Is Iran's proposal to hold nuke talks in Syria, Iraq, or China brinksmanship?

Iran's suggestions of alternative sites raised the possibility of complications to get talks under way as expected on April 13 between Iran and envoys from the five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany.

Jean-Christophe Bott/AP/Keystone/File
Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi speaks to journalists after the Conference on Disarmament at the European headquarters of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, on Feb. 28. Salehi has called for other countries to chose engagement over confrontation in resolving their differences over his nation's nuclear program.

With nine days to go, Iran still has not agreed on a location for talks with world powers over its nuclear program, Western officials said Wednesday but suggested Istanbul remained the most likely venue.

The officials — from the European Union and a Western country that will be at the planned meeting — dismissed calls from Tehran to hold the meeting in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon or China as brinkmanship.

Iran's suggestions of alternative sites raised the possibility of complications to get talks under way as expected on April 13 between Iran and envoys from the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany. It also could bring accusations of stall tactics by Iran's leaders.

Iran's foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, said Wednesday that Istanbul was Iran's first choice as a venue. It has now been publicly cited by the U.S. and others as the site of the talks. But Salehi appeared to leave open the possibility, however small, that the negotiations could shift to another location.

"Holding talks in Baghdad, and also China, as venue has been out there," Salehi told reporters after a Cabinet meeting in Tehran. "This is a course that both sides need to agree on ... Istanbul was our initial proposal as the venue for the talks. The Europeans initially rejected but then agreed. At the same time, we had other countries in mind."

The possibility of other locations also was raised by Mohsen Rezaei, a former Revolutionary Guard commander and now spokesman of Iran's Expediency Council. On Monday, he suggested Baghdad, Damascus, or Beirut, Lebanon.

His comments reflected frustration with Turkey, a recent ally that has moved to reduce critical oil shipments from Iran and agreed to host a NATO defense shield radar that would send a warning if the Islamic Republic fires missiles.

Iran and Turkey also disagree on how to end the conflict in Syria, with Tehran rejecting Turkish calls that Syrian President Bashar Assad step aside.

"Given that our Turkish friends reneged on some agreements, it is better that Iran's talks ... are held in a friendly country. Therefore, Baghdad, Damascus and Beirut are better venues for holding the talks compared to Istanbul," the semiofficial Fars news agency quoted Rezaei as saying.

Justifying his position, he reportedly said that the five powers planning to meet Iran "should not feel that Iranis in a weak position."

Iran is a Shiite theocracy and has strong ties with the Shiite or allied majorities controlling Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, while China has staunchly opposed increasing sanctions on Tehran to force it to compromise on itsnuclear program.

Rezaei is not part of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government and his views don't represent Iran'sofficial position. But the Expediency Council is an advisory body on key issues to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton is coordinating the planned talks, and an EU official said Wednesday there was some concern of a delay as the April 13 date nears.

He and a diplomat from one of the six countries said, however, that the talks would likely go ahead as planned in Istanbul, or possibly another venue in Switzerland, nothing that Iran has not formally proposed any alternate locations to Ashton's team.

Both of the men demanded anonymity in exchange for discussing confidential information. They suggestedIran's floating of venues that are unacceptable to their interlocutors reflected not only a show of Iranian resolve ahead of the talks but also splits within hardliners and relative moderates who find Istanbul acceptable.

Iran and the six last met in Istanbul 14 months ago and left the negotiating table two days later unable even agree on what to talk about.

Tehran arrived to the talks saying it would not even consider freezing uranium enrichment and kept repeating that mantra. It also pushed two demands unacceptable to the six: a lifting of sanctions and acceptance of its enrichment program before any further discussion of its nuclear activities.

Iran says the expansion of its enrichment program is meant only to provide nuclear fuel, denies any interest in developing the atomic bomb, and says the right of countries to enrich nuclear power is enshrined in the Nonproliferation Treaty.

But the U.S. and others say Iran's nuclear record is causing concern. Tehran started enriching in secret, has refused offers of nuclear fuel shipments from abroad, and last year began enriching to higher levels that bring it closer to point where it could turn its program into producing fissile warhead material at an underground bunker that could be impervious to attack from the air.

In Baghdad, Iraq's foreign ministry said late Tuesday that Baghdad was proposed as a venue for talks during a meeting between an Iranian delegation and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. It said Zebari welcomed the proposal and promised to make the "necessary contacts" with relevant international parties.

The independent Iranian news and analysis website,, said Ali Bagheri, Iran's deputy nuclearnegotiator, suggested Baghdad as the venue. The website said Iran considers Turkey an inappropriate host because of its hostile position toward the Syrian regime.

Earlier this week, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the talks would take place in Istanbul. Clinton and other leaders met this week in Istanbul to seek ways to aid the Syrian opposition in their year-old rebellion against Assad's regime.

Clinton said the proposed talks would not be "an open-ended session" and made clear that time is running out for a diplomatic accord over Iran's nuclear ambitions. The negotiations also have taken on urgency amid speculation that Israel or the U.S. could take military action against Iran later this year.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Is Iran's proposal to hold nuke talks in Syria, Iraq, or China brinksmanship?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today