in recent weeks. On one hand, Iran strongly asserts that as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it has a right to develop peaceful nuclear power. But on the other, there is also an appetite among some Iranians to speak directly with Washington, after 27 years of hostile official silence, in hopes of avoiding punishment by the Security Council and perhaps eventually restoring diplomatic relations.

Although Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki spoke dismissively of Rice's remarks, it was not immediately clear whether his comments were a framed response or the reflexive reaction of a hardline conservative. Mottaki's state television statement, for instance, appeared to represent an effort to keep the overture alive. One diplomat said the reference to "just conditions" could be read as a softening of Iran's official line, which has always demanded that any negotiations begin with no conditions at all.

"It sounds like an opening," said the European diplomat resident in Tehran. "Before they've always said 'no conditions,' so this might mean something."

In any event, few observers of Iran's government took Mottaki's remarks as the final word. Under Iran's theocratic system, the cabinet of the elected president counts for less than state organs under the direct control of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who holds ultimate power as Iran's supreme leader of the revolution. Observers awaited word from Ali Larijani, a Khamenei favorite who as chairman of Iran's Supreme National Security Council has led Iran's negotiating team. A response may also come through appointed clerics at tomorrow's prayers; the language of the sermons is routinely dictated by Khamenei's office.

In extending the offer to join Britain, Germany and France in direct negotiations with Tehran, Rice yesterday said Washington would proceed only if Iran resumed a suspension of its nuclear program, calling that necessary to answer concerns that the program may be a front for developing nuclear weapons.

But Rice's statement also offered an assurance that Iranian officials have made their central demand. "The Iranian people believe they have a right to civil nuclear energy," she said. "We acknowledge that right."

In extending the offer to enter the nuclear talks, Rice made it clear that the United States would not contemplate restoring diplomatic relations with Iran, which were severed during the 1979 hostage crisis, until the regime made changes, including renouncing its support of terrorist groups.

Senior Chinese and Russian officials welcomed the U.S. offer of direct talks, saying it showed an increased willingness to pursue diplomatic means to resolve the budding nuclear crisis. Still, Wang Guangya, China's ambassador to the U.N., said the United States should provide Iran with security assurances and drop its demand that Iran cease uranium enrichment before such talks could begin.

"I think it in a way proves that the U.S. is more serious about the negotiations than about other options, but I do hope that this offer could be less conditional," Wang told reporters.

Wang said China may be prepared to take a tougher line with Iran if the United States and Europe offer more "attractive carrots" to the Iranians, including security assurances, and a pledge to allow Tehran to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy program, including a small research-and-development project on uranium enrichment.

The United States and key European allies oppose such a project, saying it would provide Tehran with the technical know-how to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Estimates vary, but some experts think Iran could master the expertise needed to produce a nuclear weapon by the end of the year, though U.S. intelligence agencies estimate that it would take Tehran a decade to build a bomb.

The shift in U.S. policy came after mounting calls for a dialogue with Iran from foreign policy experts and lawmakers, notably former secretaries of state Henry A. Kissinger and Madeleine K. Albright, and Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.). The pressure increased in early May when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote a rambling 18-page letter that was dismissed by Bush but was seen in much of the world as an invitation for talks with the United States. The letter was followed by back-channel communications making it clear that the Iranians were seeking direct talks.

Administration officials, meanwhile, said they began seriously discussing a plan to enter talks with Iran two months ago. Rice, on her way to New York in early May for what turned out to be a contentious meeting on the Iran issue, sketched an outline of a plan, a senior State Department official said.

Later, a small group -- including officials from the State Department, the White House and the Defense Department -- was assembled to flesh out her ideas. Bush discussed them with British Prime Minister Tony Blair during his visit to Washington last week, and Bush followed that up with phone calls to the leaders of France, Germany and Russia on Tuesday to ensure that they were on board. Rice, meanwhile, discussed the idea with her Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, before Bush gave final approval to the offer.

Rice and other Bush administration officials said the offer of direct negotiations would eliminate the argument that the U.S. refusal to deal directly with Iran on the nuclear issue was the impediment to resolving the impasse.

"This is the last excuse in some sense," she said. "There have been those who have said, 'Well, if only the negotiations had the potential for the United States to be a part of them, perhaps then Iran would respond.' So now we have a pretty clear path."

Vick reported from Tehran. Staff writers Michael A. Fletcher, Glenn Kessler and Colum Lynch contributed to this report.