November 1, 2005
The Real Reason for Nuking Iran
Why a nuclear attack is on the neocon agenda by Jorge Hirsch
The strategic decision by the United States to nuke Iran was probably made
long ago. Tactics adjust to unpredictable events as they unfold.
There was such an event last week, when Iran's president declared that
Israel must be "wiped off" the map. The surprise was not the statement,
which was an often-repeated quote by the late Ayatollah Khomeini, directed
at a domestic student audience. What was surprising was both the timing
(amid discussions about whether Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium)
and the relatively low-key U.S. response. Tony Blair expressed "revulsion,"
Chirac was "profoundly shocked," the European Union in a joint statement
"condemned [it] in the strongest terms." Instead, Bush was quiet.
White House Spokesman Scott McClellan commented, "It underscores the
concerns we have about Iran's nuclear intentions," and the usually
vociferous U.S. ambassador to the UN John Bolton only said that
Ahmadinejad's remarks about Israel were "pernicious and unacceptable." Those
are uncharacteristically mild statements for this administration in the face
of such a provocative statement by Iran against one of the U.S.' closest
allies. Why?
Because Iran's intended underlying message to the U.S., which was ill-timed
only in appearance, was: If you nuke us, the world will know that you did it
because Iran supports the Palestinian cause.
Instead, it is in the U.S.' interests to de-emphasize any suggestion to that
effect, hence its low-key response. Because nuking Iran for threatening
Israel will inflame the Arab world and will not be acceptable to our
European allies nor even to the American public. There are many other
justifications that the Western world and the American public will find more
acceptable, and these will be emphasized by the Bush administration at the
right moment.
* Iran "is determined to get nuclear weapons deliverable on ballistic
missiles that it can then use to intimidate not only its own region but
possibly to supply to terrorists." (John Bolton, Oct. 15, 2005)
* "We cannot let Iran, a leading sponsor of international terrorism,
acquire the most destructive weapons and the means to deliver them to
Europe, most of central Asia and the Middle East, or beyond." (John Bolton,
June 24, 2004)
* "[S]yria and Iran
share the goal of hurting America.
State
sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with
terrorists
." (George Bush, Oct. 6, 2005)
* The 9/11 Commission determined that al-Qaeda had long-standing and
strong ties to Iran, for example that "senior al-Qaeda operatives and
trainers traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives." (By contrast,
it found no ties between al-Qaeda and Iraq).
* Iran was responsible for the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, where 19
Americans were killed and 372 wounded, according to a June 2001 indictment
by the U.S. attorney general. According to the 9/11 Commission, al-Qaeda may
also have been involved.
* Hezbollah, a terrorist group tied to Iran, carried out the suicide
bombing in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. Marines in 1982. Iran was directly
involved, according to a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth
in May 2003.
The real reason for nuking Iran, however, is none of the above. It was
spelled out with surprising candor in the Pentagon draft document "Doctrine
for Joint Nuclear Operations" [.pdf] as one of several possible reasons
geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of
nuclear weapons:
"To demonstrate U.S. intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deter
adversary use of WMD."
Yes, you read it right: The U.S. is prepared to break a 60-year-old taboo on
the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries not because the
survival of the country is at stake, not because the lives of many Americans
or allies are at stake just to demonstrate that it can do it.
The U.S. has maintained for some time now that it reserves the right to
respond with nuclear weapons to attacks or intended attacks with WMD, and
that it intends to use nuclear weapons to destroy underground enemy
facilities. It is argued that such statements have deterrent value, and that
maintaining ambiguity as to what might trigger a U.S. nuclear attack deters
countries from pursuing military initiatives that are contrary to U.S.
interests.
Nonsense. Those statements have no deterrent value because no one in his or
her right mind would believe that the greatest democracy in the world would
do such a thing.
Unless the U.S. demonstrates, by actually doing it once, that it is indeed
prepared to do so.
How do you create the conditions to perform such a demonstration and avoid
immediate universal condemnation?
* You declare Iran to be the second member of the "axis of evil."
* You start a "global war on terror."
* You invade the first member of the axis (Iraq) and put 150,000 U.S.
troops at the doorstep of the second member, in harm's way not enough
troops to invade Iran, nor to prevent an Iranian invasion of Iraq after Iran
is attacked.
