Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell stated the obvious in an interview with Bloomberg today:
I don’t see a set of sanctions coming along that would be so detrimental to the Iranians that they are going to stop that program. The Iranians are determined to have a nuclear program. Notice I did not say a nuclear weapon. But they are determined to have a nuclear program, notwithstanding the last six or seven years of efforts on our part to keep them from having a nuclear program.
Readers will recall that Secretary Powell’s presentation to the United Nations in 2003 was key to legitimizing the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq.
Powell generally keeps a low public profile. Hopefully his comments today will compel Washington to ask itself tough questions about precisely what it hopes sanctions will achieve.
– Ben Katcher
Dan, I recognize your point, but I don’t agree that all politics is economic. If there’s one thing we’ve learned over the past 100 years, it’s that the irrational must be taken in account — in daily life, and in geopolitics as well.
Eric – I don’t know about “easily” extracted and reconverted to gas, but I understand it is possible. At this stage, Iran has no reprocessing capability of any type, and as you say, why bother messing about with plates (which are sorely needed for the TRR) when it is possible to enrich gas to 20% anyway?
Regarding the isotopes, there is a Belgian reactor increasing its output soon, and a Polish one coming on line now I believe, both supplying to the big international companies that supply isotopes (the biggest of which is Covidien, part of Tyco).
Jon Harrison
Bush will follow Blair; apparently, he has an insatiable appetite for money too.
When they were in office, the basis of their policy was money.
The reason they were so subservient to Israel and its lobby was money and power.
Unfortunately, Money is power, In fact, all politics is economic.
Iran’s Natural Gas Riches: US Knife to the Heart of World Future Energy
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18176
My comment immediately below refers to Dan Cooper’s “How Criminals Profit from War” post of today at 12:25 a.m.
Dan: Interesting piece. It’s amazing how these days everybody in government cashes in after leaving. There was a time when this didn’t happen — Jefferson, Madison, Monroe all died bankrupt, or almost so. Truman, upon leaving office, embarked on a road trip with his wife, driving himself, staying in motels and paying his own way. Today of course ex-presidents are treated like divine beings. The only difference is that, unlike gods, they have an apparently insatiable appetite for money. I’d say it started with Eisenhower, whose Gettysburg farm was bought for him by the Murchisons. Actually, J. Edgar Hoover was getting all sorts of lucre from Murchison even before Ike cashed in. I blame the individuals themselves, of course, but the vast reach of government today also plays a part. Government now provides a vast source of dollars that’s there for the taking, so long as one has the right connections. The only way to change this is to reduce the size and scope of government — legislation regulating lobbies, campaign spending, etc. will always be circumvented by clever people.
In Britain a hundred or so years ago Lloyd George said, “Here we sell honors. Over there [i.e., in America] they sell policies.” Looks like Britain is becoming more and more like us these days.
Anyway, that’s my rant for the day.
no, the US regime will not listen because they NEVER DO and never learn from past blunders. US is only good at MANUFACTURING CONSENT FOR LIES.
James Canning, I was not trying to discourage anyone from visiting Iran. It is absolutely the best way to learn about the culture and the people. I was merely pointing out that it would be more cost effective for us keyboard warriors to write to MSM editors and the elected representatives and ask the hard questions that are not being asked, and to ask that they stop demonizing Iran.
Nothing would delight an Iranian better than to show his/her hospitality to a guest.
Sakinah Bagoom,
Rick Steves of Seattle is trying to encourage Americans to visit Iran. He did a travelogue last year (photos available online at ricksteves.com).
The tedious continuing demonization of Iran obviously is very dangerous.
Eric:
1) – strikes me as plausible. I don’t know for sure about “easily” but certainly it would be possible for Iran to do with its technology.
On the other hand, fabricated fuel will be under safeguard. I think you’re right that since Iran already has LEU in gas form, 1) it wouldn’t necessarily be worth it for Iran to use fuel to make a weapon, if it is going to leave the NPT and 2) the important thing is Iran leaving the NPT. If Iran does not leave the NPT, it is not going to make weapons out of its gas or its fuel. If Iran does leave the NPT, it doesn’t really matter much with path it takes, fuel or gas, to get enriched uranium.
