Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei could flee to Russia should the situation in his country continue to spiral out of control, according to Radio Netherlands.
The media organization reports that the Supreme National Security Council ordered a check-up Sunday of the jet on standby to evacuate Khamenei and his family should the need arise.
If Khamenei does depart the country, it would be reminiscent of an historic event in Iranian history: Jan. 16, 1979, when the Iranian Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi fled Iran following an increase in violent protests. The anniversary of that event is coming up soon.
The plane check is already being viewed by some as an indication that Khamenei will in fact leave Iran, as protests continue.
30.12.09
29.12.09
Public Enemy In Iran
A crucial moment, a tipping point, a turning point, a Berlin Wall moment and many other adjectives and parallels are in place in international media trying to grasp the nature of events taking place in Iran.
Iran stands on the brink says Massoumeh Torfeh in a op-ed in the Guardian. The situation in Iran has reached the point of no return she concludes.
The leader is now surrounded by the hardline clergy, right of centre politicians, Revolutionary Guards and Basij militia, who are calling for direct confrontation. This can only lead to further bloodshed. The opposition is now calling for more strikes and attacks at important centres of power such as the state TV, where clashes took place yesterday. And February sees the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Republic. There is talk of a military coup by the Revolutionary Guards if the situation does not settle down.
Iran is facing a long period of political instability; and with increasing tensions in neighbouring Pakistan, plus the volatile situation in Afghanistan and Iraq, regional security appears more precarious than any time in the recent past.
Simon Tisdall wonders in the same paper if what's taking place in Iran is a second revolution.
What's changing, as the battle lines sharpen, is that fantasy politics and paranoid posturing can no longer conceal the widening fissures – economic, social and ethnic as well as political – that are splintering Iranian society.
Maybe the regime can still cling to power. But the legitimacy of Khomeini's republic is all but shot. The infallibility of the Vali al-Faqih is blown. The "month of blood" is upon them.
Ali Ansari pens a very thoughtful piece in the Independent in which he says that the government in Iran is way out of control.
This is in many ways a crucial moment. Many of those who have hedged their bets will now begin to reassess their loyalties. Can Islam really be identified with Khamanei? Is Ahmadinejad really the best the Islamic Republic can do? Where in the Holy Koran – as demonstrators chanted – does it say you can sexually assault prisoners?
It is the brutality of the government response to the initial protests that has profoundly shaken Iranians, who are now confronted with an attempt to reimpose an extreme version of Divine Right.
The Iranians have responded forcefully, and with considerable courage, to these demands. This is not a disorganised mob, but a well-marshalled and coordinated crowd. Preoccupied with the events of 1978, observers earnestly cast around for a "leader". But this battle between accountability and autocracy has much more in common with an earlier movement, the Constitutional Revolution of 1906.
There was no single leader then, but there was a powerful idea. And today the means of disseminating that idea is much more potent. With literacy over 90 per cent and more than 25 million registered internet users, and 50 million mobile phone accounts, the days of Divine Right monarchy are long past their sell-by date. Change is coming to Iran.
Ramin Ahmadi goes a bit further in his comments in the Forbes magazine online edition. Iran's regime is on the ropes he says.
The military regime in Tehran is in its final days. The signs of an imminent collapse, perfectly traceable on the Iranian streets.
Robin Wright considers the events in Iran as the country's Berlin Moment. He goes on to describe the green movement as the "the most vibrant and imaginative civil disobedience campaign in the world."
It is time to start wondering out loud whether Iran’s uprising could become one of those Berlin Wall moments.
… [t]he green movement is far more than simply sporadic eruptions. This is the most vibrant and imaginative civil disobedience campaign in the world.
So far the green movement has insisted on non-violence. Perhaps the ultimate irony in the Islamic Republic today is that a brutal revolutionary regime suspected of secretly working on a nuclear weapon faces its biggest challenge from peaceful civil disobedience. And even such a militarised regime has been unable to put it down.
It is not only the media that finally starts taking the events in Iran right. Consider this Washington Post editorial.
[m]ore than ever, the Obama administration and other Western governments must tailor their policies toward Iran to reflect the centrality of the Green Movement's fight for freedom. While diplomatic contact with the regime need not be broken off entirely, by now it should be obvious that it cannot produce significant results -- and might serve to shore up a tottering dictatorship.
President Obama shifted U.S. policy partway in the right direction when, during his Nobel Prize speech this month, he departed from his prepared text to say that "it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear that" the Iranian protesters "have us on their side." He went further Monday with an admirably strong statement that condemned "the violent and unjust suppression of innocent Iranian citizens" and called for "the immediate release of all who have been unjustly detained.
17.12.09
Seized N.Korean weapons likely destined for Iran - source
By Ambika Ahuja
BANGKOK (Reuters) - Weapons seized in Thailand from an impounded plane traveling from North Korea were likely destined for Iran, said a high-ranking Thai government security official on a team investigating the arms.
"Some experts believe the weapons may be going to Iran, which has bought arms from North Korea in the past," said the official, quoting Thai government military experts who also took part in an investigation of the weapons.
Speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to talk to the media, he said the Thai investigating team considered Iran a likely destination because of the type of weaponry, including unassembled Taepodong-2 missile parts.
Security analysts have said North Korea's long-range Taepodong-2 is a product of joint efforts with Tehran, coinciding with Iran's development of the Shehab-5 and 6 missiles.
"Some of the components found are believed to be parts of unassembled Taepodong-2 missiles," the official said.
U.S. lawmakers have expressed concern about North Korea's close missile cooperation with Iran, which Washington suspects is seeking to build nuclear weapons. The relationship dates to the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s when Pyongyang shipped Scud missiles.
The components were discovered among 35 tonnes of weapons sealed in 145 crates of cargo seized by Thai authorities when the plane landed in Bangkok on Friday to refuel. The buyer and destination of the weapons have been shrouded in mystery.
A Thai court on Monday extended the detention of the five-man crew -- four from Kazakhstan and one from Belarus -- by 12 days to give authorities more time to investigate.
They each face 10 years in prison if found guilty of illegal possession of heavy weapons.
U.N. SANCTIONS
The weapons would breach a U.N. Security Council resolution in June banning communist North Korea from selling arms in response to defiant nuclear and missile tests.
The official said he understood Iran in the past had bought North Korea's Taopodong-1 multi-stage missile, which has an estimated range of up to 2,500 km (1,553 miles). It uses liquid fuel and was fired over Japan in 1998.
Taepodong-2 was first test-launched in July 2006 and flew for about 40 seconds before it blew apart. It is a multi-stage missile with a possible range of 6,700 km (4,163 miles). Another version was launched in April and flew about 3,000 km (1,864 miles) before splashing into the sea.
Thai authorities have said the airplane's cargo contained rocket launchers, explosives, ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for surface-to-air-missiles.
Police Colonel Supisarn Bhakdinarinath, the chief investigator, said on Tuesday an initial estimate of the value of the weapons, most of which were unused, was about $18 million.
But Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said it was too early to determine a value, adding that a closer inspection is necessary to determine their worth, where they may have been produced and where they were being delivered.
Crew members have denied knowledge of any weapons on board and indicated that the plane stopped en route to Sri Lanka and the Middle East to refuel.
The seizure came days after President Barack Obama's special envoy made a three-day trip to the communist state to persuade Pyongyang to rejoin six-nation nuclear disarmament talks.
Arms are a vital export item estimated to earn North Korea more than $1 billion a year. Its biggest arms sales come from ballistic missiles, with Myanmar, Iran and Middle Eastern states among their customers, according to U.S. officials.
In August, the United Arabs Emirates seized a ship carrying North Korean-manufactured munitions, detonators, explosives and rocket-propelled grenades bound for Iran, the first since sanctions against North Korea was strengthened. The containers were disguised as oil equipment.
(Editing by Jason Szep and Bill Tarrant)
BANGKOK (Reuters) - Weapons seized in Thailand from an impounded plane traveling from North Korea were likely destined for Iran, said a high-ranking Thai government security official on a team investigating the arms.
"Some experts believe the weapons may be going to Iran, which has bought arms from North Korea in the past," said the official, quoting Thai government military experts who also took part in an investigation of the weapons.
Speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to talk to the media, he said the Thai investigating team considered Iran a likely destination because of the type of weaponry, including unassembled Taepodong-2 missile parts.
Security analysts have said North Korea's long-range Taepodong-2 is a product of joint efforts with Tehran, coinciding with Iran's development of the Shehab-5 and 6 missiles.
"Some of the components found are believed to be parts of unassembled Taepodong-2 missiles," the official said.
U.S. lawmakers have expressed concern about North Korea's close missile cooperation with Iran, which Washington suspects is seeking to build nuclear weapons. The relationship dates to the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s when Pyongyang shipped Scud missiles.
The components were discovered among 35 tonnes of weapons sealed in 145 crates of cargo seized by Thai authorities when the plane landed in Bangkok on Friday to refuel. The buyer and destination of the weapons have been shrouded in mystery.
A Thai court on Monday extended the detention of the five-man crew -- four from Kazakhstan and one from Belarus -- by 12 days to give authorities more time to investigate.
They each face 10 years in prison if found guilty of illegal possession of heavy weapons.
U.N. SANCTIONS
The weapons would breach a U.N. Security Council resolution in June banning communist North Korea from selling arms in response to defiant nuclear and missile tests.
The official said he understood Iran in the past had bought North Korea's Taopodong-1 multi-stage missile, which has an estimated range of up to 2,500 km (1,553 miles). It uses liquid fuel and was fired over Japan in 1998.
