The Latest from Iran (21 October): How High Is the Rate of Inflation?

0605 GMT: Nuclear Watch (US Politics Edition). It looks like some officials in the Obama Administration have tried to get an advantage in the Presidential campaign from Iran's approaches for renewed nuclear talks.

The officials feed their regular spokesman, David Sanger of The New York Times, with the lines, "The United States and Iran have agreed in principle for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program...setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran."

Sanger continues:

Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know with whom they would be negotiating.

News of the agreement --- a result of intense, secret exchanges between American and Iranian officials that date almost to the beginning of President Obama’s term --- comes at a critical moment in the presidential contest, just two weeks before Election Day and the weekend before the final debate, which is to focus on national security and foreign policy.

It has the potential to help Mr. Obama make the case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the decade-long effort by the world’s major powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but it could pose a risk if Iran is seen as using the prospect of the direct talks to buy time.

The report appears to be a conversion of weeks of Iranian approaches for high-level consideration of a nine-point plan in which Tehran's suspension of enrichment of 20% uranium would be traded for removal of sanctions.

Earlier this month, Sanger was featuring the out-of-hand rejection of the proposal by US officials. At the same time, European counterparts put forward the possibility, through other journalists, of a "window" for talks between November and next spring's Iranian Presidential election.

The apparent shift in Sanger's story --- "to help Mr. Obama" in the campaign --- was already running into confusion last night, however. The White House put out the public statement, “It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections,” although spokesman Tommy Vietor said that the administration was open to such talks and has “said from the outset that we would be prepared to meet bilaterally.”

0545 GMT: The Central Bank reported on Saturday that Iran's annual rate of inflation crept up to 24% in September.

The news is already being treated with scepticism, and not just by critics of the Islamic Republic. Iran's Statistics Centre had already claimed that inflation was at 27% in August --- compared to the Central Bank's declaration of 22.9% --- and analysts and politicians inside the country have asserted that the "real" rate is even higher.

Khabar Online, linked to Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani, features an interview with economist Ali Pakzad which chides the Bank for its "erratic" reporting. Pakzad notes that Saturday's announcement was tucked away in two lines of a longer story.

There is more criticism of the Central Bank in Fars. Its top story is an interview with the Deputy Head of Parliament's Economy Commission, who criticises the "lack of working capital" and the failure to provide a stable currency.

from EA WorldView: EA Iran

Posted via email from lissping