Dear valued AOL News reader:
Sphere.com is now the place for top news from the AOL News team, with original reporting, analysis
and commentary from our ever-growing cast of top-notch journalists. Get Sphere News Now
News Video
Find, view and share videos about news and entertainment from around the Web.
See Videos »

Defiant Iran vows to enrich uranium even more

By GEORGE JAHN
,
AP
posted: 12 DAYS 18 HOURS AGO
comments: 262
Text SizeAAA
VIENNA -In a defiant speech, Iran's president declared Wednesday that his country will enrich uranium to a much higher level — a fresh rejection of an international plan to curb Tehran's nuclear program.
Experts said that could put Tehran on the road to making the material needed to arm a warhead within months.
"I declare here that with the grace of God, the Iranian nation will produce 20 percent fuel and anything it needs itself," Ahmadinejad told a cheering crowd in the central city of Isfahan.
Iran denies any interest in developing nuclear arms, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech made no suggestion the Islamic Republic was planning to turn its enriched uranium stockpile into material that could be used in nuclear warheads.
Ahmadinejad said Tehran was ready to further enrich some of its present stockpile — now at 3.5 percent — to 20 percent, the grade needed to create fuel for a small medical research reactor in the Iranian capital.
Uranium enriched at low levels can be used as fuel for nuclear energy, but when enriched to 90 percent and above, it can be used as material for a weapon. The United States and five other world powers have been trying to win Iran's acceptance of a deal under which Tehran would ship most of its low-enriched uranium stockpile abroad to be processed into fuel rods for use in the research reactor.
That would leave Iran — at least temporarily — without enough enriched uranium to produce a bomb. However, after signaling in October that it would accept the proposal, Iran has since balked, presenting counterproposals that would keep the stockpile in Iran.
On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad went a step further, vowing Iran would enrich the uranium needed for the research reactor itself.
"We told them, 'Give us the 20 percent fuel" needed for the research reactor in an exchange, the Iranian leader said in Isfahan. "But then they started adding conditions."
"So we said, 'If you want to give us the fuel, we'll take it. If not, then fine and goodbye.'"
Some 33 to 66 pounds (15 to 30 kilograms) of uranium enriched to levels above 90 percent would be needed to produce a nuclear bomb. Iran currently has around 3,300 pounds (1,500 kilograms) of 3.5 percent, or low-enriched uranium — enough to produce highly enriched material for two such weapons.
David Albright of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, which has tracked Iran for signs of covert proliferation, said the process of moving from low-enriched to 20 percent enriched uranium would take months, but the next stage — enriching to weapons grade — would require only an additional "couple of weeks."
"They're 90 percent on the way" toward weapons-grade uranium once they have enriched to 20 percent, Albright said.
A nuclear expert familiar with Iran's atomic activities said Iran could be enriching to higher levels within months after reconfiguring and testing its centrifuges, the machines that spin uranium gas into enriched material. The expert — a government official from one of the five permanent U.N. Security Council nations — demanded anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the issue.
Ahmadinejad's comments were the latest in a string of defiant statements by the Islamic Republic in a furious reaction to criticism by the 35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Last week, the board endorsed a resolution from the six powers — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany — in a lopsided majority vote.
That document criticized Iran for defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment and continuing to expand operations at the Natanz plant under IAEA monitoring. It also censured Iran for secretly building a second facility and demanded that it immediately suspend further construction.
It noted that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who has since stepped down, could not confirm that Tehran's nuclear program is exclusively geared toward peaceful uses and expressed "serious concern" over Iran's stonewalling of IAEA allegations it tried to make nuclear arms.
On Sunday, Ahmadinejad announced Iran would build 10 more uranium enrichment facilities, despite the widespread belief the country simply does not have the resources to do so.
Though Iran has yet to lodge an official rejection of the U.N.-backed proposal to send its low-enriched uranium stockpile abroad for further processing, the series of defiant statements over the past few days have sent a clear signal the idea is all but dead.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said last month that the U.N. offer has been "comprehensively rejected" by Iran. A diplomat from one of the six powers said Wednesday that America's Western allies were waiting for Washington to formally declare the wait for an Iranian response over, probably by the end of this month.
At that time, he said, the six nations would likely focus on a fourth set of U.N. Security Council sanctions on Tehran for defying its enrichment ban amid signs that Russia and China, Tehran's traditional allies on the council, might be more willing to vote for new penalties. The diplomat demanded anonymity in order to discuss confidential information.
In his comments Wednesday, Ahmadinejad signaled Iran was ready for heightened confrontation, saying it was no longer ready to negotiate with the international community over the enrichment plan or any other aspects of its nuclear program.
"You should know that even if you sizzle ... the Iranian nation won't talk to you concerning the nuclear issue," he said.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
2009-12-02 18:32:46

Related Articles

  1. See More Related Articles and Blog Posts
COMMENTS ( 262 )
Page 1 of 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>
newoxfrd63
2:48PM Dec 5 2009 
America should demand that Israel which wouldn’t even exist but for billions of dollars of American taxpayer’s aid — and support in the United Nations — that it makes an broad agreement to eliminate its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. It can do so contingent on the other major states in the area, such as Iran, signing on and also agreeing to complete inspections and oversight.
REPLY RATING
(5 RATINGS)
 
newoxfrd63
2:47PM Dec 5 2009 
A war with Iran would be an unmitigated disaster for the United States. It would raise the specter of massive terrorism against Americans all over the world, cost a huge treasure of American funds, cost thousands of innocent lives of both Americans and Iranians, and perhaps even drive the world to economic disaster.