Taepodong-2 was first test-launched in July 2006 and flew for about 40 seconds before it blew apart. It is a multi-stage missile with a possible range of 6,700 km (4,163 miles). Another version was launched in April and flew about 3,000 km (1,864 miles) before splashing into the sea.
Thai authorities have said the airplane's cargo contained rocket launchers, explosives, ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for surface-to-air-missiles.
Police Colonel Supisarn Bhakdinarinath, the chief investigator, said on Tuesday an initial estimate of the value of the weapons, most of which were unused, was about $18 million.
But Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said it was too early to determine a value, adding that a closer inspection is necessary to determine their worth, where they may have been produced and where they were being delivered.
Crew members have denied knowledge of any weapons on board and indicated that the plane stopped en route to Sri Lanka and the Middle East to refuel.
The seizure came days after President Barack Obama's special envoy made a three-day trip to the communist state to persuade Pyongyang to rejoin six-nation nuclear disarmament talks.
Arms are a vital export item estimated to earn North Korea more than $1 billion a year. Its biggest arms sales come from ballistic missiles, with Myanmar, Iran and Middle Eastern states among their customers, according to U.S. officials.
In August, the United Arabs Emirates seized a ship carrying North Korean-manufactured munitions, detonators, explosives and rocket-propelled grenades bound for Iran, the first since sanctions against North Korea was strengthened. The containers were disguised as oil equipment.
(Editing by Jason Szep and Bill Tarrant)
Obama told China: I can't stop Israel strike on Iran indefinitely
By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya, Haaretz Correspondents
U.S. President Barack Obama has warned his Chinese counterpart that the United States would not be able to keep Israel from attacking Iranian nuclear installations for much longer, senior officials in Jerusalem told Haaretz. They said Obama warned President Hu Jintao during the American's visit to Beijing a month ago as part of the U.S. attempt to convince the Chinese to support strict sanctions on Tehran if it does not accept Western proposals for its nuclear program. The Israeli officials, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the matter, said the United States had informed Israel on Obama's meetings in Beijing on Iran. They said Obama made it clear to Hu that at some point the United States would no longer be able to prevent Israel from acting as it saw fit in response to the perceived Iranian threat.
After the Beijing summit, the U.S. administration thought the Chinese had understood the message; Beijing agreed to join the condemnation of Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency only a week after Obama's visit. But in the past two weeks the Chinese have maintained their hard stance regarding the West's wishes to impose sanctions on the Islamic Republic. The Israeli officials say the Americans now understand that the Chinese agreed to join the condemnation announcement only because Obama made a personal request to Hu, not as part of a policy change. The Chinese have even refused a Saudi-American initiative designed to end Chinese dependence on Iranian oil, which would allow China to agree to the sanctions, said the Israeli officials. Saudi Arabia, which is also very worried about the Iranian nuclear program and keen to advance international steps against Iran, offered to supply the Chinese the same quantity of oil the Iranians now provide, and at much cheaper prices. But China rejected the deal. Since Obama's visit, the Chinese have refused to join any measures to impose sanctions. The Israeli officials say the Chinese have been giving unclear answers and have not been responding to the claims by Western nations. Beijing has been making do with statements such as "the time has not yet arrived for sanctions." China's actions are particularly problematic because China will take over the presidency of the UN Security Council in January. Western diplomats say China would have no choice but to join in sanctions if Russia agrees to support them, but China could delay discussions and postpone any decision until February, when France becomes council president. The Israeli officials say Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is showing a greater willingness for sanctions on Iran, despite hesitations by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
U.S. President Barack Obama has warned his Chinese counterpart that the United States would not be able to keep Israel from attacking Iranian nuclear installations for much longer, senior officials in Jerusalem told Haaretz. They said Obama warned President Hu Jintao during the American's visit to Beijing a month ago as part of the U.S. attempt to convince the Chinese to support strict sanctions on Tehran if it does not accept Western proposals for its nuclear program. The Israeli officials, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the matter, said the United States had informed Israel on Obama's meetings in Beijing on Iran. They said Obama made it clear to Hu that at some point the United States would no longer be able to prevent Israel from acting as it saw fit in response to the perceived Iranian threat.
After the Beijing summit, the U.S. administration thought the Chinese had understood the message; Beijing agreed to join the condemnation of Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency only a week after Obama's visit. But in the past two weeks the Chinese have maintained their hard stance regarding the West's wishes to impose sanctions on the Islamic Republic. The Israeli officials say the Americans now understand that the Chinese agreed to join the condemnation announcement only because Obama made a personal request to Hu, not as part of a policy change. The Chinese have even refused a Saudi-American initiative designed to end Chinese dependence on Iranian oil, which would allow China to agree to the sanctions, said the Israeli officials. Saudi Arabia, which is also very worried about the Iranian nuclear program and keen to advance international steps against Iran, offered to supply the Chinese the same quantity of oil the Iranians now provide, and at much cheaper prices. But China rejected the deal. Since Obama's visit, the Chinese have refused to join any measures to impose sanctions. The Israeli officials say the Chinese have been giving unclear answers and have not been responding to the claims by Western nations. Beijing has been making do with statements such as "the time has not yet arrived for sanctions." China's actions are particularly problematic because China will take over the presidency of the UN Security Council in January. Western diplomats say China would have no choice but to join in sanctions if Russia agrees to support them, but China could delay discussions and postpone any decision until February, when France becomes council president. The Israeli officials say Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is showing a greater willingness for sanctions on Iran, despite hesitations by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
13.12.09
A Sample Of Velayet El Fakih's Justice
In the video below,an enraged woman’s voice can be heard as a paramilitary truck runs a motorbike off the road amid a crowd of fleeing protesters.
“This is the Islamic Republic!” she shouts, gesturing at the vehicle.
That message has grown increasingly common in recent protests, as demonstrators have made it clear that their target is not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the disputed election that returned him to power in June, but the entire foundation of Iran’s theocracy, Robert F. Worth reports for NYTimes
“This is the Islamic Republic!” she shouts, gesturing at the vehicle.
That message has grown increasingly common in recent protests, as demonstrators have made it clear that their target is not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the disputed election that returned him to power in June, but the entire foundation of Iran’s theocracy, Robert F. Worth reports for NYTimes
In Iran, Protests Gaining a Radical Tinge
By ROBERT F. WORTH, for NYTimes
BEIRUT, Lebanon — In the video, one of hundreds filmed during Iran’s nationwide demonstrations on Monday, an enraged woman’s voice can be heard as a paramilitary truck runs a motorbike off the road amid a crowd of fleeing protesters.
“This is the Islamic Republic!” she shouts, gesturing at the vehicle.
That message has grown increasingly common in recent protests, as demonstrators have made it clear that their target is not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the disputed election that returned him to power in June, but the entire foundation of Iran’s theocracy.
During Monday’s demonstrations, the civil tone of many earlier rallies was noticeably absent. There was no sign of the opposition leader Mir Hussein Moussavi, a moderate figure who supports change within the system, and few were wearing the signature bright green of his campaign.
Instead, the protesters, most of them young people, took direct aim at Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, chanting, “Khamenei knows his time is up!” They held up flags from which the “Allah” symbol — added after Iran’s 1979 revolution — had been removed. Most shocking of all, some burned an image of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the revolution.
That creeping radicalization has underscored the rift within Iran’s opposition movement, analysts say, and poses a problem for its leaders, including Mr. Moussavi and the reformist cleric Mehdi Karroubi.
“The longer this goes on, the more difficult will it be for the likes of Moussavi and Karroubi to sustain their current position,” said Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations who has worked for the State Department. “They have to at some point opt for regime survival or become the leaders of an opposition movement calling for more than reform.”
Some in Iran have even speculated that Mr. Moussavi and Mr. Karroubi were uncomfortable with the most recent round of protests, which were timed to coincide with a holiday commemorating the killing of three students by the shah’s forces in 1953. While they were involved with earlier protests, the opposition leaders did not organize the most recent ones. They do not appear to have attended any of them and have been silent since. It is not clear how much influence they have over the movement, which often seems to be built more around semi-spontaneous mobilizations over Facebook and Web networks than with the aid of any clear leadership.
The aggressive tone of Monday’s protests may partly reflect the fact that they took place on and around university campuses, where radical sentiment is more common.
But students have long been central to social movements in Iran, where the population is now overwhelmingly young; as Mr. Moussavi himself pointed out last weekend, 1 in 20 Iranians is a student. And this week’s protests, in at least a dozen cities and towns across Iran, were much broader than the ones that shook Iran in 1999, said Rasool Nafisi, an academic and Iran expert at Strayer University in Virginia.
Even before the latest round of protests, a number of high-ranking figures in Iran had taken note of the opposition’s trend toward radicalism. Over the weekend, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, an influential former president, warned in a speech that “the young and the elite have been estranged from the regime” and criticized the government for using the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia against protesters.
Mr. Rafsanjani, a founder of the Islamic Republic who has provided crucial support for the opposition since the election, added pointedly that “there are some conservatives who think the people’s vote is just a decoration.” He admonished this group, saying, “If they want us to rule, we will; if they don’t, we will go.”
Other leaders have also called for a greater spirit of compromise from the government. Among them is a prominent conservative cleric, Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi, who noted last week in remarks to I.S.N.A., a semiofficial news agency, that a “large number” of people had voted against Mr. Ahmadinejad and that “we should sit together and negotiate.”
But the government’s response to Monday’s demonstrations was anything but conciliatory. Many witnesses said the police and Basij militia members were more aggressive than at any time since last summer, beating protesters with chains and truncheons and arresting hundreds of them in cities across Iran.
In the days after the protests, hard-liners stepped up their warnings. On Thursday, the intelligence minister, Heidar Moslehi, lashed out at Mr. Rafsanjani and accused him of siding with those who oppose the Islamic system, in comments reported by Fars, another semiofficial news agency.
“Shockingly, Rafsanjani expresses the same ideas as the leaders of the conspiracy,” Mr. Moslehi said.
The intelligence minister also seemed to throw down the gauntlet to moderates, accusing them of joining the assault on Ayatollah Khamenei.
“A lot of forces that were expected to support the supreme leader instead went with those who rose against the supreme leader,” he said.
One prominent conservative who has been critical of Mr. Ahmadinejad, Habibollah Asgaroladi, said the opposition had grown more “antirevolutionary,” the Khabar Online Web site reported.
Many in the opposition have echoed those warnings, from the other side.
“The regime is on a path which threatens its own survival,” declared the Iranian Writers’ Society, in a statement released Tuesday and posted on opposition Web sites. “Those who sow the wind will harvest a typhoon.”
Burned ayatollah photo sparks new Iranian protests
TEHRAN, Iran — Police surrounded the campus of Tehran University on Sunday, trapping hundreds of students protesting what they said were fabricated government images of the burning of a photo of the Islamic Republic's revered founder.
State television has repeatedly shown images, ostensibly taken during student-led protests on Dec. 7, of unidentified hands burning and tearing up pictures of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. It was a grave and illegal insult against the former leader still widely respected in the country and the elite Revolutionary Guard, the country's most powerful military force, called for the trial and punishment of those responsible.
Video circulated widely on the Internet on the day of last week's protests also showed photos of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being burned as well as one photo of Khamenei and Khomeini side by side going up in flames. The faces of those burning the pictures could not be seen and loud chants against the government were heard in the background.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters, appealed for calm but suggested the opposition was creating a hostile environment.
"Some have converted the election campaign into a campaign against the entire system," he said without naming any opposition leaders. "We call on those who are angry to remain calm."
Students, who led Sunday's protests, contended the images of burning photos were fabricated by government agents as a pretext for further crackdowns on the opposition.
Tens of thousands of students protested last Tuesday on campuses in the capital Tehran and other parts of the country, the largest anti-government rallies in months. There were also a number of demonstrations outside of campuses.
Many protesters shouted slogans against Khamenei and Ahmadinejad and chanted "Death to the Dictator."
Tens of thousands of hard-line clerics rallied in cities across the country on Saturday to denounce those who burned photos of Khamenei, the second straight day of protests by angry government supporters.
Khomeini, who led the 1979 Islamic Revolution, is revered by both the opposition and the ruling system. But Khamenei is a much more divisive figure, seen by the opposition as an dictator who rules with an iron fist.
During last week's rallies, protesters shouted "Death to the oppressor, whether it's the shah or the leader!" — making a daring comparison between Khamenei and the pro-U.S. shah, despised in Iran since his overthrow.
Opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, Iran's powerful prime minister in the 80s, was strongly supported by Khomeini against Khamenei, Iran's then-president. When massive street demonstrations erupted over June's disputed presidential election, the opposition led by Mousavi borrowed tactics from Khomenei's Islamic Revolution, such as shouting "Allahu Akbar" from the rooftops of Tehran in a nightly protest.
Mousavi has said his supporters love Khomeini and would not take actions that insulted him. The opposition contends the fabricated images are being used by the regime to discredit the pro-reform movement.
Khamenei warned opposition leaders to stay away from protesters.
"Why don't they learn when leaders of oppression and arrogance, the U.S., France and Britain, support them," state TV quoted Khamenei as saying. "Open your eyes and stay away," he said.
Hundreds of pro-reform students protested against the government on the campus of Tehran University Sunday, denying the accusations they had any connection with the images. Dozens of police surrounded the campus.
The Revolutionary Guard called for the legal action against those who burned the photos of Khomenei.
"The Revolutionary Guard ... won't tolerate any silence or hesitation in the immediate identification, trial and punishment of those carrying out this ugly insult and the agents behind them," it said in a statement posted on its Web site.
Under the law, insults to the late or current supreme leader can lead to two years of prison.
The Guard, which is tasked with defending the clerical regime that came to power in Iran in 1979 under Khomeini's leadership after the pro-U.S. shah was overthrown, was at the forefront of crushing the post-election unrest.
Reformists contend that Ahmadinejad was re-elected in June by massive vote fraud that set off huge street protests. The protests evolved into a broader confrontation against the country's ruling theocracy, but eventually died down in the face of a harsh crackdown by security forces stifled the street demonstrations.
(This version CORRECTS ADDS images also showed pictures of Khamenei, Ahmadinejad being burned; corrects spelling of Mousavi; ADDS context; minor EDITS throughout; AMENDS overline)
8.12.09
Iranians take "Allah" emblem off flag
In the video below protesters are shown waving the Iranian tricolor flag without the "Allah" emblem of the Islamic Republic and chanting "death to the dictator". This video and similar ones were beamed worldwide.
Brave Iranians Maintain Defiance
Sharif University students protest against the government of Iran
And Tehran University students protest against the government of Iran
And Science & Technology Uni of Tehran students' protest against the government of Iran
And Azad University of Mashhad students protest against the government of Iran
And Isfahan University students protest against the government of Iran
And Tehran University students protest against the government of Iran
And Science & Technology Uni of Tehran students' protest against the government of Iran
And Azad University of Mashhad students protest against the government of Iran
And Isfahan University students protest against the government of Iran
6.12.09
Obama security adviser: Picture not good on Iran
President Barack Obama's national security adviser says the door remains open for Iran to work with other countries on its nuclear program. But James Jones also says the "picture is not a good one."
Jones says the clock is ticking toward the end of the year. That's when Obama has said it would be clear whether Iran was ready to work with the United States, other U.N. Security Council members and Germany to assure the world it was not trying to build a nuclear weapon.
So far, Iran has rejected calls to enter negotiations, and Obama is believed preparing to seek harsher international penalties against Iran. Jones said "the door remains open" for Iran to change course.
Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and it has a right to enrich uranium to produce fuel for nuclear reactors to generate electricity.
Jones appeared on CNN's "State of the Union."
Jones says the clock is ticking toward the end of the year. That's when Obama has said it would be clear whether Iran was ready to work with the United States, other U.N. Security Council members and Germany to assure the world it was not trying to build a nuclear weapon.
So far, Iran has rejected calls to enter negotiations, and Obama is believed preparing to seek harsher international penalties against Iran. Jones said "the door remains open" for Iran to change course.
Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and it has a right to enrich uranium to produce fuel for nuclear reactors to generate electricity.
Jones appeared on CNN's "State of the Union."
17.11.09
U.N. report: Iran nuke site apt for bombs, not power
VIENNA (AP) — The United Nations says Iran is preparing to start up a uranium-enrichment site that was revealed only recently and which scientists suggest is too small for nuclear power purposes but suitable for making nuclear bombs.
In a report Monday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the site hidden in a mountainside in Qom appeared designed to produce about a ton of enriched uranium a year.
A senior international official familiar with the IAEA's work in Iran said that amount would be too little to fuel a nuclear power plant. The official spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the information he was citing was confidential.
Others agreed.
"It won't (even) be able to produce a reactor's worth of fuel in 90 years, but it will be able to produce one bomb a year," said Ivan Oelrich, vice president of the Strategic Security Program of the Federation of American Scientists.
Iranian construction of the secret site is at an advanced stage, with high-tech equipment already in place at the fortified facility ahead of its 2011 start-up, according to the IAEA report.
U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said the report "underscores that Iran still refuses to comply fully with its international nuclear obligations."
The IAEA has accused Iran of possibly violating an international treaty it signed regarding nuclear programs by not telling the U.N. of the site in Qom.
Iran has another nuclear program in Natanz, where it has been enriching uranium with centrifuges under IAEA monitoring. Centrifuge machines can convert uranium gas into fuel for reactors for electricity or into fissile material for nuclear weapons.
The report stated that enrichment at Natanz had stagnated. The official suggested that experts previously working at Natanz could be preoccupied with putting the finishing touches on the Qom site, known as Fordo.
The restricted document, which was obtained by the Associated Press, also noted that "for well over a year," Iran had stonewalled IAEA efforts to investigate allegations that it actively worked on a nuclear weapons program.
Unless Tehran has a change of heart, the agency "will not be in a position to provide credible assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities," the report said.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.4.11.09
Israeli commandos seize ship 'carrying arms to Hezbollah'
Israel's navy has intercepted a ship carrying 500 tonnes of Iranian weapons intended for Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Israeli military has said.
The Israeli navy intercepted a ship heading for Syria and seized an unprecedented 500-ton haul of weapons from Iran intended for the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, the army said.
“This is the largest cache of smuggled weapons ever to be seized by Israel,” an army spokeswoman, Avital Leibovitz, said in a phone interview today. “The cache includes thousands of rockets as well as hand grenades and mortar shells.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and his Syrian counterpart, Walid Muallem, rejected Israel’s allegations during a joint press conference in Tehran today, Iran’s state-run Press TV reported.
“This is the largest cache of smuggled weapons ever to be seized by Israel,” an army spokeswoman, Avital Leibovitz, said in a phone interview today. “The cache includes thousands of rockets as well as hand grenades and mortar shells.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and his Syrian counterpart, Walid Muallem, rejected Israel’s allegations during a joint press conference in Tehran today, Iran’s state-run Press TV reported.
As the World grows impatient Iran speeds up uranium extraction
Iran appears to be speeding up extraction of uranium ore at its Gchine mine site, a move that could intensify Western suspicions that the Middle Eastern state intends to build a nuclear bomb, Bloomberg reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 3), the Global Security Newswire reported. The report coincides with growing impatience on the P5+1 members about Iran's reticence with regard to proposals to ease concerns over its nuclear program and firmly stated that Israel and the international community would never agree to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner expressed today his worries about Tehran's failure to reply to the international proposal.
While the talks stall, suspicions are growing that Iran is merely buying time to advance its military nuclear program.
Kouchner's statement dovetailed with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's who said that Iran must be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
They are not answering us. So what are we supposed to do. To wait? Yes, we are waiting but not till the end of the world. I am worried because the situation remains tense. And at the same time the replies have not come (...) which is a bad sign for a new meeting in Geneva. Tehran's silence is incomprehensible.
The United States has said that a nuclear fuel plan offered to Iran will not be changed after Tehran called for the UN-brokered deal to be reviewed.
Zero tolerance needs to be shown when there is a risk of weapons of mass destruction falling, for example, into the hands of Iran and threatening our security. Iran needs to be aware of this, Iran knows our offer but Iran also knows where we draw a line. A nuclear bomb in the hands of an Iranian president who denies the Holocaust, threatens Israel and denies Israel the right to exist is not acceptable.
While the talks stall, suspicions are growing that Iran is merely buying time to advance its military nuclear program.
27.10.09
From Yemen To Pakistan Iran's Prints All Over The Room
Yemen has seized a vessel carrying weapons believed to be destined for Shi'ite rebels in the north of the country and detained its Iranian crew, a provincial Yemeni official told Reuters on Monday.
"The five crew members are being questioned. They are Iranians," said the official in Haja province, which borders Saada province, site of most of the fighting between government forces and the rebels.
Elsewhere, Pakistani forces shortly held 11 security officers on Monday for crossing into the country before releasing them. The detention came days after an Iranian commander was reported saying his men should be allowed to confront terrorists in Pakistan, officials said.
Earlier, Pakistani officials had said they were members of the elite Revolutionary Guards force, but later reports made no reference to this.
The Iranians were arrested in the Mashkhel area on the border with Iran eight days after a suicide bomber killed 42 people, including six Revolutionary Guard commanders, in Iran's southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province.
A Sunni Muslim group Jundollah (God's soldiers), which Iran says they operates from across the border in Pakistan, claimed responsibility for the blast.
"The five crew members are being questioned. They are Iranians," said the official in Haja province, which borders Saada province, site of most of the fighting between government forces and the rebels.
Elsewhere, Pakistani forces shortly held 11 security officers on Monday for crossing into the country before releasing them. The detention came days after an Iranian commander was reported saying his men should be allowed to confront terrorists in Pakistan, officials said.
Earlier, Pakistani officials had said they were members of the elite Revolutionary Guards force, but later reports made no reference to this.
The Iranians were arrested in the Mashkhel area on the border with Iran eight days after a suicide bomber killed 42 people, including six Revolutionary Guard commanders, in Iran's southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province.
A Sunni Muslim group Jundollah (God's soldiers), which Iran says they operates from across the border in Pakistan, claimed responsibility for the blast.
26.10.09
With 18 Months For The Nuclrae Mullahs Israel Is Up To Strike
Several Western diplomats told Reuters that the top spy agencies, of the U.S. CIA, UK's MI6, Israel's Mossad, their French and German counterparts, generally agreed that Tehran would need at least 18 months to produce a nuclear bomb, if it decided to make one.
This assessment, was described as the "worst-case scenario," rather than the most likely one.
Meanwhile, French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner underscored the risk of a pre-emptive strike by Israel.
The minister told The Daily Telegraph that time was running out.
This assessment, was described as the "worst-case scenario," rather than the most likely one.
Meanwhile, French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner underscored the risk of a pre-emptive strike by Israel.
The minister told The Daily Telegraph that time was running out.
They [the Israelis] will not tolerate an Iranian bomb. We know that, all of us. So that is an additional risk and that is why we must decrease the tension and solve the problem. Hopefully we are going to stop this race to a confrontation.
There is the time that Israel will offer us before reacting, because Israel will react as soon as they know clearly that there is a threat.
24.10.09
Will Obama Escape the Charlie Brown Syndrom?
Iran goes by its own book. Negotiate at length then ask for more time while confusing the very basis of the negotiations.
Is it the IAEI proposal to ship 75% of Iran's LEU stockpile that we are waiting an answer to, or the mullah's proposal, vaguely floated through media, to "buy" a significantly higher LEU from outside while keeping whatever domestic LEU Iran possesses, home safe??
Iran rendered the heart of the talks unclear.
If anything, it is applying the centrifuges enrichment "spinning" phenomena to negotiations. Keep rotating around proposals at a high speed till you convert constraints into allowances.
Engagement has simply legitimized Iran's uranium enrichment to the purity level of %5 in clear defiance to 3 UN Security Council resolutions demanding that it suspends its enrichment activities.
Now, unless it is an addictive hobby, one should quit searching for evidence to the military nature of Iran's nuclear program.
Even US president Barak Obama's administration is rethinking previous assessment, which concluded back in 2007 that any secret uranium-processing activities "probably were halted" in 2003 and had not been restarted and that Iran has suspended research on nuclear-warhead design. Washington's change of heart was triggered by the revelation of the Qom facility one month ago according to what two former senior U.S. officials involved in high-level discussions about Iran told the Washington Post.
Careful intelligence gathering, the paper reported, produced a clearer image of the military nature of the Iranian nuclear program.
There is always a critical delay before a change of heart is adopted as a policy, given in this case, Iran's bluffing proficiency and Obama's lack of immunity to the self-deceiving power of the strategy of hope. And in this sense Obama is about to outdo the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, as per Tom Bevan corollary. Watch the video:
It is worth noting, in the meantime, that Iranian nuclear scientists are not politely standing in line waiting the cue from Vienna, Geneva or elsewhere to proceed on the terms of a final deal.
Thousands of centrifuges are spinning in known, and most probably unknown, sites in Iran feeding Iran LEU stock with at least 4.5 Kg per day.
Is it the IAEI proposal to ship 75% of Iran's LEU stockpile that we are waiting an answer to, or the mullah's proposal, vaguely floated through media, to "buy" a significantly higher LEU from outside while keeping whatever domestic LEU Iran possesses, home safe??
Iran rendered the heart of the talks unclear.
If anything, it is applying the centrifuges enrichment "spinning" phenomena to negotiations. Keep rotating around proposals at a high speed till you convert constraints into allowances.
Engagement has simply legitimized Iran's uranium enrichment to the purity level of %5 in clear defiance to 3 UN Security Council resolutions demanding that it suspends its enrichment activities.
Now, unless it is an addictive hobby, one should quit searching for evidence to the military nature of Iran's nuclear program.
Even US president Barak Obama's administration is rethinking previous assessment, which concluded back in 2007 that any secret uranium-processing activities "probably were halted" in 2003 and had not been restarted and that Iran has suspended research on nuclear-warhead design. Washington's change of heart was triggered by the revelation of the Qom facility one month ago according to what two former senior U.S. officials involved in high-level discussions about Iran told the Washington Post.
Careful intelligence gathering, the paper reported, produced a clearer image of the military nature of the Iranian nuclear program.
It is still too early, however, to cheer.Intercepted communications revealed a key piece of data: Iranian plans to place only 3,000 centrifuge machines in the plant. That number is too small to furnish fuel for a civilian power plant, but just big enough to supply Iran annually with up to three bombs' worth of weapons-grade fuel, the former officials said.
(...) Intelligence analysts calculated that it would take Qom's high-end centrifuges at least 20 years to produce enough low-enriched uranium to meet the needs of a typical 1,000 megawatt nuclear power reactor for a year.
There is always a critical delay before a change of heart is adopted as a policy, given in this case, Iran's bluffing proficiency and Obama's lack of immunity to the self-deceiving power of the strategy of hope. And in this sense Obama is about to outdo the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, as per Tom Bevan corollary. Watch the video:
It is worth noting, in the meantime, that Iranian nuclear scientists are not politely standing in line waiting the cue from Vienna, Geneva or elsewhere to proceed on the terms of a final deal.
Thousands of centrifuges are spinning in known, and most probably unknown, sites in Iran feeding Iran LEU stock with at least 4.5 Kg per day.
23.10.09
Iran Israel Reported Talks Still Rolling
It was first reported by The Age newspaper, then picked up by Haartez which made public the names of the representatives of the two foes.
The story that Israeli and Iranian officials sahred, not only the same conference but rather, the same room and pannel in Cairo is still making headlines.
I pushed several Iranian commentators on the story, however they all denied the very possibility that such an event could have taken place.
In a previous post I provided some track record of the Israeli Iranian communications.
John Lyons, The Australian Middle East correspondent is latest to report on the story.
The story that Israeli and Iranian officials sahred, not only the same conference but rather, the same room and pannel in Cairo is still making headlines.
I pushed several Iranian commentators on the story, however they all denied the very possibility that such an event could have taken place.
In a previous post I provided some track record of the Israeli Iranian communications.
John Lyons, The Australian Middle East correspondent is latest to report on the story.
NUCLEAR negotiators from around the world must have known they were about to witness something extraordinary when they walked through the foyer of the Four Seasons Hotel in Cairo on September 29. They all knew bitter enemies were about to sit at the same table for the first time in years.