Iran hasn’t made any indications that it would leave the NPT under foreseeable circumstances. Iran has said it is comfortable being like Japan, capable of making a weapon but voluntarily refraining and staying in the NPT.
2) As you’ve noticed, ending the worldwide shortage does not mean Iran would have an assured, pressure-free supply of isotopes. The only way Iran can have a supply of isotopes that it knows is not subject to Western conditions is to make its own.
Mossadegh and Ahmadinejad
Today, 57 years later, Iran faces almost the same dilemma in which the imperialist forces are planning to undermine Iran’s political and economic system, using the UN sanctions, while the well-to-do classes frightened by President Ahmadinejad’s pro-working class and national independence policies, are engaged in activities aimed at fostering insecurity domestically and weakening Iran’s position internationally. The unceremonious role of this segment of the population led partly by the “reformists”, is in fact preparing the ground to enhance U.S. influence in Iran, strengthen its supremacy in the Middle East region and change the balance of forces in Central and East Asia. The leadership of this “movement” attempted to use the tenth presidential election as a stepping stone to seize state power by slandering the result of the election, in which President Ahmadinejad with 63% of the votes defeated the reformist candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.
But here is where similarities between Mossadegh’s period and today’s situation under Ahmadinejad ends and important differences begin. In sharp contrast to the liberal government of Dr. Mossadegh, President Ahmadinejad’s government is an outcome of a revolution. Secondly, Iran is much more developed in comparison and the U.S. in the last 30 years has not been able to bring down Iran’s social-economic system and lastly, but not the least important, the Islamic Republic’s security forces are the result of the revolution and are trained, equipped and ideologically armed by the world outlook of the Islamic leaders, while the Shah’s military forces were trained by the colonial and imperialist powers and were at the service of the monarchy allied with foreign interests. Finally, the economic sanctions of the West have been to some extent derailed by China and Russia that have lost their potency in undermining the Iranian economy.
Today, 57 years later, Iran faces almost the same dilemma in which the imperialist forces are planning to undermine Iran’s political and economic system, using the UN sanctions, while the well-to-do classes frightened by President Ahmadinejad’s pro-working class and national independence policies, are engaged in activities aimed at fostering insecurity domestically and weakening Iran’s position internationally. The unceremonious role of this segment of the population led partly by the “reformists”, is in fact preparing the ground to enhance U.S. influence in Iran, strengthen its supremacy in the Middle East region and change the balance of forces in Central and East Asia. The leadership of this “movement” attempted to use the tenth presidential election as a stepping stone to seize state power by slandering the result of the election, in which President Ahmadinejad with 63% of the votes defeated the reformist candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.
But here is where similarities between Mossadegh’s period and today’s situation under Ahmadinejad ends and important differences begin. In sharp contrast to the liberal government of Dr. Mossadegh, President Ahmadinejad’s government is an outcome of a revolution. Secondly, Iran is much more developed in comparison and the U.S. in the last 30 years has not been able to bring down Iran’s social-economic system and lastly, but not the least important, the Islamic Republic’s security forces are the result of the revolution and are trained, equipped and ideologically armed by the world outlook of the Islamic leaders, while the Shah’s military forces were trained by the colonial and imperialist powers and were at the service of the monarchy allied with foreign interests. Finally, the economic sanctions of the West have been to some extent derailed by China and Russia that have lost their potency in undermining the Iranian economy.
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102998088473&s=107098&e=0016ZgII6mkAXNjy8FOOFKwZQAAj1razVx-PRc0waBcYFnRhxuRBbkol0lI4JJHjSwSWSWJ0Gc28SgF6tJc9yRg8dNQxwmoFPEroxvz5uj_yzW2ROBOP8Z0wehPTotJWCmm3AbGlXrl6rDib3AD0uszB-FacU3ZQRmG
How Criminals Profit From War
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25037.htm
Not related to the Iran but nevertheless it is an interesting read.
