@@ We should not play Bush game of chicken on Iran. @@
- From: "Arash" <A7000@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 08:25:25 -0400
Toronto Star
April 30, 2006
We should not play Bush game of chicken on Iran
U.S. president's tactics echo buildup to invasion of Iraq
By Haroon Siddiqui
hsiddiq[AT]thestar.ca
Set aside the American spin ? dutifully disseminated by the media ? regarding the
latest report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran's nuclear
program.
Rather than augment America's case, it proves how counterproductive George W. Bush's
bullying tactics have been.
Cornered by him, Iran has enriched uranium. It has reduced co-operation with the
Vienna-based agency, thereby slowing progress on unearthing all aspects of the
nuclear program. It hinted Friday that it'd co-operate even less if he does not let
up.
"The international community is less well off than it was before the issue was taken
to the Security Council", said a diplomat over a phone from Vienna.
Bush's tactics bear eerie parallels to his 2002-2003 buildup to the invasion of Iraq.
The ostensible issue then was the hidden weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Now, it
is the Iranian "intention" to develop a nuclear bomb.
Iran's nuclear program is not new. It began in the 1970s under the Shah, with full
U.S. co-operation. But following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the Nuclear Suppliers'
Group (NSG), a 45-nation cartel, wouldn't sell Iran nuclear technology (Iran is
entitled to nuclear technology under the treaty, so the West denied Iran its treaty
rights for decades). So it went to the black market. What it bought there is a matter
of debate.
But Iran is NOT in violation of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its
enrichment of uranium, under international inspection since 2003, is legal. (What
transpired before that we do not fully know). Iran even opened up some military
installations, where the inspectors found no nuclear activity.
Two years ago, Iran "voluntarily" agreed to suspend enrichment. It did so while
negotiating with Britain, Germany and France in an attempt to end the US-led Western
freeze on technological transfers, including spare parts for civilian planes. When
those talks failed, Iran removed the seals on nuclear material to resume low-level
enrichment. That, too, was legal. The IAEA inspectors were present when the seals
came off.
So, what is Iran guilty of?
It has not been fully forthcoming on what enrichment equipment it bought pre-2003. It
is yet to prove that its work is solely for peaceful purposes. But the IAEA has not
found a smoking gun. Hence its conclusion: The glass is half-full and half-empty.
On Friday, the agency added what Iran has already said: the enrichment program
continues.
Along the way, Iran had made two offers: set up a consortium to let other nations
partially own and operate its commercial enrichment facility, thereby removing the
secrecy around it, or, alternatively, ditch that facility in return for a small
experimental facility (which would pose little threat of nuclear proliferation),
along with an ensured supply of nuclear fuel, plus security assurances that it won't
be whacked (by the U.S. or Israel).
But the U.S. would not agree. It says Iran "might" make a bomb. But there's no way
the IAEA can measure "intentions".
That Iran has an unsavory regime does not mean that Bush can have carte blanche to
start a war. He says he does not plan to. But that's what he said on Iraq.
The more he drags Iran into the Security Council, the greater control he has over
what he really wants: "regime change". That, in turn, drives Iran even more toward
the bomb.
The more debate and resolutions he can generate in the council, the better for Bush,
even if Russia and China don't fully go along.
The "media hysteria" would help ratchet up the fear factor and keep the spotlight off
the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, and also all his troubles at home.
Secondly, it would let him turn the Iran case into "a test of the credibility of the
Security Council", the same way he did on Iraq. Condoleezza Rice is already using
that phrase.
None of this is to say that Iran's nuclear program should not be curbed. But one
cannot think of a worse way than Bush's way.
He is pushing Iran to take the North Korean path: pull out of the Non-proliferation
Treaty (NPT) altogether to shield itself from any international inspection and
develop the bomb.
It is this dangerous game of chicken that Canadian neocon Prime Ministern Stephen
Harper is getting Canada into, by supporting Bush holus bolus on Iran.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146261012177&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
.
- Prev by Date: @@ Imposing sanctions on Iran illegal - Russian diplomat @@
- Next by Date: @@ 'Now it's our turn to act' @@
- Previous by thread: @@ Imposing sanctions on Iran illegal - Russian diplomat @@
- Next by thread: @@ 'Now it's our turn to act' @@
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