The representatives of Israel and Iran arrived for the meeting brokered by former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans. It was a meeting of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, a group established by the Rudd government.
For the next two days, an Israeli woman and an Iranian man sat at the same table. At no time did they shake hands - while other delegates greeted each other at the beginning and end of the meeting and during coffee breaks, the Israeli and the Iranian kept their distance.
However, the significance was that both governments allowed their representatives to attend the meeting knowing the other would be there.
Israel's Merav Zafary-Odiz and Iran's Ali Ashgar Soltanieh joined other atomic energy negotiators to discuss the nuclear threat in the Middle East.
According to a person who sat through the meeting and spoke to The Weekend Australian, it started slowly between the Israeli and Iranian - each put their country's position, which the other normally only saw reported in the media.
Mr Soltanieh peppered his presentation with quotations from the Koran and Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamanei, saying Iran was committed to a peaceful nuclear program. Iran's program was within the guidelines of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, he insisted.
Then Ms Zafary-Odiz had her turn. If Israel's security could be guaranteed, it would support a nuclear-free Middle East, she said. An official in the room summed her up as reflecting the 1995 declaration of President Shimon Peres: "Give me peace and I'll give you the bomb."
While these presentations were directed at the group, finally it became too much and the Iranian directly addressed his Israeli counterpart. According to the newspaper Haaretz, Mr Soltanieh asked: "Do you or do you not have nuclear weapons?"
He would have known no Israeli official would confirm what is widely accepted as fact - that Israel has its own nuclear arsenal. In response, Ms Zafary-Odiz is reported to have smiled.
The source who sat through the meetings told The Weekend Australian Mr Evans's chairmanship was "masterful". He allowed the Israeli and Iranian to state their positions and directly address each other but ensured it did not become acrimonious. This was a regional meeting, and Mr Evans's aim was to ensure that in front of their neighbours and each other Israel and Iran could outline their positions.
The second exchange between the two, according to another source, came in the corridors. As they tried to pass, they greeted each other and said "excuse me", but did not shake hands.
The commission was an initiative of Kevin Rudd. The Prime Minister suggested setting it up on a visit to Kyoto in June last year, and it became a joint project of Australia and Japan.
Mr Rudd pushed for Mr Evans to be chairman, and the Japanese agreed as long as he shared the post with their former foreign minister, Yoriko Kawaguchi.
The secretariat is based in the Department of Foreign Affairs in Canberra, and with the energy of Mr Evans, fresh from running the International Crisis Group, it is seen as an Australian body.
When the Cairo meeting was suggested to Israeli officials they were interested. They know the UN nuclear weapons organisations well, and are suspicious of them, but were not familiar with this new body. Their interest turned to intrigue when they looked at the list of invitees: the US, several European countries, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Turkey - and Iran.
Israeli officials sounded out Australian officials about whether Canberra was committed to the new body.
Since the fall of the shah in 1979, Israel has shunned meetings attended by Iran. It's not known whether the plan for these talks went to the level of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but one Israeli official said it certainly went close. "This was not mundane," the official said. "A representative of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission doesn't travel light-heartedly to a meeting attended by an Iranian official."
Despite Israel, Egypt and others confirming the presence of the Iranian official, the Iranian media denied he had attended - a move seen as aimed at a domestic audience.
For an Iranian official to be sitting at the same table as an Israeli, or exchanging polite excuse-me's in the corridor, is still a bridge too far for some in the Iranian regime.
19.10.09
Secret Talks Between Washington and Tehran
Officials in US President Barak Obama's Administration told Time magazine that the president was involved in a secret "multiparty" negotiation with the Iranians "over the last four months".
In the meantime Tehran is staying the course of sending mixed messages to the international community.
Iran's state-run Press TV cited unnamed officials in Tehran as saying the Islamic Republic was looking to hold on to its low-enriched uranium and buying what it needed for the Tehran reactor abroad.
Asked to comment on Iranian media reports claiming that Tehran may be reluctant to ship out its fuel, The head of the Iranian delegation, Ali Asghar Soltanieh refused to comment.
Today, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, said resumed talks between France, Russia and the United States, and Iran have got off to a 'good start'.
The backroom talks began in June, when Iranian officials told the International Atomic Energy Agency their country was running out of fuel for an aging research reactor built for the Shah in 1967 by American technicians. Iran sought the IAEA's help in buying more of the specially manufactured plates of enriched uranium used in the reactor to produce isotopes for cancer treatment, X-rays and insecticides. The IAEA, in turn, discussed the request with the U.S. "We very quickly saw an opening here," says a senior Administration official involved in the multiparty negotiations that ensued, speaking on condition of anonymity.
In the meantime Tehran is staying the course of sending mixed messages to the international community.
Iran's state-run Press TV cited unnamed officials in Tehran as saying the Islamic Republic was looking to hold on to its low-enriched uranium and buying what it needed for the Tehran reactor abroad.
Asked to comment on Iranian media reports claiming that Tehran may be reluctant to ship out its fuel, The head of the Iranian delegation, Ali Asghar Soltanieh refused to comment.
18.10.09
Revolutionary Guard commanders killed in Iran bomb
A man wearing an explosives-laden belt blew himself up during a conference between Shia and Sunni groups in southeastern Iran on Sunday killing around a half dozen of senior commanders of the elite Revolutionary Guard and at least 26 others.
The official IRNA news agency said the dead included the deputy commander of the Guard's ground force, Gen. Noor Ali Shooshtari (the photo), as well as a chief provincial Guard commander for the area, Rajab Ali Mohammadzadeh. The other dead were Guard members or local tribal leaders. More than two dozen others were wounded, state radio reported.
Iranian state television said "Rigi's terrorist group has claimed responsibility for the attack," referring to Abdolmalek Rigi, leader of the Sunni millitant group Jundollah (God's soldiers).
The commanders were inside a car on their way to a meeting with local tribal leaders in the Pishin district near Iran's border with Pakistan when an attacker with explosives blew himself up, IRNA said.
The region in Iran's southeast has been the focus of violent attacks by Jundallah, who are engaged in a vicious circle of violence with the Revolutionary Guards.
Tension between the two has in recent months escalated following the arrest and death sentence of Abdol-Hamid Rigi, a brother of the Jundullah leader. Rigi was due to be executed in July, but for unknown reasons the this has been delayed.
Iran's state-owned English language TV channel, Press TV, said there were two simultaneous explosions: one at the meeting and another targeting an additional convoy of Guards on their way to the gathering.
Jundallah accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution and has carried out attacks against the Revolutionary Guard and Shiite targets in the southeast.
That campaign is one of several ethnic and religious small-scale insurgencies in Iran that have fueled sporadic and sometimes deadly attacks in recent years — though none have amounted to a serious threat to the government.
The Revolutionary Guard blamed Sunday's attack on what it called the "global arrogance," a reference to the United States.
"The global arrogance, with the provocation of its local mercenaries, targeted the meeting of the Guard with local tribal leaders," said a Guard statement read out on state TV.
Iranian officials have often raised concerns that Washington might try to incite members of Iran's many ethnic and religious minorities against the Shiite-led government, which is dominated by ethnic Persians.
The Guard commanders targeted Sunday were heading to a meeting with local tribal leaders to promote unity between the Shiite and Sunni Muslim communities.
In April, Iran increased security in Sistan-Baluchistan Province, at the center of the tension, by placing it under the command of the Guard, which took over from local police forces.
The 120,000-strong Revolutionary Guard controls Iran's missile program and has its own ground, naval and air units.
Iran's parliamentary speaker, Ali Larijani, condemned the assassination of the Guard commanders, saying the bombing was aimed at disrupting security in southeastern Iran.
"We express our condolences for their martyrdom. ... The intention of the terrorists was definitely to disrupt security in Sistan-Baluchistan Province," Larijani told an open session of the parliament broadcast live on state radio.
In May, Jundallah took credit for a suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque that killed 25 people in Zahedan, the capital of Iran's Sistan-Baluchistan province, which has witnessed some of Jundallah's worst attacks. Thirteen members of the faction were convicted in the attack and hanged in July.
Jundallah is made up of Sunnis from the Baluchi ethnic minority, which can also be found in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The group has carried out bombings, kidnappings and other attacks against Iranian soldiers and other forces in recent years, including a car bombing in February 2007 that killed 11 members of the Revolutionary Guard near Zahedan.
Jundallah also claimed responsibility for the December 2006 kidnapping of seven Iranian soldiers in the Zahedan area. It threatened to kill them unless members of the group in Iranian prisons were released. The seven were released a month later, apparently after negotiations through tribal mediators.
17.10.09
Iran's nuclear disclosures: why they matter
The Christian Science Monitor
By Peter Grier / staff writer
Gas centrifuges are an amazing technology. They're thin metal tubes that stand upright, about as tall as a fifth-grader, and spin on magnetic bearings that are virtually frictionless. They revolve so fast that when they're filled with uranium hexafluoride gas, the compound separates into isotopes of different atomic weights, with the heavier isotope pushed to the outside by centrifugal force.
They're hard to get running right. Vibration can be a problem, so they must be tuned, a little like guitars. But once an array of centrifuges is humming along, it needs little maintenance. They are a great way to enrich uranium to the point it can be used in a nuclear reactor – or a nuclear bomb.
All this is by way of explanation as to why recent revelations about Iran's hidden centrifuge plant at Qom are so important to the future balance of power in perhaps the most volatile region in the world.