Russian prime minister lectures Clinton in front of TV cameras
The prime minister — considered by many to be the real power in Russia — started out by greeting Clinton in their first meeting since she became secretary of state. Then, sitting across from her in a gilt-edged chair, he launched into a list of complaints about the drop in U.S. trade during the economic crisis, Russia’s difficulties in joining the World Trade Organization and U.S. sanctions that have affected Russian companies. The latter subject appeared to be a reference to penalties on firms doing business with Iran, Syria and North Korea.
http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_14713031
Alan (or anyone else who cares to comment),
A well-known authority on nuclear proliferation told me today that:
(1) “Uranium can easily be extracted from fabricated fuel. Then one can do whatever with it, including reconverting to gas to enrich further”; and
(2) “The worldwide shortage of isotopes will end in a few months.”
Even if Iran can reprocess TRR fuel plates into gas and then refine it to bomb grade, one wonders whether it might not be cheaper just to start with LEU, and one also wonders whether the IAEA inspectors might notice. Even so, I’d like to get some definitive answer on whether it’s technically possible.
How will this shortage end? I thought the Canada reactor will be down for several months, and vaguely recall from the Leveretts’ article that the Netherlands reactor will also be down for maintenance. Are the other reactors able to take up the slack?
I very much doubt ANYBODY listens to Ben Grimm anymore.
James
Re: China and Russia
In this world, Money talks:
Money is a major part of any diplomacy but I agree there are other factors involved here.
If any diplomacy were independent of commercial calculations, this world would have been a better place to live in.
Israel lobby will never allow rapprochement with Iran and the Islamic republic should prepare itself for the worst-case scenario.
Hello Firoangela,
I take your point re McCain, but my point is that other influential people would have to follow him, or else he too would be a lone wolf with minimal influence. In any case, I don’t see Sen. McCain changing his tune. As always I appreciate your thoughts; I certainly agree with your last paragraph.
Mr. Canning, I agree with you, but I don’t think the US can summon the strength. I think sone fairly major disaster has to occur before we see a major swing in opinion.
Dan Cooper,
I think the Russians and the Chinese regard more sanctions against Iran at this time as counter-productive, if diplomacy still has an opportunity to proceed effectively, and that this viewpoint is indpendent of commercial calculations.
US strength will be enhanced if Obama pulls all American military forces out of Iraq. In fact, he should have done this by now. $5 billion per month is squandered on this idiotic adventure.
Jon Harrison,
Most political realists would agree the US willl maintain close ties with Israel. I think the real issue is whether the US can summon the strength of character to act in its own best interests, and those of Israel too, by telling the Israelis they must accept an independent Palestine in the near future. For Israel’s own sake, the sooner Palestine is recognized as independent, the better it is for Israel. Obviously, this is not the point of view of Bibi Netanyahu.
Happy Nowrooz to you, too, kooshy, and to you all.
May the fish be with you ;)
نوروز مبارک
Happy Norooz to you all
Powell’s whole Bloomberg interview was well worth reading, as was, even more so, his lengthy video interview given just before the 2008 US election (probably still out there on YouTube) in which he indicated his support for Obama and gave very well thought-out reasons why.
Still, Powell deserves considerable responsibility for getting us into Iraq (though it probably was inevitable by then anyway). After his disgraceful February 2003 presentation to the UN – which struck me as so full of holes that I thought it would slow down or even halt the march to war as it was carefully dissected by discerning journalists (wrong about that) – I found it virtually impossible to persuade anyone that invading Iraq was a bad idea. Powell had considerable credibility with the public, and he traded that for what he (mistakenly) thought would be continued influence on US foreign policy.
Though I nevertheless think highly of him for what he’s said on several occasions since then, I remain upset that he claims to believe “it was the right call” to invade Iraq. He either doesn’t believe that, in which case he deserves disrespect for saying it, or he’s given it the careful review it deserves and genuinely believes it, in which case I strongly disagree with him and will inevitably discount his views on other matters, or he hasn’t bothered to look into it thoroughly enough to know what he really believes.
I’m willing to believe that it’s the last of these three possibilities – the only one which justifies continued respect for him – but not for very much longer. That day was the most important (public) day of his life, and he owes it to himself to figure out (and to us to frankly tell) whether he did the right thing.
