I have pasted a copy of yesterday’s IAEA Board of Governors Report on Iran below.
– Ben Katcher
About The Race for Iran
Archive Highlights
The Authors
Flynt Leverett
Hillary Mann Leverett
Ben Katcher
Key Documents
- Turkey-Brazil-Iran Nuclear Agreement
- UNSCRs
- IAEA Reports
- Iranian Proposals
- Western And P5+1 Proposals
- Energy and Economics
- Resources on US Policy
- Videos
- Rules and Regulations For www.RaceforIran.com
Iran says UN nuclear watchdog bends to political influence
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103106988909&s=107098&e=0017AOg4EQ1zmXXatEmG7KMp1247xh0iklnPRDoXY3Nx7xJFxX7DLD1Y5jAHVDnw1rJN3txAbiFwtyTk9kuwck9EO-XvtuSdBnGo9dSd6RNJyVVsCmvj6O7nw==
In formal testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee on February 2, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair wore out the subjunctive mood in addressing Iran’s possible plans for a nuclear weapon.
His paragraphs were replete with dependent clauses, virtually all of them beginning with “if.”
Blair repeated verbatim the 2007 judgment that Iran is “keeping the option open to develop nuclear weapons,” and repeated the intelligence community’s agnosticism on the $64 question: “We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.”
Here we go again. A report issued Thursday by the new Director General of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Japanese diplomat Yukiya Amano, has injected new adrenalin into those arguing that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.
The usual suspects are hyping—and distorting—thin-gruel language in the report to “prove” that Iran is hard at work on a nuclear weapon. The New York Times’ David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, for example, highlighted a sentence about “alleged activities related to nuclear explosives,” which Amano says he wants to discuss with Iran.
Amano’s report said:
“Addressing these issues is important for clarifying the Agency’s concerns about these activities and those described above, which seem to have continued beyond 2004.”
Sanger and Broad play up the “beyond 2004” language as “contradicting the American intelligence assessment…that concluded that work on a bomb was suspended at the end of 2003.” Other media have picked that up and run with it, apparently without bothering to read the IAEA report itself.
The Times article is, at best, disingenuous in claiming:
“The report cited new evidence, much of it collected in recent weeks, that appeared to paint a picture of a concerted drive in Iran toward a weapons capability.”
As far as I can tell, the “new evidence” consists of the “same-old, same-old” allegations and inferences already reported in the open press—material that failed to convince the Director of Intelligence, Dennis Blair, to depart from previous assessments during his Congressional testimony on February 2. Rather, he adhered closely to the unanimous conclusions of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of Nov. 2007.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24828.htm
New Grist for Hype on Iran
By Ray McGovern
Watch the video by clicking on this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-EpWwUT9Og&feature=related
Interesting comments by Scott Ritter who was a chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998
Interesting and educational view by Franklin Lamb
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1-/12778-clintons-final-offer-to-iran-one-more-bundle-of-crippling-sanctions-one-more-t-list.html
Exactly, the NPT was killed by the US. First, coddling the Israeli program. Second, denial of Iran’s right to develop nuclear power, even after signing the NPT and allowing IAEA inspections. Third, doing a deal with India despite their not being a signatory to the NPT. And fourth, blocking Iranian supply of nuclear fuel.
In addition, the nuclear powers have never made any serious efforts to dismantle their nuclear weapons as the NPT requires.
The whole NPT reeks of hypocrisy, something that the US invokes when it suits its purposes and ignores when it doesn’t. And because the great powers choose not to take the NPT seriously, using it only to play big power games, they are putting the whole world at greater risk
As Kooshy says, the Iranian nuclear case was an education for the rest of the world. Now the whole world will have to deal with the blowback.
John – good point. The other issue is that while the international community seeks in vain to find Iran in breach of the NPT, it is never pointed out that the clearest and most profound breach is by the international community. Under the terms of the NPT, we are specifically obliged to assist Iran with nuclear technology. Not only have we not assisted, we have actively obstructed it for 30 years.
If you are talking about the NPT, that treaty is dead long time ago first by Bush administrations refusal to comply with the accord reached during the Clinton administration with the North Koreans and then with openly approving of the illegal Indian proliferation, what is left of NPT?, its long been exposed to be a discriminatory, no one is going to take this seriously any more. But the bulk of this discriminatory exposure was shown by Iran, the way Iran perused this case they clearly educated the world about the NPT and individual countries rights under NPT, how you might think you have the rights but practically you might not enjoy it unless you be able to stand up to the powers and do it yourself. Thanks to Iran this was an education for the rest of the world by Iran nuclear case in last several years.
The US’ gambit regarding the Tehran Research Reactor may go down as one of the stupidest moments in nuclear non-proliferation history.
Basically the US was holding the Iranian regime hostage to the needs of its Tehran Research Reactor. Do as we demand, the US was saying, or your medical reactor will shut down.
To my knowledge, the issue was never presented this way in the Western media. But other nations are sure to take note of these strong arm tactics.
Success of nuclear non-proliferation depended on both inspections and guaranteed supply of nuclear fuel. The US’ TRR gambit has made it painfully obvious that supply of nuclear fuel is not guaranteed–it depends on the attitude of the West toward a regime.
Not wishing to have their fuel supply held hostage by the West, many are likely to develop contingency plans and more robust nuclear processing capabilities.
What should Obama do on Iran?
1. Realize that the current government of Iran is not going anywhere any time soon.
2. Realize that the post-election protests/green movement, while courageous and admirable, have had the downside of putting the hopes for engagement with Iran seriously off course. And that serious corrective effort will be necessary to avoid repeating the mistakes of his predecessor Mr. Bush.
3. Understand that using the “bully pulpit” to support the cause of freedom everywhere may be a good thing, but that openly alligning the US with the green movement would be crippling to their cause, much in the same way our embrace of the “moderates” after the Shah was ousted assured the failure of the moderates. So a tightrope must be walked here and Obama should not give in to pressure from Republicans.
4. Take a step back and realize how far away Iran really is from producing a nuke.
5. Utilize back channels for preliminary discussions while looking for an opportunity to openly negotiate a limited “win win” situation that can be built upon. Realize we are not going to solve the nuke issue with Iran all in one swoop. There is not enough trust between us, for example, for Iran to ship 100% of its fissable materials outside of Iran in one shipment. Look for smaller scale agreements that can be reached between our countries that can be used to build trust. In other words, take “baby steps”.
6. Realize that there are forces at work in the US and Israel that are cleverly and deceptively seeking to arrange a war with Iran. One example: http://original.antiwar.com/porter/2009/06/03/report-ties-dubious-iran-nuclear-docs-to-israel/ Keep your wits about you, remember what you stand for, and don’t give up.
What Should Obama Do Next On Iran?
1.) Explain to the American people that Iran is no threat to the United States unless we or Israel attack it first, and then it would be a serious threat to U.S. access to energy and would likely stage terrorist operations in the continental United States. [The last thanks to 30-years of federal immigration policies that leave us without knowledge of who is in the country or what they are capable of doing.]
2.) Publicly state that there will be no U.S. surprise attack on Iran, and no U.S. attack at all on Iran unless the president asks for a formal declaration of war and the Congress votes its approval in a constitutional manner.
3.) Call in Israel’s ambassador to the United States and tell him that we understand that Israel believes Iran is a threat to its survival, and that we agree that Israel has every right to defend itself. If Israel believes it must go to war with Iran, then so be it. But also tell the ambassador that if Israel attacks Iran, the U.S. administration will declare U.S. neutrality in the war and immediately cut off military and financial support to all combatants in the war.
4.) Speak to the American people and tell them to expect to be brutally propagandized by U.S. citizen Israel-Firsters through AIPAC, their ubiquitous media shills, and the men and women they own in the U.S. Congress and federal bureaucracy. Urge Americans to ignore this effort by U.S. Israel-Firsters to get them to send their soldier-children to fight in a religious war in which the U.S. has no genuine national interest at stake, and in which U.S. participation would further bankrupt the country, require the reintroduction of conscription, and put America at war with all of the Muslim world — Shia and Sunni — for the foreseeable future.
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103071606363&s=107098&e=001K3Vsk0NbcKCAkB2GeLykhD6iigCHz-Qc64yU-fg7AEP2I8STHZqV2Sn4eUyx7GvjeDoPYe8e6bglhqBCP55P6VC4VLxHfhOzd_QWaGwtRFUUp0qU6V4V2rEScATagXrQfaJIx3sHSGOENB3uctxWBjg9gB2p7pCL
From the point of view of promoting more normal relations between the United States and Iran, avoiding a military conflict, and bringing stability to the region, the truth as to the more narrow question of whether the election was procedurally fraudulent may be relevant.
If in fact the election was not stolen, and Washington (and Europe) pretend that it was, this can contribute to a worsening of relations.
It will give further ammunition to hard-liners in Iran, who are portraying the whole uprising as a conspiracy organized by the West. (It doesn’t help that the Obama administration hasn’t announced an end to the covert operations that the Bush administration was carrying out within Iran).
More importantly, it will boost hardliners here – including some in the Obama administration – who want to de-legitimize the government of Iran in order to avoid serious negotiations over its nuclear program.
That is something that we should avoid, because a failure to seriously pursue negotiations now may lead to war in the future.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2009/06/was_irans_election_stolen.html
ASDF
Please click on the above link, study the entire article which is written by By Mark Weisbrot, co-director, Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Let us have your views on it
Chossudovsky: US Will Start WW3 by Attacking Iran
By Russia Today
February 19, 2010 “RussiaToday” — A UN nuclear watchdog report suggests Iran could be developing a nuclear bomb, apparently confirming long-held suspicions in the West. But Tehran denies the claims, again insisting that its atomic intentions are peaceful. Michel Chossudovsky, who’s from an independent Canadian policy research group, believes that what Iran says hardly matters, because the U.S. is planning for war.
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103071606363&s=107098&e=001K3Vsk0NbcKB8rE3gnYMBvlG823HnfpSVH-2PTCRxEc6M-y0jVkwwUNphkUHkGV2rLv6U4z4v_-Kahj7FhmItdyt-oohDrxTVIh4O9B019sIH8f0rwVwpeq6UL4_R1QPQlgtpjKIeEZE7xNXX3XxyQ1rtT-T_mXQU
Yes Hassan Khomeini wrote a letter, but later he also met Khamenei and Ahmadinejad.
All exile groups in the world have this problem: to make a mountain out of a molehill
I don’t think that the uptick in Iran stories is as intense as the run-up to the Iraq War. I think it’s more related to wagging the dog (nothing positive to talk about on the domestic front, just negative stuff like the awful economy and Wall Street looting) and preparing the ground for something after sanctions prove ineffective, perhaps in 2012.
The good news is that Obama has proven himself to be totally uninterested in promoting policies the way Bush/Cheney did. He did a positively awful job marketing health care. On Afghanistan he did nothing but a single speech.
The bad news is that Obama seems content to follow the lemmings, wherever they happened to be headed. And the lemmings are in charge of framing the Iran issue.
There is a sudden upsurge in anti Iran stories across the news media at the moment, it is comparable to the pre Iraq war media propaganda, which makes me think that there will be some conflict in the coming months.
The white house spokesperson, Mr Gibbs announced that Iran does not have the capability to enrich uranium to 20%
Now the big question is this:
If Iran does not “have the capability” to enrich to 20 percent for fuel rods, how can Iran enrich to 90 percent for a bomb?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24700.htm
John H. has a good point. At the time of the Iranian hostage crisis, for example, most Americans were not aware of the 1953 coup in Iran led by the US and Great Britain. So they had no idea why admitting the Shah back into the US was such a big deal and a precipitating factor for the hostage crisis.
I would love to see a poll on the awareness of the 1953 Coup by Americans if anyone has any data out there.
Another great poll would be whether Americans are aware that enrichment to 19.75% is not sufficient for a nuclear warhead. My guess is that a vast majority of Americans are unaware of that. So, once again we see politicians feeding off of the ignorance of the masses and using alarmism to advance the same tired policies and ways of dealing with international problems.
Ironically, we see the President of Iran talking about an impending attack by Israel to alarm the people of Iran and to get them to unify behind them.
Americans and Iranians have so much in common. We are all being manipulated by our “leaders” for their own political benefit while they drive us closer to unnecessary war.
Paneer Jan if that’s all the cards you have you are playing a bad hand, as I understand this is the core of the Leverett’s argument, they are in way saying let’s call it Parole they may accept
ASDF:
so pragmatic! i see. so the problem is only the chance of happening it, but not the moral authority that you have filled it in nearly all the posts here. talk more please. the more you talk, the more you contradict yourself ;)
Kooshi jan: I’m all for it, but what are the chances of that happening?? So, we need to deal with the card we have been dealt.
Iran: what happened, where now?