News about Iran's nuclear program has abounded in recent weeks. There was Qom, then allegations that Iran has a secret bomb-design program called "Project 110," and Tehran's surprise offer to perhaps send low-enriched uranium abroad to be turned into reactor fuel.
These and other recent events hint that the pace and complexity of Iran's nuclear program may have increased. Now, Iranian leaders may – or may not – want the bomb. But it seems clear that Tehran wants to develop into a regional power, meaning that time could be short for the United States and its allies to engage with a rising threat in an area crucial to both global energy production and the future of Islam.
"Iran presents the most serious single security challenge in the Middle East," writes Anthony Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), in a just-published book on the implications of Iran's weapons programs.
US had been looking for a covert facility
Seen in satellite photos, the newly revealed Iranian facility near Qom looks as if it could be a Wal-Mart, a school, or a factory. But it's intended to house about 3,000 gas centrifuges, according to both Iranian and US officials. In terms of uranium-enrichment capability, that would make it a modest plant.
But to many US proliferation experts, Qom represents the danger of a second fuel cycle foretold. That's because Iran already has a large centrifuge farm, near Natanz. There, it has 8,300 installed centrifuges, though only about half are actually enriching uranium. It is big enough to house 54,000, according to the US.
Natanz itself was revealed to the world by an Iranian dissident group in 2002. Iran says the facility is intended to produce low-enriched uranium (LEU) for use in nuclear power reactors. Today it is under scrutiny by Western intelligence services and International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, and many experts say it would be difficult for Iran to divert enough LEU from the Natanz production line to produce bomb-grade uranium elsewhere.
That has led many experts outside Iran to this conclusion: If the Iranians want to produce fissile material for weapons, they would be likely to do so at a hidden site. Natanz represents their first fuel cycle. This hidden site, or sites, would constitute the second.
The US intelligence community has predicted this. Two years ago, in their 2007 National Intelligence Estimate of Iran's nuclear intentions and capabilities, US analysts said: "We assess with moderate confidence that Iran probably would use covert facilities – rather than its declared nuclear sites – for the production of highly enriched uranium for a weapon."
So, is Qom this covert facility?
Iran says that it is not and that, like Natanz, it is for civilian uses.
If it were intended to be a secret site, then it is likely that somewhere is also a hidden facility for producing uranium hexafluoride, the centrifuges' feedstock. In fact, some proliferation experts suggest that Iran may have a network of such sites. Or, if it does not already have such a network, Tehran may now start building one, because Qom has been discovered.
That would make keeping tabs on Iran's program something like a high-stakes game of Whac-A-Mole. Miss, and perhaps Tehran gets a nuclear arsenal.
"They hid Qom, and our intelligence agencies found it in the nick of time," says David Albright, a former weapons inspector and president of the Institute for Science and International Security. "We can't count on that next time."
Conflicting intelligence reports
Obtaining fissile material, such as plutonium or highly enriched uranium, is the hardest step in producing the bomb. But it is not the only step. Nuclear weapons are complex devices that require high-voltage firing systems and associated detonators. Pieces must be machined to incredibly precise tolerances if they are to fit together and work.
Handing someone the blueprint of a bomb is not tantamount to giving him nuclear capability. Producing the stuff from that blueprint is a difficult art.
According to US intelligence, Iran has worked on such components in a weaponization process. But US agencies also conclude that Tehran stopped that work in 2003.
Intelligence analysts in some other countries, such as Germany, disagree – and insist Iran is still busy with weaponization work. Apparently that is also the view of some officials at the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
An IAEA report leaked to the press in early October alleges that Iran's Project 110 is continuing its clandestine effort to produce a nuclear warhead small enough to sit atop a missile. "Project 111" is corresponding work aimed at reshaping space inside the nose cone of a Shahab 3 missile so that the warhead will fit.
The IAEA report concludes that Iran has "sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device." But the paper has fierce detractors within the agency, who contend that some of the intelligence behind this conclusion could be forged.
Some outside experts, moreover, note that the parts of the report made public so far don't have many dates associated with Iran's alleged activities. That means it is possible that Iran had a Project 110 at one time, but has since scrapped it, as US intelligence continues to insist.
"I'm suspicious of 'spinning' on both sides of this issue," says Greg Thielmann, a former US intelligence official who is now a fellow at the Arms Control Association.
As to the pace of Iran's progress, it is conceivable that Tehran could build its own nuclear device as early as this year, according to Mr. Cordesman of CSIS.
But it is more likely that the time frame for deployment of actual weapons, on top of missiles, would be 2011 to 2015, he writes in his new book.
"Iran seems to be developing all of the capabilities necessary to deploy a significant number of nuclear weapons no later than 2020 and to mount them on missile systems capable of striking at targets throughout the region and beyond," Cordesman writes.
Hope for real nuclear negotiations: slim, but present
So, that's it then? It's inevitable that Iran is going to join the nuclear club?
That's not necessarily true, say other experts. There are some hopeful signs that Iranian leaders remain open to real nuclear negotiations.
For instance, on Oct. 1 Iran agreed in principle to send most of its openly declared LEU out of the country, probably to Russia. There, it would be turned into fuel for a small Iranian reactor that produces medical isotopes.
If this shipment comes to pass – and that is a big "if," considering Iran's past behavior – it would be a positive step. No longer would Tehran have at its disposal a pile of material it could easily enrich into bomb fuel.
The key is the intentions of Iran's leaders. Those are unknown to the US and its partners in negotiations.
If Iran is determined to get a nuclear bomb – and if a consensus exists in Iran's government behind that objective – there may be no stopping it. No negotiations or agreement with the US and other nations would help, according to Matthew Bunn, a principal investigator at the Project on Managing the Atom at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
"They would either reject or violate measures that would seriously constrain their program," said Dr. Bunn during a recent presentation on how to deal with Iran's program.
However, if views differ within Iran's hierarchy about how close to get to nuclear weapons capability, then a negotiated deal could have an effect on the program's future.
By proffering incentives for Iran to change its behavior, the West could strengthen the hand of any Iranians in favor of a less confrontational approach, said Bunn.
But time and flexibility are needed to strike such a bargain. After decades of intense hostility, neither the US nor Iran trusts the other.
"Ultimately, to get Iran to address [the concerns of the US and its allies], the [US and its allies] must address Iran's concerns," said Bunn. "A deal not seen as serving Iran's interests, as well as ours, will be rejected or will fail."
Are Iran and Israel Talking Again?
Russia's FM Sergei Lavrov urged, in an interview with RIA Novosti, Iran and Israel to restore relations. "There is nothing impossible in that," he said, adding that "no one needs war".
Russia's interesting position coincided with emerging news that representatives from the two rivals had already met in Egypt under Australian sponsorship.
Australian paper The Age, reported that a meeting took place in the Egyptian capital, Cairo, last month as part of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, an expert panel assembled by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to help rid the world of nuclear arms.
In fact any contacts between Israel and Iran should come as no surprise. The two countries have a track record of relations and communications that goes even beyond the Islamic revolution era.
Trita Parsi’s excellent book "Treacherous Alliance", details the fascinating complex relationship between the US, Iran, and Israel.
Consider this piece of information he provides about the Israeli Iranian communications in the post-Khomeini era:
While there is a tendency to limit the contacts between Israel and Iran to the well known "Iran Contra", in which Tel Aviv played a crucial role in facilitating arms shipments to Tehran from the US, Parsi uncovers the multi-folded communications between the two countries in this respect.
Parsi quotes the Jaffee Institute for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University as saying that arms sales to Iran totaled an estimated $500 million from 1980 to 1983, most of it was paid for by Iranian oil delivered to Israel.
Parsi brilliantly puts the Israeli Iranian relations in the perspective of Bin Gurion's "Periphery Doctrine", according to which Israel, for a long period of time, pursued alliances with the belt states around the Arab World, which are Iran, Turkey and Ethiopia under the former Haile Selassie emperors. Below is a soundbite from the book on the DNA of such a relation.
Nevertheless, it is not a relation limited to politics or strategic interests. Every Jewish pupil learns in his/her early years how, back in 536 BC, the king of Persia freed the Jews from their Babylonian captivity.
It is definitely too early to jump into final conclusions concerning the prospects of the Iranian-Israeli relations. However, the fact the Lavrov's statement and The Age report come at a time of growing tension between Turkey -one of the 4 pillars of the periphery doctrine- and Israel, a growing irritation between Turkey and Iran given the latest Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and finally Iran's need (willingness is still to be determined) to end the standoff over its nuclear program, all might constitute elements for a renewed kick off in the relations between Iran and Israel.
Russia's interesting position coincided with emerging news that representatives from the two rivals had already met in Egypt under Australian sponsorship.
Australian paper The Age, reported that a meeting took place in the Egyptian capital, Cairo, last month as part of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, an expert panel assembled by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to help rid the world of nuclear arms.
Iran's senior envoy to the meeting was its ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh.
Israel sent the director of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, Merav Zafary-Odiz. Israel's former foreign affairs minister, Shlomo Ben-Ami, was also at the meeting in a non-official role.
In fact any contacts between Israel and Iran should come as no surprise. The two countries have a track record of relations and communications that goes even beyond the Islamic revolution era.
Trita Parsi’s excellent book "Treacherous Alliance", details the fascinating complex relationship between the US, Iran, and Israel.
Consider this piece of information he provides about the Israeli Iranian communications in the post-Khomeini era:
In early 1980s, only months after the eruption of the hostage crisis, Ahmed Kashani, the youngest son of Grand Ayatollah Abol Qassem Kashani, who had played a key role in the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry in 1951, visited Israel – most likely the first Iranian to do so after the revolution – to discuss arms sales and military cooperation against Iraq’s nuclear program at Osirak.
