Is Iran telling the truth about nuclear program?
How Pakistan is helping IAEA investigate Iran's nuclear intentions.
In a move that could lead to a breakthrough in the investigation of Iran's nuclear program, two senior Pakistani Army officers delivered
uranium enrichment components for analysis by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna "in order to establish whether traces of weapons-grade uranium found in Iran match that on the Pakistani equipment." The
Guardian reports that Pakistan has resisted cooperating with the IAEA until now.
If the IAEA does find matching traces, it could confirm Iran's statements that it was not manufacturing weapons grade uranium, but had imported it " via a Pakistan-based network trading in nuclear technology." That network has since been exposed and shut down by Pakistani and US authorities.
The discovery of the weapons-grade traces almost two years ago was one of the most startling discoveries in the Iranian investigation. Inspectors no longer believe that Tehran produced the material. But if the Pakistani and Iranian traces do not match, the finding will throw open the possibility that Iran obtained nuclear equipment from another, as yet unknown, source.
The
BBC reports that a spokesman for the IAEA said the investigation
will not target Pakistan's nuclear program.
The Financial Times writes that the decision by Iran to continue the suspension of its uranium processing, and the US's decision to remove its objections to Iran joining the World Trade Organization are positive developments that give the world "a useful pause" in which the US and the EU must
cobble together a policy towards Iran that "has a chance of success."
Furthermore, Iran has some reason to be confident of its position. It has played the Europeans and Americans off against each other quite well. After the Afghanistan and Iraq wars it is surrounded by American forces. But the US is bogged down in Iraq whereas, politically, Shiite Iran has broken out, with a Shia-dominated government in Baghdad that is changing the balance of power in the Middle East. Moreover, while it is clear Washington has a pronounced attitude towards Iran, it is not evident it has a plausible policy.
So, the news is not all that good after all. That can change if the US goes beyond tacitly supporting the EU initiative and formally associates with it. The goal would be to circumscribe Iran's nuclear activities tightly, while addressing Tehran's legitimate security concerns. That does not offer the clear result Washington would wish for, but does it really have any alternative?
The Daily Telegraph also writes in support of the pause brought about by Iran's agreement on the suspension of nuclear activities. But this brief respite, it argues, doesn't change
the facts on the ground.
These are that, since the time of the Shah, Iran has sought to become a nuclear weapons power and thereby dominate the Gulf; that for nearly 20 years it has pursued a covert program in defiance of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; and that the ultimate goal of the moderates within the regime is the normalization of relations with Washington, a fact that weakens the EU's leverage as mediator. In an opinion piece in the
Guardian, columnist Martin Wollocott argues that even if Iran did have "the bomb" it really won't matter much to anyone because it is highly unlikely it would be used as anything but a deterrent, since the response to its use would be overwhelming. But, American leaders
have another agenda when it comes to Iran, an agenda that may ultimately separate them from their European allies, including Britain.
That is, first, because the inescapable fact is that Iran would not be in breach of its treaty obligations, at least not immediately. And, second, because the Europeans do not see Iranian nuclear weapons capacity as a catastrophe in the way that the Bush administration does. Shaped as it is by men who want to reverse the defeats of their youth, among which the Iranian revolution and the consequent seizure of American diplomatic hostages stands high, Bush's men want to see the Tehran regime gone from the world stage, not emboldened by the acquisition of nuclear weapons. A new survey released Thursday by
InterMedia, a Washington DC-based polling firm, shows that a solid majority of Iranians support their government's development of nuclear weapons technology. Intermedia found that 55 percent of the 2,001 Iranians randomly polled by phone
support the government, while 46 percent strongly support the government's program.
"Despite the U.S. perception that a nuclear Iran is a threat to American and global interests, Iranians themselves are motivated to support this program for various reasons," said Dr. Haleh Vaziri, InterMedia's Regional Research Manager for the Middle East and North Africa. "Some of these reasons are national and regional in scope: nuclear weapons are seen as potential symbols of national pride. They would also affirm what many in Iran believe, that the country deserves a place as a recognized regional power. Finally, some think the country needs a nuclear arsenal for deterrence in what is a dangerous neighborhood." Meanwhile the
Chinese People's Daily Online reported Thursday that Iranian leaders accused the US of promoting regime change in their country by
promoting ethnic and racial strife. The report notes that on April 11, the US State Department said that it had "earmarked 3 million US dollars to 'promote democracy in Iran,' a move criticized by Tehran as 'interfering in Iran's internal affairs.' "
Also...
•
Iran leader urges anti-US vote (
CNN)
•
Iran: An economy on the move? (
BBC)
•
Iranians are divided over much, but not over the nuclear issue (
Daily Star, Lebanon)
•
UN: Palestinian jobless rate reaches record high (
Ha'aretz, Israel)
•
She says she wants a revolution (
Ha'aretz)
•
Anti-Mubarak protesters beaten in Cairo (
Los Angeles Times)
• Feedback appreciated. E-mail
Tom Regan
.
|
RSS feed