Iran’s package also took a comprehensive approach to regional security and foresaw a key role for Iran in future regional negotiations.
So what is the problem?
The problem has been that negotiations with the US and the Europeans have usually ended in a u-turn by the US as soon as the parties got close to agreement.
The last time Iran suspended its enrichment activities, the EU and the US reneged on their commitments in 2005. The US insisted on a permanent suspension of enrichment, and Iran withdrew its cooperation after a 2-year suspension period.
In early 2005, officials from the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency studied the idea of placing an enrichment facility inside Iran, but the US blocked the idea.
In the same year, a proposal by scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to end the standoff over Iran's nuclear program was also rejected by the Bush administration. The proposal argued for a dramatic shift in U.S. policy to help build an internationally run enrichment facility inside Iran to replace its current facilities rather than trying to halt Iran's efforts to enrich uranium.
So while the Iran-6 make much noise about a ‘lack of confidence’, the problem is actually as much the other way.
Speculation
Despite the fact that the Iran-6 have made some big concessions on paper, we have Bush and Browne threatening more sanctions and the Israelis threatening war.
What could explain this schizophrenia?
One possibility is that this is a tactic to undermine the process once again. They could be trying to provoke Iran into confrontation. This does not make sense other than in the case of Israel that is being heavily sidelined by this potential agreement. Could this also be the reason for Israel’s frantic peace-making with Hamas, Syria and perhaps also Hezbollah at this juncture?
Some relevant IAEA Reports for those interested:
