@@ Are Iran, North Korea, stringing along U.S.? @@
- From: "Arash" <A7000@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:28:58 -0400
Jewsweek
September 19, 2005
Nuclear Diplomacy
Are Iran, North Korea, Stringing Along U.S.?
The Bush administration has finally changed its tactics on Iran and North Korea. The
problem is that during four years of stalemate, both countries moved on with their
programs.
By Michael Hirsh [JEW]
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Photos/050913_050919/050919_northkorea_hsmall.widec.jpg
Negotiators from the United States, Japan, China, South Korea, North Korea and Russia
announce a deal on Pyongyang?s nuclear program on September 19th.
?The time for diplomacy is now?, Condoleezza Rice declared at her confirmation
hearings eight months ago. It?s clear that Rice meant what she said. Almost as soon
as she became secretary of State, she swiftly empowered a pragmatic negotiator,
Christopher Hill, to find common ground with North Korea. Hill, the assistant
secretary for East Asia, may have done just that on Monday when he announced a
tentative and partial deal to eliminate North Korea's nuclear weapons program, saying
that Washington and Pyongyang could now ?exist peacefully together?.
Rice has also spelled out a softer approach to Iran, reflecting a weakening in the
U.S. position since Washington got bogged down in Iraq.
Last week at the United Nations she even removed, at the last minute, a tough line in
her speech that identified Iran as a ?leading state sponsor of terrorism?. (?We didn?t
want to get out too far ahead of the Europeans?, explained a senior administration
official). But while the Bush administration has replaced four years of hard-line
tactics with real diplomatic maneuvering, it has a whole new set of problems.
The main difficulty is that during the years of stalemate, both Iran and North Korea
have moved on with their nuclear programs. And they are aggressively using this
progress on the ground as leverage in talks.
Tehran, especially, is barreling ahead with newfound confidence, converting uranium
at a great rate and seeking to isolate Washington and its three European allies
diplomatically from other nations, especially Russia and the other 30 members of the
International Atomic Energy Agency?s Board of Governors.
Since re-activating its nuclear program in August in defiance of the wishes of the
?European Union-3?? Britain, Germany and France?Iran has converted more than seven
tons of raw uranium or ?yellowcake? at its Isfahan facility into uranium hexafluoride
gas, or UF6, officials with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) tell
NEWSWEEK.
UF6 is the basic feeder stock for enriching uranium into bomb-grade material and
reactor fuel. Added to more than two tons already on hand, ?that?s enough for two
nuclear bombs,? says [JEW] David Albright, a nuclear expert with the Institute for
Science and International Security in Washington.
And in a speech last Saturday that was by turns combative and conciliatory, new
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sought to pre-empt U.S.-European efforts to
gain support for an anti-Iran resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors, which is
meeting this week in Vienna.
President Ahmadinejad proposed a plan by which Iran enriches its own uranium in
partnership with other countries?becoming, in effect, a nuclear supplier.
He specifically mentioned a joint Iranian-South African collaboration, proposed by
Pretoria, to provide yellowcake to Iran and take back all the UF6.
The idea, according to a diplomat who is familiar with Tehran?s thinking, is to
establish a kind of pilot program on the ground before ?Iran and the EU3 negotiate
the entire package?. That way Ahmadinejad?s plan?which originated in consultations
during the visit of Iranian then-chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani to South
Africa about two months ago?would gain legitimacy in the international community.
South Africa is an IAEA board member.
What is Iran?s ultimate strategy? Some U.S. officials and observers believe that
Tehran?s plan is to string out the negotiations while it gets closer to a nuclear
weapons program.
The new UF6, for example, is placed in metal cylinders deep in a tunnel complex that
might be immune from a military strike (although it remains under IAEA camera
surveillance). ?I think they want to have enough for several bombs worth stockpiled
in case they?re stopped?, says [JEW] David Albright. In order to enrich this material
to bomb grade, however, Iran still has much work to do in building ?cascades? of
centrifuges suitable for that task.
Iran denies it has any ambitions to build a nuclear weapon, which President
Ahmadinejad said Saturday ?is prohibited? by ?our religious principles".
Finally, if diplomatic push does come to shove and the Westerners opt for economic
sanctions, Iran may be seeking to blunt their impact by reducing the number of
countries that will sign on to them. U.S. and European officials recognize they may
never gain a U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions.
But the senior administration official, who spoke only if his name was not revealed,
said Washington could still pack a punch in hurting Iran?s already-isolated economy
as long as it had the major European powers, and possibly Japan, on board for
bilateral sanctions. ?Ultimately if we try to bring something to the Security Council
on Iran, we?re probably not going to succeed given the Iraq experience. Especially if
it?s us versus Iran?, said the official. ?That?s why we have to move in lockstep with
the EU3. We?re waiting for them to become as frustrated as we have been with the
Iranians?.
U.S. and European officials urged the IAEA board to refer Iran to the Security
Council after President Ahmadinejad vowed to continue Iran's efforts to develop
enrichment capability and reportedly said he would pass Tehran's nuclear know-how to
other Islamic nations. But Russia has balked, saying such a referral should not take
place before further diplomatic efforts are made.
North Korea?s aims are less transparent than Iran?s. President Bush, reacting to Hill?s
statement of a joint agreement in six-party talks with North Korea on Monday, said
the news was a ?positive step,? but added, ?now we?ve got to verify whether or not
that happens?. The two nations agreed to work toward the ?denuclearization? of the
Korean peninsula, in exchange for which Washington pledged it has ?no intention to
attack or invade? North Korea and held out hope for aid, economic cooperation and
possibly a civilian nuclear program in the future.
If such a deal succeeds, it may not end up looking terribly different from the 1994
Framework Agreement negotiated by the Clinton administration, despite years of harsh
criticism of that pact by the Bush administration. But in the meantime the North has
also moved ahead with its program?and, just as dangerously, may be involved in
nuclear proliferation. A report in the Sankei Shimbun, a Japanese newspaper, last
week quoted a high-ranking North Korean military official as saying that Pyongyang
has already passed on ballistic missile information to ?a friendly nation in the
Middle East?.
U.S. intelligence officials believe that Tehran is seeking to adapt the Shahab 3
missile to be able to carry a small nuclear warhead. U.S. officials had no immediate
comment Monday on the Japanese news report. But U.S. intelligence officials have
contended?at least until now?that North Korea?s efforts to sell its know-how have
been confined to missiles, not WMD technology.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9401515/site/newsweek
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Ahmadinejad Blows Them Away at UN
- Next by Date: Re: @@ Video: President Ahmadinejad's speech (Sep. 17, 2005) @@
- Previous by thread: @@ JEW: Iran only 6 months from having nuclear weapons @@
- Next by thread: @@ Incessant drumbeat of claims from Washington @@
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