Liz:
It seems, Obama, as his recent Norowz greeting shows, is not interested in an understanding with an ascendant Iran that is eager to keep the genie in the bottle. That would have only come with the expense of Israel. with a change in Iran’s mind, future understanding would be severely at the expense of the U.S as well. this sounds pretty obvious to me. It seems, he doesn’t get that nice words, well this year that one was also gone, is not enough to seduce an ancient nation. the nice words need to be backed up with nice deeds.
The irony is that one of the key people responsible for the tragic war in Iraq is now showing much more wisdom than many in the United States who opposed the war. The only realistic option for Obama is to finally recognize the Islamic Republic of Iran after over three decades and to deal with the Iranian government in a rational manner. The Iranians will not give up their nuclear rights or any other of their rights as a sovereign state. It is important to keep in mind that time is not on the side Obama, as the US position grows weaker and weaker in the region and as a strong and influential Iran moves further away from western economies.
West pushes for new UN sanctions on Iran.
The United States, Britain, France and Germany are eager to start talks with China and Russia on a U.S.-drafted proposal for a new round of sanctions against Iran.
But Russia refuses to negotiate on new sanctions without China, U.N. diplomats say. They add that Russian officials have made clear they dislike the draft resolution Washington circulated to Moscow and Beijing weeks ago.
China has yet to react.
Russia and China have lucrative business ties with Tehran, which Western diplomats say is one of the main reasons that Moscow and Beijing have been reluctant to support any punitive U.N. measures against Tehran
WHAT NEW SANCTIONS ARE BEING PROPOSED?
The latest proposal includes the following measures:
· It would place restrictions on new Iranian banks established abroad, a measure that some diplomats say would amount to a ban;
· It would urge vigilance regarding transactions linked to Iran’s central bank, but would not officially blacklist it as the Western powers had originally wanted;
· It would restrict insurance and reinsurance firms from insuring cargo shipments to and from Iran;
· There would be additional Iranian individuals and companies facing travel bans and asset freezes, with a new focus on members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and companies controlled by it;
· Some shipping companies would be blacklisted, including the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines;
· Limits on arms trade with Iran would be expanded into a full arms embargo with an inspection regime similar to one in place for the North Korea sanctions;
· It does not include sanctions targeting Iran’s oil and gas sectors as the French had originally pushed for.
China has given no clear signals on how it would vote on a new sanctions resolution, though it has repeatedly called for further dialogue with Tehran and said it does not believe it is the time for more sanctions.
Sakineh Bagoom, I understand your concerns, but, respectfully, it would cost almost as much to travel cross country to California and stay in Tehrangeles for 18 days as it does to fly to Iran and tour for 18 days.
Regarding fears instilled by demonization, I guess I’m ornery. I’d never travelled outside the US, hadn’t been on a plane in 15 years, but I was determined to go to Iran precisely to thumb my nose at the propagandists.
An American in Iran is more protected than if he/she were in his own home. Think about it: if an American tourist in Iran suffered so much as a hangnail, the US government would draw a bulls eye on Khamenei’s back. Every hotel manager, every restaurateur, every shopkeeper, taxi driver and tour guide will does everything in his power to ensure the well-being of American tourists. Try to find a copy of the film, Bam 6.6, the story of two young Americans where were trapped in the earthquake at Bam. You will see from the eyes of the young Jewish woman how Iranians cared for her and helped her recover from her injuries and the death of her fiance.
Regarding visas: since the US and Iran do not share diplomatic offices, US visitors to Iran must be accompanied (ie. by a tour guide), and their guide will arrange for visas. I’ve contacted several tour agencies; they all tell me an individual does not arrange his/her own visa to Iran, the guide takes care of that. Visas are processed through the Iran desk at the Pakistani embassy. Women are required to cover their hair in visa photos, but are NOT permitted to cover their hair in US passport photos, so…. two sets of photos.
Fiorangela, you wrote: “I challenge more of the people who are interested in preserving the integrity of the United States and in participating as thoughtful citizens to travel to Iran, to keep learning about Iran, and to constantly push back against the ‘elite’ and the ‘media’ in order to keep them honest, us out of war, and the Iranian people alive.”