Farhang Jahanpour, 19 February 2010
“”The choice confronting the regime is stark. It lost its legitimacy in the deceit over the June 2009 election, a trend confirmed by the increasing disaffection even of some pillars of the Islamic Republic establishment. This is illustrated by the actions of Hassan Khomeini, grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini and curator of his office. The anniversary of Khomeini’s death is an occasion when traditionally the supreme leader and other dignitaries visit his former residence and take part in mourning ceremonies. On the latest such occasion, Hassan Khomeini invited Mohammad Khatami to speak, and – when the government restricted the former president’s movements, blocking his attendance – cancelled the entire event in protest.
More recently, Hassan Khomeini sent a strongly-worded letter to Iran’s state broadcaster, chiding it for biased reporting and for distorting the words of his grandfather. He warned that if it did not correct its ways he would forbid it from using Khomeini’s words again. On 11 February, the anniversary of the revolution, the authorities arrested Mohammad Reza Khatami and his wife Zahra Eshraqi, Ayatollah Khomeini’s granddaughter. When the regime makes enemies even of such figures, it is clear both how fearful it is and how it is prepared to deal with others.
The display of fervid control the regime was forced into on 11 February reveals its desperation. A foreign assault, which would unite all Iranians behind a power they hate, could yet give it an infusion of strength – all the more reason for the west to ignore Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s provocations, and oblige his government to face the people without false comfort. Mir-Hossein’s Moussavi’s demands offer the regime an opportunity to restore governance to a path of legitimacy. It seems unlikely that the regime will turn back from its self-destructive path.
First published in Open Democracy.
http://www.opendemocracy.net/farhang-jahanpour/iran-what-happened-where-now
The Gallup Poll on Iran is news?
Thirty years of hearing only one side of the story will almost always convince people of that side’s position.
And for that neo-conmen and their fellow travelers like Wigwag are exultant.
Paneer Jan isn’t it better to say no nation should be allowed to have nuclear weapons specially the ones they have used it or the ones who have been in hegemonic expansionist wars since their inception; if you are good citizen can you announce that here without getting yourself in any trouble.
Wow Wig Wag, I was surprised, bravo you got us, would you also be interested to know how favorable America is to the other nations or for that matter to the Iranians, you may want to look at the pull conducted by University of Maryland and posted on this site a few weeks back
Cheers
No theocracy should be allowed to have nuclear weapons, period. Imagine Pat Robertson as President of Christian Republic of US?? Would you trust him to have nukes?? I don’t…
wigwag: Iran and IRI are not one and the same. The IRI does not represent the legitimate will of the Iranian people.
At any rate, IAEA: Iran may be working on nuclear warhead
Khamenei denies nuclear report claims
BBC: Iran’s supreme leader has denied it is developing nuclear weapons, after a new report from the UN atomic watchdog, the IAEA, sparked an international outcry. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the outcry was “baseless” as Iranians’ beliefs “bar us from using such weapons”. The blunt report raised concerns Iran was working on nuclear weapons. But Ayatollah Khamenei countered: “We do not believe in atomic weapons and are not seeking that.” >>>
Supreme Leader Khameneii Is Such a Joker
by AlexInFlorida on Fri Feb 19, 2010 06:41 AM PST
He says Religion forbids us to have such weapons.
Khameneii, Allah the Merciful and Compassionate doesn’t exactly agree with you killing, executing,shooting, kidnapping, raiding,threatning, thieving, plundering, torturing, raping and coercing an entire nation either, but it doesn’t seem to be stopping you from doing all these things.
http://www.iranian.com/main/2010/feb/iaea-iran-may-be-working-nuclear-warhead
The new Gallup Poll is out asking Americans whether they view other nations favorably or unfavorably. Gallup does this poll every year and they don’t ask about all nations, just nations that are in the news a lot. Here are the results (favorable/unfavorable):
Canada: 90/6
Great Britain: 87/7
Germany: 80/12
Japan: 77/16
Israel: 67/25
India: 66/25
France: 63/31
Egypt: 58/29
Mexico: 49/46
Russia: 47/45
China: 42/53
Saudi Arabia: 35/58
Cuba: 29/64
Pakistan: 23/71
Iraq: 23/73
Yemen: 21/56
Palestinian Authority: 20/70
Afghanistan: 18/79
North Korea: 14/80
Iran: 10/85
Anyone notice where Iran is on the list?