Iran’s neighbor Pakistan has atomic weapons and Iran’s most determined enemy, Israel has atomic weapons.

Iran has joined the international atomic energy covenant and allowed inspections. Israel, acting as an outlaw state with a huge arsenal of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons — has not signed any international agreements and has not allowed even a single inspection. Yet, with no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb, Jewish Neocon-influenced Washington is saber-rattling; threatening to bomb Iran into oblivion. Such an act of war would have disastrous consequences exceeding even the catastrophe of the Iraq War, a war that has killed or maimed thousands of Americans and cost king’s ransom in American taxpayer’s dollars.
REPLY RATING
(5 RATINGS)
 
pen319073
5:16AM Dec 5 2009 
in October former Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh stated that if Iran were not further sanctioned by this Christmas Israel would attack the country. That's actually an order to Obama and he needs to comply.
The same way that Bush got his orders to attack Iraq. Well, Sharon personally delivered those...
REPLY RATING
(8 RATINGS)
 
petek54
5:00PM Dec 4 2009 
Khadihi's remarks did raise a few eyebrows.
46 years ago JFK wanted very much to preclude a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. I think June of 1963, he wrote the last in a series of insistent letters to Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. Those letters sought what Israel now demands of Iran: international inspections of its nuclear facilities. The key difference between then and now -: Kennedy knew for certain that Israel, while portraying itself a friend and ally, repeatedly lied to Kennedy about nuclear weapons development at the Dimona reactor in the Negev Desert... And all that JFK achieved was a good way to get his head to leak.
REPLY RATING
(10 RATINGS)
 
INITO P
3:02PM Dec 4 2009 
IrwinRSteffy Wrote: Another thought comes to mind. Anyone read Khadafi's comments about Obama's pandering to AIPAC recently? He said Obama did so because he's afraid Mossad, Israeli intelligence, would assassinate him, as he suggested they did with Kennedy. Now we've been trained as a culture to ignore or dismiss what disliked foreign leaders say about our country out of some sense of phony patriotism. What are the implications if there's truth in the words he spoke?>>>>>>>>>>Initop Replies: And what a thought you had. LOL Do you realize you are quoting Ghaddafy? What a moron. Hey, all you putzes, come claim this genius as your own. LOL :)
REPLY RATING
(9 RATINGS)
 
IrwinRSteffy
12:12PM Dec 4 2009 
What you essentially have on display now is a stark illustration of our shadow government -- the real USA that the world knows better than us-- conniving, meddling, manipulating and yes, engaging in acts of war across sovereign lines. This is why we are hated so much around the world.

Now think: where's does Obama fit in this scenario? What do you think will happen to him if he doesn't fall in line with conventional thinking in the 'community?' He's boxed in.

Another thought comes to mind. Anyone read Khadafi's comments about Obama's pandering to AIPAC recently? He said Obama did so because he's afraid Mossad, Israeli intelligence, would assassinate him, as he suggested they did with Kennedy. Now we've been trained as a culture to ignore or dismiss what disliked foreign leaders say about our country out of some sense of phony patriotism. What are the implications if there's truth in the words he spoke?
REPLY RATING
(12 RATINGS)
 
INITO P
8:50AM Dec 4 2009 
pen319073
3:05AM Dec 3 2009
Gdwilli3
5:51PM Dec 2 2009
So those who eat bacon are an abomination to the Lord?--yup Heaven hates ham.>>>>>>>>>Initop Replies: I think ignorant, hateful people such as you putzes are an abomination to mankind. Do you morons walk upright? :)
REPLY RATING
(17 RATINGS)
 
INITO P
8:44AM Dec 4 2009 
To all you morons that think Israel is the only one that should fear a nuclear Iran, consider Iran controlling the Strait of Harmuz. If you're comfortable with this, your opinion has no value. And, for all of you moron's that think Iran only has Israel in its sights, remember the US hostages it held for 444 days, think ********* proxy war in Yemen, its alliance with Chavez and Morales. I'm utterly fascinated how you support a regime that will jail an Iranian national because a relative living abroad voices criticism of these despots. If you think isolationism is the answer you are wrong, dead wrong. History will suerly ************* if you bury your head in the sand. :)
REPLY RATING
(14 RATINGS)
 
nhcrofton37
4:56AM Dec 4 2009 
A key neocon justification for invading Iraq was: "sanctions do not work, so we must use force"!
REPLY RATING
(13 RATINGS)
 
amandarogers1980
5:12PM Dec 3 2009 
This is a time for truth. America is about to make a momentous decision: whether to launch a war in the Middle East that could ignite the Clash of Civilizations against which Harvard professor Samuel Huntington has warned, a war he believes would be a tragedy and a disaster for this Republic. To avert this war, to answer the neocon smears, Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Someone in better days said, "Nothing un-American can live in the sunlight."
REPLY RATING
(8 RATINGS)
 
Page 1 of 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>
GOT SOMETHING TO SAY?
YOU'LL BE ASKED TO REGISTER OR SIGN IN BEFORE POSTING A COMMENT.
Make a Comment
Comment
 
     

All Good News, All The Time

GNN

The Savings Experiment

cleaning products

 

Politics Daily

Sports

Money

Technology

Health

Entertainment

In a defiant speech, Iran\'s president declared Wednesday that his country will enrich uranium to a much higher level _ a fresh rejection of an international plan to curb Tehran\'s nuclear program.