I am never in favor of sanctions.

Jack,
signaling Iran that talks are forever
UNITED NATIONS September 19, 2006 (LAT)

Of course, we are not in favor of sanctions -- as a rule, not as a permanent fixture of our rational makeup. Sanctions rarely serve their intended purposes. But what sanctions do accomplish is to bring clarity to an issue. And to kick ditherers and hand-wringers to one side of the fence or the other.

EU, IRAN REPORTED CLOSE TO DEAL FOR NUCLEAR TALKS
WASHINGTON September 26, 2006 (Reuters)

PROGRESS SEEN IN EU-IRAN TALKS
BERLIN September 28, 2006 (Reuters)

EU, IRAN FAIL TO REACH NUCLEAR DEAL
BERLIN September 28, 2006 (ABC News)

Well, at least Iran has picked up the pace in breaking the hearts of the EU pretty-please pack.

EU, IRAN PLAN MORE NUCLEAR TALKS
LONDON September 29, 2006 (IranMania)

EU TO ADMIT IRAN NUCLEAR TALKS HAVE FAILED

LUXEMBOURG October 16, 2006 (AFP) - The European Union will acknowledge Tuesday that nuclear talks with Iran have failed and support a return to the UN Security Council to prepare sanctions, according to a draft document seen by AFP.

Draft conclusions from Tuesday's meeting of European foreign ministers said that the Union now believes that "Iran's continuation of enrichment-related activities has left the EU no choice" but to return to the United Nations.

No, now wait.

SOLANA: WE ARE STILL IN THE PRE-NEGOTIATING PHASE WITH IRAN

LUXEMBOURG October 17, 2006 (IRNA) - European Union Foreign Policy chief Javier Solana denied Tuesday that the 25-member bloc has cut off talks with Iran on the nuclear issue and said the door was open for negotiations.

"When somebody wants to maintain the channel of communication open You cannot say talks have broken down."

"We have not entered into formal negotiations. We are in a pre-negotiating phase. We like to do as much as possible to enter into negotiations," Solana clarified.

And who is first out of the box with a draft UNSCR? France has been kicked to the sanctions side of the fence.

FRANCE TO PUSH UN RESOLUTION FOR IRAN SANCTIONS

October 18, 2006 (JP/AP) - France's UN Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere said France, Britain and Germany - who have led negotiations with Iran - were still working on the Security Council resolution.

"I hope that the text can be circulated by the end of the week," he said.

All of which brings to mind that master diplomat, Philippe Douste-Blazy.* M. Douste-Blazy warned of an "international crisis" were Iran to reject the West's proposals.

"We must be very firm" in demanding that Iran responds favourably to the proposals it received earlier Friday from European Union negotiators France, Britain and Germany, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said.

"If Iran ends up not accepting (the proposals) then the matter will have to go to the Security Council and that could effectively be the start of a major international crisis," he said.

The French foreign ministry said the EU offer recognised Iran's "inalienable" right** to civilian nuclear energy as long as it does not violate the terms of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).

M. Douste-Blazy said all this August 5, 2005.

STANDING FIRM SINCE AUGUST 2005
On His Lucky Betting Foot

* The dimmest bulb in the dark Chirac marquee™.

** States do not have inalienable rights. States have rights by treaty or force of arms. As such a state can acquire, lose, or relinquish rights. The state cannot exercise an inalienable claims to these rights. All rights claims by a state are provisional. A state is mutable and passing, it has no definite form to which anything inalienable can be assigned.

PFFT (What is this?): Had enough ¾ | Getting ready to talk tough on sanctions 1 | Rayonnement français ¼