While there is a tendency to limit the contacts between Israel and Iran to the well known "Iran Contra", in which Tel Aviv played a crucial role in facilitating arms shipments to Tehran from the US, Parsi uncovers the multi-folded communications between the two countries in this respect.
Parsi quotes the Jaffee Institute for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University as saying that arms sales to Iran totaled an estimated $500 million from 1980 to 1983, most of it was paid for by Iranian oil delivered to Israel.
Parsi brilliantly puts the Israeli Iranian relations in the perspective of Bin Gurion's "Periphery Doctrine", according to which Israel, for a long period of time, pursued alliances with the belt states around the Arab World, which are Iran, Turkey and Ethiopia under the former Haile Selassie emperors. Below is a soundbite from the book on the DNA of such a relation.
In May 1982, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon told NBC that Tel Aviv had supplied Iran with arms and ammunition because it viewed Iraq as "being dangerous to the peace process in the Middle East". Sharon added that Israel provided the arms to Iran because it felt it was important to "leave a small window open" to the possibility of good relations with Iran in the future.
Nevertheless, it is not a relation limited to politics or strategic interests. Every Jewish pupil learns in his/her early years how, back in 536 BC, the king of Persia freed the Jews from their Babylonian captivity.
It is definitely too early to jump into final conclusions concerning the prospects of the Iranian-Israeli relations. However, the fact the Lavrov's statement and The Age report come at a time of growing tension between Turkey -one of the 4 pillars of the periphery doctrine- and Israel, a growing irritation between Turkey and Iran given the latest Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and finally Iran's need (willingness is still to be determined) to end the standoff over its nuclear program, all might constitute elements for a renewed kick off in the relations between Iran and Israel.
16.10.09
Confusion Rules Over Iran
Iran is about to get hold of the dirty bomb; Iran is way far from that. Iran possesses all the know how capacity to fabricate a deployable bomb; Iran is unable to ensure the very basic clean uranium enrichment process. Now, choose your position and dig into a long list of contradictory evidences to support your claim.
In the end no one is dead sure of the final conclusion.
David Kay, screams "Striking Iran" is the option that Washington might, exclusively, find at its disposal if the Mullahs regime stayed the course it seems to be pursuing.
In the end no one is dead sure of the final conclusion.
David Kay, screams "Striking Iran" is the option that Washington might, exclusively, find at its disposal if the Mullahs regime stayed the course it seems to be pursuing.
Iran has achieved the effective status of a nuclear-weapons-capable state. No matter what American policy makers want to believe, Iran has built a uranium-enrichment establishment, procured a workable design for a weapon, carried out work to enhance and validate that design, and developed longer-range missile-delivery systems.
(...) The fact is, Iran’s nuclear program has progressed considerably beyond where it was when President Bush first uttered what would become a useless policy prescription, and is now at a point where only a severely intrusive on-the-ground inspection regime—at least as tough as the one we carried out from 1991–95 in Iraq—could have any hope of verifying that Iran’s nuclear program has stopped.
(...) If the latest round of talks allow Tehran to drag out discussions—while further enhancing its nuclear capabilities, and any meaningful sanctions continued to be postponed to avoid “poisoning the negotiations” (...) The danger ahead is that Tehran(...) will push its nuclear program further and faster than it otherwise would have, and enter the dangerous arena of actually deploying nuclear weapons.
David Kay is an authority on nuclear issues. He led the UN inspection after the first Gulf War that uncovered the previously unknown Iraqi nuclear program and, after the most recent Gulf War, led the CIA’s Iraq Survey Group that determined that there had been no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction at the time of the war. Hence, what he offers should be insightful.
Well, it is, till you continue reading.
David Ignatius summarizes an articled that appeared in Oct. 8 issue of Nucleonics Week in which the author, Mark Hibbs, reports that Iran's supply of low-enriched uranium suffers from certain "impurities" that "could cause centrifuges to fail" if the Iranians try to boost it to weapons grade.
Ignatius, not less than how confused you might be, sites some contrary assessments.
there's some uncertainty among experts about how serious the contamination problem is
Elsewhere, confusion rules within the intelligence community.
U.S. spy agencies are considering whether to rewrite a controversial 2007 intelligence report that asserted, with "high confidence", Tehran halted its efforts to build nuclear weapons in 2003, current and former U.S. intelligence officials told WSJ.
The American assessment contradicts the findings of at least the 3 main European allies, Germany, France and UK.
If undertaken, a new NIE likely wouldn't be available for months. The U.S. and its allies have imposed an informal December deadline for Iran to comply with Western demands that it cease enriching uranium or face fresh economic sanctions.
A shift in the U.S. intelligence community's official stance -- concluding Iran restarted its nuclear weapons work or that Iran's ambitions have ramped up -- could significantly affect President Barack Obama's efforts to use diplomacy to contain Tehran's capabilities.
Any timeline for negotiations could be shortened if a new NIE concludes Tehran has restarted its atomic-weapons work, said officials involved in the diplomacy. But the White House could also use the new report to galvanize wider international support for sanctions against Tehran.
15.10.09
Assafir and Tarfelsay's Garage Door
The Israeli distributed video, in which the army claims that rockets were being moved from an explosion site in the Lebanese southern village Tarfelsay, is a propaganda production which aims at establishing a pretext for an Israeli aggression on
Assafir nails down the misinformation.
The 4 meters “body” which appears in the Israeli video is the garage door where the explosion took place, Assafir quotes a so called “official narration”.
“After the explosion, 7 to 8 guys from the neighborhood started to collect the leftovers, among them the garage door which was wrapped in a white blanket, and transported them in a small truck, to a moor (boura) in the neighboring Deir Qanoon Alnahr” says Assafir.
The paper might have not heard of You Tube, where one could retrieve the video, which Hezbollah didn’t deny its authenticity but rather its interpretation, and count around 2 dozens of human beings in the explosion site hurriedly moving stuff into at least 2 trucks while many other vehicles could be spotted.
Anyway this is a ridiculous detail missed by the paper that is well known for it’s “A class” investigative reporting.
For example, a couple of weeks ago Assafir broke the news with a front page story on a US military base being established in Lebanon, before the Lebanese Army corrects that this is a base of his and has no attachment, whatsoever, to any American entity. Or when the paper, unequivocally, kept reminding its readers of the marginal position the Lebanese issue enjoyed on the Saudi Syria summit in
Now Back to Tarfelsay!!
Reading the well sourced investigative front page piece in Assafir today, one could draw the following conclusions.
- There is no moor (boura) in Tarfelsay. The villagers had to hurriedly transform the fire leftovers and the garage door to a moor in a neighboring village.
- Tarfelsay inhabitants, not known for any cotton related business, give no damn about their white blankets. They even use them to wrap black smoked garage doors ripped by minor explosions that are caused by the marriage of electrical contact and flammable material. (Assafir doesn’t bother to qualify the fact that a minor explosion shouldn’t have ripped the garage door from its frame).
Are you insane?? Would be an expected answer from Assafir reporter.
Hell no!! So why do you expect Tarfelsay villagers to act differently you discriminating son of the bitches….
I bet you find me one similar incident in any village, all over the World, not followed by inhabitants moving the leftovers to another village, especially if among these a garage door!!!
Assafir would have reported that the Titanic docked safely.
Iran's Difficult Choises
Meir Javedanfar penned a nice piece in The Guardian in which he casts pessimism over the results expected from the World powers talks with Iran.
He asks if Iran could afford a nuclear U-turn.
He asks if Iran could afford a nuclear U-turn.
This is now an even more difficult decision for the Iranian leadership to take, as they have already sold their "victory" to the Iranian public. To comply would mean an embarrassing U-turn. After the recent disturbances at home, this could damage the conservatives' position. However, if they don't agree to it, crippling sanctions, or even war, could follow
13.10.09
US wants bunker-buster fast, denies Iran is reason
This undated artist's rendering provided by Boeing Co. shows a "massive ordinance penetrator" or MOP bomb made by Boeing Co. is undergoing testing and is slated to come on line by mid-2010, to become the largest conventional bomb in the U.S. arsenal. The bomb is approximately 20.5 feet long, has a 31.5-inch diameter and a total weight of slightly less than 30,000 pounds. The weapon will carry over 5,300 pounds of explosive material and will deliver more than 10 times the explosive power of its predecessor, the BLU-109. Guided by global positioning system navigation, the MOP will be carried aboard Air Force B-2 bombers. (AP Photo/Boeing Co.)
By ANNE GEARAN (AP)
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete.
Call it Plan B for dealing with Iran, which recently revealed a long-suspected nuclear site deep inside a mountain near the holy city of Qom.
The 15-ton behemoth — called the "massive ordnance penetrator," or MOP — will be the largest non-nuclear bomb in the U.S. arsenal and will carry 5,300 pounds of explosives. The bomb is about 10 times more powerful than the weapon it is designed to replace.
The Pentagon has awarded a nearly $52 million contract to speed up placement of the bomb aboard the B-2 Stealth bomber, and officials say the bomb could be fielded as soon as next summer.
Pentagon officials acknowledge that the new bomb is intended to blow up fortified sites like those used by Iran and North Korea for their nuclear programs, but they deny there is a specific target in mind.
"I don't think anybody can divine potential targets," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said. "This is just a capability that we think is necessary given the world we live in."
The Obama administration has struggled to counter suspicions lingering from George W. Bush's presidency that the United States is either planning to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities itself or would look the other way if Israel did the same.
