Iran Candidates Toe Hard Line for Nuclear Bid

“No compromise, no submission, only Jalili!” they shouted, while waving a handwritten placard with the text: “Negotiating with Satan is against the Koran.”

They are among many who support Mr. Jalili, who is the presidential candidate favored by Iran’s hard-liners in Friday’s presidential election.

He has built his campaign around implacable “100 percent” opposition to compromise with the West over the country’s nuclear program. And while he and the seven other carefully vetted candidates might disagree on issues like women’s rights and economic troubles, when it comes to Iran’s nuclear program they are all saying the same thing: there will be no backing down, no bargaining away the nation’s perceived right to enrich uranium for power generation.

Even his opponent on the far side of Iran’s narrow political spectrum, the cleric Hassan Rowhani — the closest any of the candidates comes to the reformist camp — avoids any mention of the word “compromise” when discussing the nuclear program. He spends much of his time fending off attacks from political opponents who accuse him of having already sold out the country’s rights when he was the nuclear negotiator by temporarily suspending uranium enrichment while under heavy international pressure in 2004.

Hoping to force Iran to stop enriching uranium and begin negotiating in earnest, the Obama administration has imposed tough economic sanctions that appear to be wreaking havoc on Iran’s economy. But if the presidential campaign is any indication, rather than forcing a capitulation, the sanctions seem only to have stiffened Iran’s will to resist.

“Year after year, America has imposed harsher sanctions on us,” said Nader Karimi Joni, an Iranian journalist who is critical of certain state polices. “Now, with these candidates, we see the consequences: the sanctions hurt, but they have made our leaders much more determined.”

The stances of Mr. Jalili, the current nuclear negotiator, and Mr. Rowhani, the former negotiator, illustrate how much Iran’s position has hardened after a decade of escalating sanctions and increasing international isolation.

Mr. Jalili, in particular, has turned the election into a referendum on the country’s nuclear stance, banking on the support of Iran’s governing establishment, a mix of conservative clerics and Islamic Revolutionary Guards commanders for whom anti-Western sentiment is a staple.

Mr. Rowhani, who has been attracting support from some of the veterans of the now silenced green movement, led the first rounds of negotiations with Western countries, after the 2002 disclosure of Iran’s secret nuclear program.

Under his watch, two years later, Iran temporarily suspended enrichment of uranium as a confidence-building measure, but the Western powers stood by their demand that the entire program be terminated, accusing Iran of seeking nuclear weapons.

Mr. Rowhani now finds himself mocked by the Jalili camp, which cites those negotiations as an example of ignorance and weakness.

“We disarmed ourselves” by suspending enrichment, an official of Mr. Jalili’s campaign said in a film shown on state television last week.

“They assumed we would suspend, shut down and destroy our nuclear facilities,” Mr. Jalili himself says in the film, quoting Joschka Fischer, who was then Germany’s foreign minister. “Resistance is the solution to our problems,” he says over and over again.

As talks waxed and waned, Iran’s nuclear program ballooned. Following the end of suspension in 2005, Iran went from having two dozen test centrifuges to having nearly 17,000, according to the May 2013 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The current sanctions against Iran have slashed the value of its currency, aggravated its already high inflation rate and cut many of its financial ties to the rest of the world. Iran is increasingly resorting to barter trade with remaining oil buyers India and China as financial transactions have become nearly impossible.

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Senate confirms 2 Fed Board candidates

Harvard Economist Jeremy c. Stein and investment banker and lawyer Jerome h. Powell confirmed easily after the morning of the debate. Vote for Mr. Stein is 70 to 24 and about Mr Powell, 74 to 21.

Nor is it widely known views on issues central to the policy, the Fed: whether to take more action to reduce unemployment, or for the economy is already at risk from dangerous acceleration of inflation.

For months, Senator David Vitter, Louisiana Republican and member of the Banking Committee, hold nominations, saying two men will be "rubber stamps" for the policies of the Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, s. organised and reflection, the Obama administration. Bernanke, organised by Mr has already done more for increasing economic growth and reducing unemployment by many of his conservative critics favour and other critics — mostly liberal – argue that it has not yet done enough.

After JPMorgan Chase recently recognised commercial losses, which raises questions whether the fed and other agencies have a sufficiently tight hand of regulatory reins, Democratic Senate leaders found enough votes to overcome the objections of Mr. Vitter and others. Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, explicitly linked the vote to the JPMorgan Chase Bank is to have is abnormal behavior, as if he were a game of Craps.

In addition to the determination of interest rates on the basis of the State of the economy, the Fed also is one of the main regulators of financial undertakings.

Both of the new Governors are tested in the financial regulation, Mr. Powell as senior officer Finance Department under President George h. w. Bush and Mr. Stein as Adviser to the Treasury Secretary Timothy f. Geithner.

Some Fed schedule travel have expressed concern that the institution has operated under full capacity for so long. Mr Obama has been slow to fill in all of the proposals, and Republicans blocked some of its candidates.

In 2010, Senator Richard c. Shelby, Republican of Alabama put on hold the nomination of Peter a. Diamond, Nobel Laureate in economics, causing Mr. Diamond to withdraw last June. On Thursday some senators expressed hope that the vote will lead to more widely recognised. Too long he said Senator Emilia Maslarova, Republican of Tennessee, the Senate is felt as "are invited to join the Grand Ole Opry and is not allowed to sing."

Senator Charles e. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said: "hope that it can set the tone for agreements, which are well in the future, this year and in 2013."

Report on the White House expressed gratitude that "both sides come together" for the votes of Mr. Stein and Mr. Powell. "Today a broad bipartisan vote in the Senate reflects his deep knowledge of the economic and monetary policy, as well as their distinct backgrounds and unique experience," he says.

Opening the debate on the Senate floor, Mr. Vitter clarify that is opposition to candidates, and that he opposed the Fed monetary policy of low interest rates. "The Federal Reserve has essentially zero interest rate rules, easy policy over a long period of time," he said, calling it "very dangerous policy".

On the regulatory front says Mr. Vitter, approval of two new articles would assist the Board to adopt rules implementing the law on Dodd-Frank financial regulation and pushing "these regulations left.", if you will

The two candidates were confirmed by voice vote of the Senate Banking Committee on 29 March, and is not controversial in its own right. But Senate Republicans are many of Mr Obama candidates by wider opposition to their policies.

Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, said he will vote to confirm candidates, stating that they are qualified, although he believes that they are not as "hawkish" on inflation, he would like.

Mr. Corker expressed hope that, if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election, the Democrats are not in such a way, when he nominated the next Fed Chairman and Vice-Chairman.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction of 17 may 2012

Due to an error in editing, an earlier version of this article incorrectly reported to the Senate vote of Jerome Powell is 74-12.

View the original article here