* You strike Iran's facilities, using conventional and nuclear bombs, to
deter Iran from retaliating with missiles with chemical warheads and from
invading Iraq, thereby saving the lives of 150,000 American soldiers.
* You argue that Iran's chemical and nuclear facilities had to be
destroyed to prevent terrorists using weapons from those facilities to
attack the U.S. (Never mind that the nuclear facilities were just nuclear
reactors, not nuclear weapons).
* You get Israel to pull the trigger, i.e., bomb some Iranian
installations (as it did in Iraq at Osirak) to provoke an Iranian response.
Now enter the world after the U.S. "demo," according to U.S. planners:
* There will be no doubt that U.S. statements on the use of nuclear
weapons will have deterrent value.
* The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty will be amended to prohibit
uranium-enrichment for all countries that do not do it already; violators
will be nuked.
* North Korea will be forced to disarm under the now real and credible
threat of massive U.S. nuclear attack.
* Any country suspected of pursuing nuclear weapons or any other
military capability that could threaten the U.S. or its allies will be
nuked.
* Russia, China, and all other nuclear countries will eventually be
forced to disarm under the threat of massive U.S. nuclear attack.
However, the real world does not always follow the script envisioned by U.S.
planners, as the Iraq experience illustrates. So here is a more likely
"post-demo" scenario:
* Many non-nuclear countries, including those currently friendly to the
U.S., will rush to develop a nuclear deterrent, and many will succeed.
* Terrorist groups sympathetic to Iran will do their utmost to retaliate
in-kind against the U.S., and eventually will succeed.
* With the taboo against the use of nuclear weapons broken, use of them
by other countries will follow in various regional conflicts, and subsequent
escalation will lead to global nuclear war.
Bye-bye world, including the United States of America.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=x61
.....................................................................
Is Ahmadinejad authoritative on Iranian foreign policy?
By Iason Athanasiadis
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
[From: Daily Star (Beirut)]
By the time that Philippe Welti, the Swiss ambassador to Iran, took the
floor last Thursday night at the prestigious Center for Middle East
Strategic Studies in downtown Tehran, the select audience of diplomats and
Iranian academics invited to hear Iran's chief nuclear negotiator speak were
expectantly awaiting the evening's verbal confrontation. They were not
disappointed.
"I will be visiting Washington in two weeks' time to confer with my American
counterparts," Welti said. "What do you suggest that I offer them as an
answer when they ask me about the Iranian president's recent comments about
Israel?"
The gales of laughter that greeted the comment were one of the evening's few
light moments. During his lecture Ali Larijani, a conservative ideologue who
has seen some of Iran's most experienced nuclear negotiators resign from
their positions since he took over this summer, charged that the United
States was "quashing ... any Iranian attempt to become more prominent in the
region." He continued:
"This reflects the fact that Iran is capable of emerging as a regional
balancer that can affect U.S. designs on the region." Larijani described the
pressure on Iran over its nuclear program as the "most radical form of
hegemony."
The next day, tens of thousands of conservative Iranians took to the streets
to mark Jerusalem Day, the annual event the regime orchestrates as a sign of
solidarity with the Palestinians. The echoes of President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad's comments still reverberated as an unrepentant crowd burned
effigies of Uncle Sam, dragged Union Jack-draped coffins behind them and
carried aloft placards proclaiming that "Israel must be wiped off the face
of the earth." It was proof enough that Ahmadinejad's comment had been made
to appeal to this electoral constituency of aging revolutionaries and
disaffected youths whose lives have seen little improvement in the past 26
years of the Islamic Republic. The president's words were intended for
internal rather than international consumption and did not necessarily
reflect a declaration of war against Israel.
If much can be divined about a leader from the manner in which his
bodyguards treat a crowd, last Friday's march was instructive. The first to
arrive outside the huge Tehran University mosque where Friday prayers are
traditionally held was Ahmadinejad. The crowd heaved and tossed as his
security detail hustled him through, shoving aside anyone standing in the
way. Well-wishers and photographers reeled under the onslaught of his
twenty-something earpiece-sporting toughs.
Following Ahmadinejad was Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. Reputed to be the
most powerful man in Iran, even after losing the recent presidential
election, and despite being the target of several assassination attempts,
Rafsanjani's escorts were not so much violent with the crowd as firm.
Gratuitous roughness was replaced by effectiveness.
Finally, it was the turn of Parliament Speaker Gholamali Haddad Adel and
Larijani. Their security was inconspicuous by comparison with what preceded
them and the bodyguards did not manhandle well-wishers. While all four
personalities are at high-risk in terms of their personal security, their
decision to approach the mosque by walking through the crowd up to the main
gate rather than by entering through a side entrance was calculated to
strike a populist note.
Ahmadinejad's violent minders reflect the same militant culture that shapes
the president's extremist-sounding speeches. When he pronounced a rhetorical
death sentence upon Israel last week, he was paying homage to his mentor and
founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who introduced
the phrase "Israeli must be wiped off the face of the earth" into the
Iranian political lexicon.
In Tehran, neophyte administration officials reeled with surprise at the
international reaction to the statement. After all, the same sentence that
caused such trepidation in the world's capitals has been inscribed in a
corner of Tehran's Argentine Square for the past two decades. Western
diplomats pointed to the English-language posters advertising the "World
Without Zionism" conference where Ahmadinejad made his statement as final
proof that the event was intended for Western consumption. However, they did
not factor into their calculations the powerful Iranian desire to appear on
par with the West. Iranians pointed with pride at the perfectly spelled and
lavishly designed posters decorating the streets, oblivious to their
potential for causing offense.
Iranians have indeed pioneered techniques in the presentation of regime
propaganda. For example, a four-floor digitalized and Photo-shopped poster
rears up next to Motahari Bridge in central Tehran, featuring a hijab-clad
woman holding a baby in one hand and a gun in the other. It towers over the
legend, "I love my child, but I love martyrdom more." This is indicative of
the bombast the regime uses to bolster its ideological positions, which are
rarely backed by action - there is still no record of an Iranian suicide
bomber outside the context of the Iran-Iraq war.
Moreover, Ahmadinejad's inexperienced political handling of his trip to New
York last September to address the United Nations General Assembly alarmed
Iranian officials sufficiently for them to consider sidelining his role in
international affairs. The Expediency Council, a body that negotiates
gridlocked policy initiatives and is headed by Rafsanjani, has had its
constitutional importance elevated and now holds a veto over some affairs.
Furthermore, Rafsanjani has been moving back into the international arena
with a recent trip to Saudi Arabia. It came hot on the heels of Riyadh's
cancellation of a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Monachehr Mottaki,
as tension again mounts between the Wahhabi Sunni and theocratic Shiite
states.
Back at the main lecture hall, Welti had sat down and the audience awaited
Larijani's reply. He said: "We want Palestinians to live just like the
Europeans and not be killed every day by the Israelis. Be assured that Iran
is not after nuclear weapons or missiles."
The Iranian negotiator's answer bore little direct relation to the Swiss
diplomat's question. It was a microcosm of the cultural gulf that separates
the two sides when they sit down at the negotiating table.
Iason Athanasiadis specializes in Middle East politics and often visits
Iran. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=&categ_id==5&article_id=
728
......................................................................
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Iranian president calls for democracy for Palestinians
TEHRAN: Irans President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday the only
solution to the Middle East conflict was democracy for Palestinians, after
provoking outcry last week by calling for Israel to be wiped off the map.
The official IRNA news agency quoted him as saying the best step would be
political rather than military.
The only logical solution to solve the Palestinian issue is to hold free
elections with the participation of Palestinians inside and outside the
occupied territories and recognition of the nations legitimacy, he said
after a meeting with Irans supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
When Iran uses the term occupied territories it usually means not only the
West Bank and Gaza but the whole of Israel, whose right to exist Iran does
not recognise.
Ahmadinejad appeared to be calling for full democratic representation for
Palestinian refugees and émigrés anywhere. His comments last week sparked
sharp international criticism, including a rebuke from the UN Security
Council.
I will ask UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to put on his agenda the
formation of a democratic and legitimate Palestinian government,
Ahmadinejad said on Sunday. Annan is expected to visit Iran in the next week
or two.
Several countries summoned Iranian ambassadors last week to seek assurances
that Tehran was not planning a military attack.
The United States and Britain said Ahmadinejads remarks added to fears that
Iran was planning to build nuclear arms. Tehran says its nuclear programme
is purely peaceful. reuters
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=
05\11\01\story_1-11-2005_pg4_17
.....................................................................
Iran's London envoy sacked as president purges officials Ewen MacAskill,
diplomatic editor Tuesday November 1, 2005 The Guardian
Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has embarked on a purge of senior
Iranian diplomats, with the ambassador to London among his first victims.
The sackings will create further alarm in western capitals over Mr
Ahmadinejad, who has made a series of hardline pronouncements since becoming
president in the summer.
Iranian and western diplomatic sources confirmed last night that Seyed
Muhammad Hossein Adeli, who was posted to London last year, had been sacked.
According to western diplomats, Muhammad Reza Alborzi, Iran's ambassador to
the UN in Geneva, was also being recalled, sources said.
The purge comes less than a week after the president was widely condemned
for calling for Israel to be wiped off the map.
Mr Alborzi was part of an Iranian delegation involved in failed negotiations
with Britain, France and Germany in Paris this year over Tehran's nuclear
programme.
Iran is desperately trying to avoid referral of the nuclear issue to the UN
security council and western diplomats suggested that Mr Ahmadinejad may be
conducting a clear-out of Iranian diplomats involved in these negotiations.
The US, EU and Israel suspect that Iran is covertly engaged in pursuit of a
nuclear weapons capability. Tehran denies this.
Western diplomatic sources suggested that the purge is related to the
nuclear negotiations. Mr Ahmadinejad had complained that some diplomats had
sided too much with European negotiators and failed to represent Iran's
national interest.
An Iranian source said there were several reasons for Dr Adeli's sacking,
but denied that these included the nuclear issue or the call to wipe out
Israel. Dr Adeli, who returned to London late last week from discussions in
Tehran, had proved to be a relatively popular ambassador in London. He was
less reserved than his predecessors and prepared to make Iran's case in the
media. He is a former governor of the Iranian central bank.
Since Mr Ahmadinejad became president Iran has effectively broken off talks
with Britain, France and Germany by resuming uranium conversion, an early
step towards nuclear weapons capability.
It yesterday handed over additional documentation to the International
Atomic Energy Agency in an attempt to avoid referral to the UN security
council. Muhammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation,
said there was good cooperation with UN inspectors.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1605736,00.html
.....................................................................
Nejad's Words
Maher Othman
[From: Al-Hayat, 31 October 2005]
Iran could have done without new problems prior to the fiery speech its new
president Mahmoud Ahmedi Nejad addressed, calling for "wiping out Israel".
As much as the title chosen by the Islamic committees of school students in
Iran for its conference, "the world without Zionism", during which Nejad
gave his speech, deserves admiration; since this doctrine, as practiced by
the ultra-radical Zionist right-wing in Israel is both racist and evil. This
doctrine encourages war crimes and crimes against humanity targeting the
Palestinians. Not a single country seems to be willing to implement
President Nejad's call to wipe out Israel now or in the foreseeable future.
Nejad and the prominent Iranian officials, the world considers Nejad as
speaking on their behalf, should listen to the loud complaints, especially
from Western leaders, to realize that Nejad's call, although mere empty
enthusiastic words, might have serious repercussions on Iran.
Some years ago, which now seem to be many, the then Iraqi President, Saddam
Hussein stood and threatened to burn "half of Israel" with chemical weapons
if it attacked his country. The West and Israel rocked the world. Then
Saddam's blood boiled and he invaded Kuwait on August 2nd . He bombed Israel
with missiles that failed to kill a single Israeli. Nevertheless, it was a
pretext for Israel to acquire new weapons and obtain compensation from the
United States in exchange for not interfering in the upcoming war, led by
the United States to oust the Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. On June 7th, 1981,
an Israeli air strike bombed and destroyed Iraq's French-made "Ozirak"
nuclear reactor (Tammuz). Finally, Saddam Hussein's regime collapsed, Iraq
itself collapsed and is still until now dominated by the US occupation. This
occupation is also Israeli in some way, since the staunchest inciters of the
last war were American neo-conservatives, known for strongly supporting
Israel and sponsoring its interests.
Indeed, the Iranian nuclear project does not suit the Israelis or the
Americans or the West in general.
Although Israel is a nuclear state, Western countries do not impose any
inspection on its sites, arsenal or means to transport, drop and deliver its
nuclear weapons on jets, cross continent missiles, modern German submarines
and other means. The failure of the International Agency for Atomic Energy
(IAAE) to inspect Israeli nuclear facilities is inexplicable, while it
insists on imposing its control and inspection on Iranian facilities, Iran
maintain they are meant for peaceful purposes related to generating electric
power. The three European countries mediating between Iran and the United
States in the nuclear issue are: Germany, France and Britain. All three
country refuse allowing Iran to pursue Uranium enrichment. They seek to
convince Tehran to submit its nuclear program to continuous international
monitoring to prevent any shift to developing nuclear weapons.
President Nejad gave Israel a free pretext to justify any strike on the
Iranian nuclear facilities, regardless of its purposes and perhaps to strike
Iranian military bases, factories and silos. If this is to happen, the
Israeli leaders would say that Iran threatened the existence of their state
and that it represents an existential threat to the Israelis. Should it
occur - this is just a scenario - but it is a very probable one, considering
that the Americans will not hold the Israelis back now but they might help
by supplying it with the necessary bombs and missiles to destroy the
defenses surrounding the nuclear facilities; then President Nejad might have
given a free service to the enemies of his country.
Through his speech in the student conference, the Iranian President has
suggested new possibilities, it is most unlikely that he comprehensively
thought about. This is not meant to scare him of what the Israeli reaction
might be, since Iran has many means to seek vengeance and respond. What is
meant is to shed light on a battle that is currently pointless, but which
has been widely opened in an already very tense region.
http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/OPED/10-2005/Article-20051031-477612e1
-c0a8-10ed-002d-80ae93d4c97e/story.html
.....................................................................
Iran's New Mission
31/10/2005
Ahmed Al-Rabei
[From: Asharq Alawsat]
After the Arabs and Muslims failed to eliminate Israel, Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to try his luck by announcing his desire to wipe
Israel off the map. After the sacrifices of hundreds of thousands of Arabs
who died or were injured in several wars against Israel were wasted as
Israel occupied more Arab lands, the Iranian President came to try his luck.
There are only two ways for the Iranian president to wipe Israel off the
map. The first is to mobilize the Iranian army and deploy it against Israel.
This requires the agreement of Arab governments whose territories this army
will have to cross which have signed up to a proposal of peace with Israel
creating two states, one Jewish and other Palestinian. The army will also
have to pass through occupied Palestinian territories administered by a
national authority, which has signed a number of peace agreements with
Israel.
As for the second alternative, it is to develop a nuclear weapon and use it
to hit Israel. This raises another problem. The nuclear weapon is not a
smart weapon. It kills everyone, including four million Palestinian living
in the Occupied Territories and inside Israel. A nuclear bomb would not
respect international boundaries and will endanger the people of Jordan,
Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and other countries near Israel.
First and foremost, however, is it reasonable for someone who wants to wipe
Israel off the map to announce this historical and dangerous plan outright,
instead of keeping it a top-secret?
Mahmoud Ahamdinejad on his own will eliminate Israel, while the Arab world,
and especially the Palestinians, adopt peace plans with Israel. He Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad sought to please an enthusiastic crowd in Tehran even if this
meant turning the rest of the world against him; his statements have
succeeded in uniting the world against him at a time when he needs the
international communitys support for his nuclear program. Even if Israel
had spent millions, it would have failed to achieve half of what the Iranian
President did in his speech, which it has cleverly used to put pressure on
Iran.
Iranian ambassadors in several western capitals engaged in a damage-control
exercise and claimed the presidents words should not be taken literally to
mean he called for the annihilation of Israel. Yet, Ahmadinejad put an end
to the discussion and reaffirmed his statements!
Israel is a criminal aggressive state but it is indeed very lucky; its
enemies offer their services for free on a golden plate. The latest
statements by Irans president are a gift from heaven for the Israeli media
to continue its campaign of lies. Critically, Ahmadinejad has given enough
excuses for the United States and Israel to object to the Iranian nuclear
program as a menace to the international community!
The Iranian president has created for himself a new mission, which requires
much effort and time!
http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section==2&id=$61
....................................................................
Ahmadinejad's Israel Remarks Split Iran
31/10/2005
TEHRAN, Iran, AP -Pro-democracy reformers denounced Iran's hard-line
president Sunday for calling for Israel's annihilation, saying it harmed the
country's international standing.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday that Israel is a "disgraceful
blot" that should be "wiped off the map," prompting international
condemnation and an Israeli demand Iran be expelled from the United Nations.
On Sunday, Ahmadinejad said his comments represented Iran's long-standing
policy toward the Jewish state enunciated by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini, who led the 1979 revolution, the Islamic Republic News Agency, or
IRNA, said.
"These words are the same ones that the late Imam (Khomeini) said,"
Ahmadinejad said, explaining that he only added one sentence about "the
powers of arrogance," seen as a reference to the United States. Iran does
not recognize the existence of Israel and Khomeini had repeatedly called for
its destruction.
But former reformist president Mohammad Khatami criticized Ahmadinejad,
saying "those words have created hundreds of political and economic problems
for us in the world," IRNA said.
It was the first time in a quarter century that there was a clear-cut rift
over a major policy position drawn up by Khomeini.
"Ahmadinejad's remarks harmed Iran. It was irresponsible and illogical,"
said Rajabali Mazrouei, a prominent reformer and former deputy. "We can't be
more extremist than Palestinians themselves."
Morad Veisi, a leading political analyst, said it was the first time that an
Iranian head of state was openly calling for the destruction of Israel.
"Khomeini was a spiritual leader, not head of government. Ahmadinejad
apparently is not even familiar with the world of politics," he said.
Extremists, however, were motivated by Ahmadinejad's remarks. About 300 men
and women turned up Sunday at the offices of the Headquarters for
Commemorating Martyrs of the Global Islamic Movement to volunteer for
suicide bomb attacks against Israel.
A spokesman for the group said it had signed up more than 45,000 volunteers
to undergo training for suicide attacks since it began recruiting in June
2004.
"More than 1000 of them have already been trained. Many of them don't need
training since they are already members of the elite Revolutionary Guards
and paramilitary Basij forces," Mohammad Ali Samadi said.
Several senior officials, including presidential adviser Mojtaba Rahmandoust
and Parliamentary speaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel, were at the gathering.
"The Iranian nation wants this regime removed from the world map,"
Rahmandoust told the gathering held at a building owned by the semiofficial
Martyr Foundation.
In London, Britain said Iran poses a challenge to the international
community, citing the call to wipe out Israel and charging Tehran was
involved in the Iraqi insurgency and had nuclear weapons ambitions.
"Iran has to change its behavior in terms of support for terrorism, in
deceit over nuclear weapons and in terms of its relationship and threats to
other members of the international community," British Defense Secretary
John Reid told the British Broadcasting Corporation on Sunday.
Reid said Iran appeared to be trying to confront the international
community, which is considering how to respond.
Reid said he did not have conclusive proof that the Iranian government was
involved in providing weapons to insurgents in Iraq. But he said there was
evidence of the involvement of Iranian elements in the Iraqi insurgency.
http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?id=$45§ion==1
.....................................................................
Negotiation first priority, but other scenarios envisioned: nuclear official
Tehran Times Political Desk
[01 November 2005]
TEHRAN Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani said here
on Monday that the uproar raised by the West about President Mahmud
Ahmadinejads recent anti-Zionist remarks will only encourage Iran to gain
access to nuclear technology.
Speaking at a conference entitled Irans Nuclear Energy, from Yesterday to
Today at the Amir Kabir Industrial University in Tehran, Larijani added
that immediately after Ahmadinejads remarks were broadcast, foreign media
tried to connect the statements to Irans nuclear issue.
Ahmadinejads remarks only expressed the idea that the Zionist regime is a
dictatorial force that has evicted Palestinian people from their homeland
through the use of force and is therefore not legitimate, he commented.
Through creating propaganda against Iran, Westerners are trying to show that
Iran is under pressure over its nuclear program, Larijani noted.
But they should realize that such attitudes will only encourage us to gain
access to nuclear technology.
The SNSC secretary said that Iran should pursue the nuclear issue with the
objective of mastering the nuclear fuel cycle, while observing the three
principles of dignity, wisdom, and national interests.
He stated that Irans nuclear program began 40 years ago.
At the time, Iran had a close relationship with the United States, and the
Americans had accepted the fact that the country needed various sources of
energy and had therefore proposed constructing a research reactor in Iran,
which was built and is still running, but the with the victory of the
Islamic Revolution, the U.S. abrogated all of its contracts with Iran.
Those who believe we can get help from European countries on the nuclear
issue see for themselves that there is no guarantee that these countries
will produce and supply our nuclear fuel, Larijani observed.
He stressed that Iran is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency
and has accepted the safeguards agreement and therefore has the right to
gain access to nuclear technology.
Larijani also stated that the West should not accuse Iran of concealment.
In fact, they consider it our right to access nuclear energy but intend to
deprive us of the nuclear fuel cycle through the use of force.
They say they have doubts about our intentions since we possess huge oil
and gas reserves and thereby conclude that Iran is seeking a nuclear bomb.
But why should they punish Iran today for a technology that, according to
the U.S., it will gain access to in 10 years time? This is the United
States preemptive theory.
Referring to the double-standard polices of the U.S. and Europe toward the
nuclear programs of various countries, Larijani said, South Korea and Japan
also enrich uranium but the concern over intentions is only about Iran.
The truth is, Iran can take a great technological leap forward and surpass
developing countries if it gains access to higher levels of technology due
to its geopolitical position, extensive expert forces, and inspirational
ideology, which alone is the main factor that can cause trouble (for the
West).
If we yield to their demands now, one day they will probably call for the
cancellation of classes at Amir Kabir University, since they are related to
nuclear issues.
The top nuclear official stressed that Iran has prepared for a difficult
scenario which will have its own costs but will make others realize they
cannot frighten Iran.
Elsewhere in his remarks, Larijani noted that Iran acknowledges that the
IAEA can carry out any supervisory measures over its nuclear activities in
order to prove it has not diverted from its peaceful nuclear program.
He stated that Iran certainly prefers to resolve the nuclear issue through
dialogue, adding, In order to do so, we need some effort. Negotiations
alone are useless. Whats important is to get nearer to our objectives and
demands through talks.
I do not consider dialogue the only way to resolve the issue, but I do
believe that negotiations are a priority.
Asked what stance Iran would take if it faced demands to close the Isfahan
Uranium Conversion Facility, with an alternative of possible sanctions or
war, Larijani said, The remarks made about possible military attacks are
only meant to intimidate Iran.
In fact, there will be no war, because they are not prepared to launch
military strikes on two fronts at the same time. Iran is a hard target and
unlike Iraq does not lack a legitimate government but enjoys legitimacy
among its neighbors.
If they think they can restrict us by imposing sanctions on oil, they are
totally mistaken since that will only increase the price of oil.
Iran gives IAEA complete information on P1 and P2 centrifuges
Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Deputy Director for International
Affairs Mohammad Saeedi said Iran has submitted some documents to the IAEA
related to the P1 and P2 centrifuges, in line with Irans full cooperation
with the agency.
These documents are related to the agencys questions about the P1 and P2
centrifuges, and some of these documents will be delivered to the inspectors
who are currently in Tehran, Saeedi told the Mehr News Agency on Monday on
the sidelines of the conference.
He expressed hope that with the submission of these documents, the agency
would reach a definite conclusion about ambiguities which it raised on the
P1 and P2 centrifuges in September 2003.
In two visits to Tehran by Olli Heinonen, the IAEA deputy director general
and head of the Department of Safeguards, considerable progress was made
through answering questions and clearing up ambiguities, something which has
been acknowledged by the agencys officials.
The first stage of these inspections took place two weeks ago, and the
inspectors are currently carrying out the second stage of their mission,
which started on Saturday and will last until Wednesday. He said this is the
last stage of inspections before November.
Hopefully, Mohamed ElBaradeis report on Irans nuclear program for the
November IAEA Board meeting will be based on the reports of the agencys
inspectors, Saeedi stated. The nuclear official rejected speculation that
the latest investigations were based on the recent IAEA resolution on Irans
nuclear program, saying, These investigations are within the framework of
the additional protocol and bilateral agreements between Iran and the
agency.
Asked about coordination between the new nuclear negotiating team after the
change in government and the Supreme National Security Council, he said the
new team is coordinating just like the previous team.
IAEA should view Iran as role model: Esmaeili
Managing Director of the Tehran Times and the Mehr News Agency Parviz
Esmaeili also delivered a speech at the conference, saying that the IAEA
should view Iran as a role model since, according to its claims, 18 years
of concealment have not caused Iran to divert to a nuclear weapons program.
Esmaeili noted that Irans strategy is to pursue the process of nuclear
negotiations in order to attain its rights concerning the use of nuclear
technology.
They believe we have concealed our activities for 18 years, but I think
its the agency that has failed to carry out its duties toward Iran over the
past 18 years, he said.
http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=/1/2005&Cat==2&Num=
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.intellnet.org
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,'
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