The administration has been careful not to take military action off the table even as it reaches out to Iran with historic talks this month. Tougher sanctions are the immediate backup if diplomacy fails to stop what the West fears is a drive for a nuclear weapon.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently said a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would probably only buy time. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen has called a strike an option he doesn't want to use.
The new U.S. bomb would be the culmination of planning begun in the Bush years. The Obama administration's plans to bring the bomb on line more quickly indicate that the weapon is still part of the long-range backup plan.
"Without going into any intelligence, there are countries that have used technology to go further underground and to take those facilities and make them hardened," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. "This is not a new phenomenon, but it is a growing one."
After testing began in 2007, development of the bomb was slowed by about two years because of budgetary issues, Whitman said, and the administration moved last summer to return to the previous schedule.
North Korea, led by Kim Jong Il, is a known nuclear weapons state and has exploded working devices underground. The United States and other countries have offered to buy out the country's weapons program. The Obama administration is trying to lure Pyongyang back to the bargaining table after a walkout last year.
Iran is a more complex case, for both diplomatic and technical reasons. Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claims its nuclear program is peaceful and meant only to produce energy, but the West suspects a covert bomb program that may be only a year or so away from fruition.
"I don't really see it as a near-term indication of anything being planned. I think certainly down the road it has a certain deterrent factor," said Kenneth Katzman, a specialist on Iran and the Middle East at the Congressional Research Service. "It adds to the calculus, let's say, of Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il."
Details about Iran's once-secret program have come out slowly and often under duress, as with last month's surprise confirmation of the hidden underground development site near Qom.
That revelation came a month after the Pentagon had asked Congress to shift money to speed up the MOP program, although U.S. and other intelligence agencies had suspected for years that Iran was still hiding at least one nuclear development site.
The MOP could, in theory, take out bunkers such as those Saddam Hussein had begun to construct for weapons programs in Iraq, or flatten the kind of cave and tunnel networks that allowed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden to escape U.S. assault in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, shortly after the U.S. invasion in 2001.
The precision-guided bomb is designed to drill through earth and almost any underground encasement to reach weapons depots, labs or hideouts.
12.10.09
Iran marches toward the bomb
Here is my latest op-ed on Iran.
The Geneva meeting with Iran, which was eagerly described as “constructive” by Washington, left the most important question unanswered: What Middle East would these talks “construct”?
The answer depends much on what we draw from the talks between Iran and the international community, and as things stand at the moment, Iran is marching towards developing its own nuclear bomb.
Uranium enrichment is no longer a red line for Iran and discussion have gently shifted to the level of uranium purity Iran is allowed to process for domestic use and what will be done with the surplus. Hence, Tehran can comfortably announce plans to install a “new generation of centrifuges” at the country’s newly-revealed nuclear facility near the Shi’ite holy city of Qom, and at other sites, yet to be revealed. This was the hope as outlined by Secretary of Defence Robert Gates, during a CNN/George Washington University forum which was hosted by him and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
In the meantime, a report prepared by IAEA experts and made public by ISIS said that Iran has successfully tested Shahab-3 missiles which have a range of 2,000 kilometers, and is working to develop a nuclear payload that can be delivered by them. The report concludes that Tehran already has the technical knowledge to build a nuclear bomb.
Israeli media is already addressing the possibility of living with a nuclear Iran, while Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak “conceded” that an Iranian nuclear bomb does not pose an existential threat to Israel.
This possibility is sending shivers down some spines in several Arab capitals.
In the last week, the UAE has adopted a civilian nuclear energy law that will pave the way for huge nuclear power program worth $41 billion. Although civilian in nature, the program hints at the region’s preparedness to start a nuclear arms race should Iran get there. UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al-Nayah openly expressed his country’s (and the GCC’s) concerns to Clinton in Sharm Il-Sheikh in March that the U.S. would reach an agreement with Iran on key strategic issues without Washington consulting its Arab allies.
Saudi Arabia is close to spending billions to buy a Russian S-400 advanced missile defense system, to protect against a potentially nuclear Iran, Gulf analysts and diplomats told AFP recently.
Elsewhere, Washington is sabre-rattling against Tehran with a semi-official, plan B focused around assurances, bribes and containment, and which involves the U.S. nuclear umbrella over America’s Middle East allies, if Iran develops its bomb. It is an option that dovetails with the line of thinking of many officials around the Obama administration, and some of which was expressed openly their boss took office.
Take Ashton B. Carter, who wrote, before being assigned the job of Defense Undersecretary, that “containment and punishment” is the post-diplomacy-failure policy. Meanwhile, Gary Samore, head of non-proliferation at the National Security Council, preached of a responsible nuclear Iran, a country, he suggests, “would probably act like other nuclear-armed states and was not likely to give terrorists the bomb.”
Then consider the mounting opposition coming from some hawks in the “bomb Iraq camp.” Brookings’ Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack (whose book The Threatening Storm influenced many liberals to back the Iraq war) agreed during a joint panel prepared by AEI and Brookings the same day of Geneva talks, that containment, not military action, is the best policy on Iran.
Feeling that assurances and containment could fail to convince Israel, the Obama administration is considering bribery. The Washington Times quoted unnamed US officials as saying that President Obama will not pressure Israel to publicly disclose its suspected nuclear weapons program, nor will he pressure the Jewish state to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. It is the same president who, days earlier, was lecturing the world at the UN General Assembly on nuclear nonproliferation and who was the driving force behind the UN resolution which aims at ridding the planet of nuclear weapons.
So, on preventing a nuclear Iran, we are invited to shift gears from “yes we can” to “what can we do?”, before we gamble on there being a regional balance of nuclear power while at the same time striving for a long term goal of a nuclear-weapons-free planet.
In the meantime, those who disagree ought to, according to Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria, “shut up”.
11.10.09
Why A Deal With Iran Could Mean Nothing?
Washington Post's Glenn Kessler detailed the birth story of the pending deal between Iran and the P5+1 over its nuclear program.
The general parameter of the deal, which was agreed upon "in priniciple", is Iran's acceptance to further enrich its stockpile of low enriched uranium through a third party.
However, some Iranian official offered confusing statements on the deal in the aftermath of the Geneva talks.
Iran's ambassadot to UK, who participated in the Geneva talks, denied, in an interview with the AP, the fact that such a deal had been discussed. Iran' top nuclear negotiator Said Jalili made a clear distinction between Iran's willingness to buy enriched uranium to the purity level of %19.75 from a third party, and its unwillingness to hand over the one-bomb worth of uranium it already posses.
Nevertheless, even if Iran reached an agreement with the P5+1 to trade its posession of enriched uranium, of %3.5 purity level, for another amout of uranium, yet, of higher enrichment (%19.75), and was able to run its medical nuclear reactor, it is still not clear whether or not Iran could abuse the final aquired product for millitary purposes. It is equally unclear, if Iran would be provided directly with enriched uranium of %19.75 purity level or by fuel rods derived from this relatively high enriched uranium.
It was reported that Russia will process the extra enrichment and France will take over to produce fuel rods which Tehran needs for its waining medical nuclear reactor. This is still to be determined in the coming meeting between representatives from France, Russia, US, IAEI and Iran.
In the meantime, experts suggest that despite the deal, Iran could still have a leeway for weaponizing the nuclear material it is about to get.
John Bolton touched on this point in his WSJ op-ed:
The general parameter of the deal, which was agreed upon "in priniciple", is Iran's acceptance to further enrich its stockpile of low enriched uranium through a third party.
However, some Iranian official offered confusing statements on the deal in the aftermath of the Geneva talks.
Iran's ambassadot to UK, who participated in the Geneva talks, denied, in an interview with the AP, the fact that such a deal had been discussed. Iran' top nuclear negotiator Said Jalili made a clear distinction between Iran's willingness to buy enriched uranium to the purity level of %19.75 from a third party, and its unwillingness to hand over the one-bomb worth of uranium it already posses.
Nevertheless, even if Iran reached an agreement with the P5+1 to trade its posession of enriched uranium, of %3.5 purity level, for another amout of uranium, yet, of higher enrichment (%19.75), and was able to run its medical nuclear reactor, it is still not clear whether or not Iran could abuse the final aquired product for millitary purposes. It is equally unclear, if Iran would be provided directly with enriched uranium of %19.75 purity level or by fuel rods derived from this relatively high enriched uranium.
It was reported that Russia will process the extra enrichment and France will take over to produce fuel rods which Tehran needs for its waining medical nuclear reactor. This is still to be determined in the coming meeting between representatives from France, Russia, US, IAEI and Iran.
In the meantime, experts suggest that despite the deal, Iran could still have a leeway for weaponizing the nuclear material it is about to get.
John Bolton touched on this point in his WSJ op-ed:
Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington, provided similar conclusion to the Post:
After Geneva, the administration misleadingly stated that once fashioned into fuel rods, the uranium involved could not be enriched further. This is flatly untrue. The 19.75% enriched uranium could be reconverted into uranium hexafluoride gas and quickly enriched to 90%. Iran could also "burn" its uranium fuel (including the Russian LEU available for the Bushehr reactor) and then chemically extract plutonium from the spent fuel to produce nuclear weapons.
While others counter such assessments, Iran is extravagantly showing off its nuclear capabilities. Consider this soundbite by Iran's atomic energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi:
Iran to extract the more highly enriched uranium for weapons. He noted that Argentina published the process online.
We can enrich uranium, we can process uranium, we can produce fuel rods, we can mine uranium, we can deal with spent fuel, which proves we have a full fuel cycle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)