THERAN - Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, in a letter to EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana on October 6 accused the six major powers of “unreasonable behavior” over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Analyst Ali Khorram stated that Iran’s letter could be an indication of an inclination to resume talks and that also shows Iran’s dissatisfaction.
“This letter shows Iran is dissatisfied with the route taken by Europe through the 5+1 group,” he told the Mehr News Agency.
In the letter Jalili stated, “In the judgment of the international community, this unreasonable behavior is an indication of the lack of a clear response to the principled questions of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Four UN Security Council resolutions have been issued against Iran for its refusal to halt its uranium enrichment activities.
On the response to the letter in Western countries, Khorram said, “In the West, the letter resulted in several contradictory responses. The first response was that Iran was accused of being angry and not inclined to negotiation, whereas the main point of this letter was an invitation to negotiation.”
Letter is a sign of Iran’s “political initiative”
Professor Elham Aminzadeh said Iran’s letter to Javier Solana shows Iran’s “political initiative”.
“Writing this letter after the fourth resolution… was reasonable and was a sign of Iran’s political initiative,” she told the Mehr News Agency.
The letter was meant to determine “whether the Europeans are looking for a solution or are just” using pressure and threats, he stated.
She added, “The Islamic Republic of Iran has always emphasized that negotiation is the only way to solve the nuclear issue.”
Letter should have been sent during the Caucasus crisis
Professor Alireza Davari said he believes it was the wrong time to send such a letter and it should have been written during the Caucasus crisis.
“Undoubtedly, sending such letters is potentially positive and can be assessed within the framework of public diplomacy. However, I believe, the time for sending and publishing this letter was not correct. This move should have been made during the Caucasus crisis.”