On Tuesday, Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reported the following: that Iran and the EU were nearing an agreement in which Iran would suspend uranium enrichment for 90 days; that at Tehran's insistence, negotiators led by EU foreign-policy chief Javier Solana agreed to keep the temporary enrichment halt a secret; and that in exchange, Iran would get a temporary reprieve from the imposition of sanctions by the United Nations Security Council.
The next day, a Washington Times editorial went one step further and revealed that the above-said deal was favored by some officials in the State Department, hinting that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was among them. The editorial attacked the deal as unsatisfactory and simply beneficial to Iran, which is under the gun of a Security Council resolution.
Iran's reaction to the Washington Times report was instant and expected. A top nuclear official, Mohammad Saeedi, held a press conference and denied the report, stating that his boss, Ali Larijani, was meeting with Solana in Berlin simply around the issue of an incentive package by the so-called "Five-plus-one" ie, the UN Security Council's permanent five plus Germany. But, of course, Saeedi had a hard time getting around the question that this package centered, after all, on the very issue of suspension
............................................
Both the US and Iranian policy debates have been raging outside the purview of public opinion, for the most part, except when one hears contradictory and/or contrasting points of views expressed by different officials. For now, both sides in the Berlin talks have reported "progress" and have agreed to follow-up talks, yet the chances are that
the deliberate leak of behind-the-scene talks in the Washington Times has managed, albeit temporarily, to set the process back at a delicate and exceedingly critical moment in the negotiations. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HI30Ak01.html