While I agree with the premise that people need to become more educated about the world, in this instance Iran, it may be cost prohibitive for an average person to make such a leap. In particular to a country that is so demonized that one may be too frightened to even apply for a visa. In lieu of this, I would propose that more people would hold MSM and their government more accountable. So, when statements are made regarding a country that is unknown to them, they write to the editors or their congressperson and ask the tough questions that are not being asked. Educating people is the only chance that this world can become a better place. Ignorance and fear are never a good combination. There are many sites on the net that one can learn about Iran – or – just a trip to Tehrangeles (read: Los Angeles) where they can meet many Iranians.
I agree with Colin Powell that the Iranians will continue to develop nuclear power to generate electricity, no matter how much noise is raised in the international community. Powell allows for the possibility Iran does no seek nuclear weapons, and certainly there is no evidence of a current program by Iran to develop such weapons.
The Israel Lobby and the Neocons (often one and the same) are relentless and never look back on their errors. It is that fanticism which enables them to outlast many of their opponents who often simply opt out of the fight.
Here is a rare example of a prominent Neocon admitting they made a mistake by relying on Chalabi while claiming that the Neocons were right on everything else over the last 25 years.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/new/blogs/muravchik/Chalabi_Out_of_the_Closet
“Confessing error is never easy, especially when under attack. We neoconservatives were proven right about every issue on which we took up cudgels against liberals and paleocons for 25 years, so when we finally were wrong on Iraq, we got pilloried. The particulars of our errors—whether it was the whole idea of invading Iraq or just aspects of its execution—will be sorted out for a long time, but one cardinal mistake was undoubtedly our infatuation with Ahmad Chalabi.”
hello Jon Harrison –
you wrote:
“if John McCain starts to say something similar, and …Graham & Lieberman don’t disown him, then perhaps change will be in the air.”
What if, instead, “if McCain starts to say something similar, and doesn’t pay any attention to what Graham and Lieberman think because McCain is in control of his own gravitas and character, then perhaps change will be in the air.”
you wrote:
“I really believe the Lobby has a stranglehold on the both the political process and elite opinion. The two are self-reinforcing, and this prevents the American people from a getting an accurate picture of events in Iran, Iraq, Palestine, etc.”
Don’t know about anyone else on this blog or at Mondoweiss or Tikun Olam, but I’m certainly not elite, tho I daresay I have a keener perception of Iranian people and culture than the ‘elite.’ Most of the participants on this blog do, as well. I’ve been to Iran. (Among the elite, it’s difficult to separate the propagandized from the propagandizers.)
Unfortunately, I’m one of a very few non-Iranian Americans to make that claim. I challenge more of the people who are interested in preserving the integrity of the United States and in participating as thoughtful citizens to travel to Iran, to keep learning about Iran, and to constantly push back against the ‘elite’ and the ‘media’ in order to keep them honest, us out of war, and the Iranian people alive.
Colin Powell is fully responsible for a wrong testimony to the United Nations on Iraq’s WMD (e.g. mobile production facilities) which ultimately led to the ongoing war. I do not want to point to the countless victims but to the very fact that the copy of Picasso’s Guernica in the UN building had to be covered when he gave his press conference afterwards.
“The Iranians are determined to have a nuclear program. Notice I did not say a nuclear weapon.”
You’ve got to give Powell credit for making that distinction. Few in the West do.
Yes, a low profile — too low, I fear. Certainly his fellow Republicans will pay no heed to Powell’s words. The president listens to him, but Obama seems unable to break free of the straitjacket the Lobby has put him in.
You know, it would be great to see the recent comments of Powell and Petraeus actually move the debate off the “we and Israel have a the same interests” line. But I just don’t see it happening. As I mentioned in another post, if John McCain starts to to say something similar, and his friends Graham and Lieberman don’t disown him, then perhaps change will finally be in the air. But I simply can’t imagine that happening. The media is even worse than Congress. There is some criticism of Israel in the US mass media, but one almost nevers sees reporting on the fact that there are respectable people who question the value of the Israeli tie. I really believe the Lobby has a stranglehold on the both the political process and elite opinion. The two are self-reinforcing, and this prevents the American people from a getting an accurate picture of events in Iran, Iraq, Palestine, etc.