Iran and the US - Bush's new cold war
- From: NY.Transfer_News@xxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:49:52 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Iran and the US - Bush's new cold war
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
The International Herald Tribune - Apr 30, 2006
http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2006/04/30/america/web.0430iran.php
Iran and the U.S. in a new cold war
By David E. Sanger and Elaine Sciolino
The New York Times
WASHINGTON Iran and the United States have begun to reveal new strategies in
their nuclear dispute that seem bound to escalate their confrontation, as
both nations seek to turn to their advantage a highly critical report that
portrays a nuclear program proceeding at full tilt, in growing secrecy.
In many ways, what has unfolded in the past three days resembles cold-war
deception and brinkmanship, with some decidedly new twists for a very
different nuclear age. As in the early days of the cold war, both sides have
tried to write the rules on the fly, using every tool available - from
American threats of sanctions to Iranian threats to cut off oil.
Iran, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, has been
successful in gradually blinding the agency's inspectors, increasingly
denying them access to crucial sites and steadfastly refusing to answer
questions about suspected links between Iran's civilian nuclear program and
its military.
While Iran denies any clandestine effort to build a nuclear weapon, it is
clearly drawing on the diplomatic playbook of a country that has done just
that - North Korea. Iran has gone so far as to boast about, and perhaps
exaggerate, its nuclear prowess to try to convince the West that its program
is now unstoppable.
Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the chairman of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, and
other Iranian officials on Friday described their nuclear program as
"irreversible." They argue that the United States should simply accept this
- - much as it now accepts that Pakistan and India will never give up nuclear
technology.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's fiery president, said Saturday that giving up
enrichment "is our red line, and we will never cross it," according to state
television.
In Washington, senior Bush administration officials have taken a position at
the opposite extreme. In the words of Robert Joseph, the State Department's
top proliferation official, the administration is determined to ensure that
"not one centrifuge spins" in Iran.
In interviews in the past two days, the officials have described a plan to
turn the United Nations Security Council's "requests" that Iran cease
enriching uranium into an enforceable requirement. What has chilled the
Chinese, the Russians and some others in Europe, however, is that the
administration is insisting on citing Iran under Chapter VII of the United
Nations Charter, which authorizes the use of penalties, and if that is
inadequate, of military force.
This is still not a contest between nuclear powers - Iran is not believed to
have a bomb yet, and intelligence estimates say that day is still 5 to 10
years away, assuming there is no clandestine effort that no one has
detected.
Instead, it is an effort by the United States and some other nations to
refashion the nuclear rules. They want to declare that even if Iran is
legally entitled under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium
for civilian purposes, Mr. Ahmadinejad cannot be trusted to do so. By
deceiving the nuclear agency about its activities, President Bush and
British, French and German officials say, Iran has given up whatever treaty
rights it once enjoyed.
Mr. Bush has also acknowledged that America's credibility has been deeply
harmed by the intelligence failures over Iraq.
On Friday, he tried to allay concerns that he was proceeding down the same
path he used to give a legal basis for the invasion he ordered 37 months
ago. "There's a difference between the two countries," he told reporters,
even as his European allies worry about similarities in the American
strategy.
For the first time, the administration has publicly declared, as it did in
the case of Iraq, that if the Security Council fails to act, Mr. Bush will
organize "like-minded nations" to begin to impose punishment.
"We have not conceded the point and we will not concede the point that Iran
will become a nuclear weapons power," said R. Nicholas Burns, who directs
the diplomatic talks for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
He insisted that Iran was mistaken if it thought that the Bush
administration would ever allow its nuclear activity to go ahead- which is
essentially what has happened in North Korea for the past three years, while
negotiations have dragged on to the brink of collapse.
"The difference in the two situations is that in Iran you have a state
situated in the most volatile area of the world, where they are the leading
central banker of terrorist actions," Mr. Burns said. "What they can't count
on is a compliant and divided international community."
The strategies have only hardened the other side's position.
Washington's episodic saber-rattling - from the president's vague comments
that "all options" are on the table if diplomacy fails, and the increasingly
public discussion of whether he or the Israelis will ultimately opt for a
military strike - has so far failed.
The Iranians have responded with threats of their own, knowing that even the
specter of confrontation rattles the oil markets and sends prices to new
levels, enriching Iran and heightening the pain for Mr. Bush and American
consumers.
The Iranians may have also overplayed their hand.
While they insist that their current activities are within their treaty
obligations, they ignore the I.A.E.A.'s finding that Tehran hid some of its
activities for two decades. And Friday's report accuses Iran of continuing
to hide vital information.
But this dispute is about more than transparency. It is also about national
pride and Iran's insistence on self-sufficiency and independence. That may
help explain why Iran has celebrated enrichment with dancers in traditional
dress, who paraded on national television while holding a small box said to
contain the fruits of their atomic labors.
The inspectors' report confirmed that Iran had succeeded in enriching
uranium at a low level, but it would take significantly more processing,
equipment, and problem-solving to produce fuel for a bomb. Fabricating a
warhead would take even more time, and risk detection.
"The real fight here is not over whether they have a weapons program, it is
over whether they can create a nuclear weapons option," said Gary Samore,
who led nonproliferation efforts in the Clinton administration and continues
to study the Iranian program, speaking earlier this year. "And that is the
smoke-and-mirrors game, convincing everyone that they have that capability."
That is what most concerns senior officials inside the Bush administration.
Officials who deal with nuclear strategy note that it is now widely assumed
that North Korea has several to 10 nuclear weapons - even though the North
Koreans have never conducted a nuclear test.
"We think the Iranians looked at the Koreans and learned a lesson," said a
senior official, who would not speak for attribution on a matter of nuclear
strategy.
It would be a very different approach than the one taken by the Russians in
the late 1940's, or the Chinese in the early 1960's, or the Indians and
Pakistanis in the late 1990's, all of whom set off nuclear explosions to
prove their powers. Given the limited access allowed I.A.E.A. inspectors,
officials here and in Vienna say, there would be no way to verify, or
disprove, Iran's claims.
Mr. Bush has therefore taken the position that Iran must give up everything.
He said Friday, "The Iranians should not have a nuclear weapon, the capacity
to make a nuclear weapon, or the knowledge as to how to make a nuclear
weapon."
The Russians and Chinese view that as unrealistic; a senior Russian official
said it was time for a "détente" with Iran, drawing another term from the
cold war.
In Vienna, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the atomic agency, has
made it clear in conversations with diplomats that he believes pragmatism
will eventually dictate that Iran be allowed some limited form of
enrichment, monitored constantly by his agency.
But there is the fear - here, and in Vienna - that the I.A.E.A. is seeing
only part of the program, and that the evasive answers to its questions hide
a clandestine effort, somewhere under the desert. As Tehran restricts
international inspections, it will be harder to know whether its program
more closely resembles the very real one in Pakistan, whose scientists sold
technology to Iran, or the nuclear mirage in Iraq.
[David E. Sanger reported from Washington for this article, and Elaine
Sciolino from Vienna.]
© 2006 The International Herald Tribune
*
================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
List Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
Subscribe: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEVRNYHwEfpL2U00kRAsMjAJ9pEPE0LDRwRAzMMlMxbGdk+b24wACfdtwU
yBdKCIW6l+zihdaj78YQprE=
=6HDF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Iran Should Not Worry about the USA, Israel will take care of Business
- Next by Date: Iran the powerful?
- Previous by thread: @@ Le Figaro: Iran's powerful military will hit the U.S. hard @@
- Next by thread: Iran the powerful?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
