06 October 2008

Iran will continue with uranium enrichment even if the country is promised supplies of nuclear reactor fuel, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said on Sunday.

Iran's "unchangeable policy is to be self-sufficient in fuel production for (nuclear) plants," Mottaki told reporters. "We are determined to continue peaceful nuclear work until reaching full self-sufficiency."

The minister was asked whether the Islamic republic would suspend uranium enrichment if it received international guarantees of a fuel supply.

Mottaki said Iran cannot rely on assurances by world powers and most notably the United States, which have not delivered on their nuclear contracts with Iran made before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Washington and its Western allies accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program, while they have never presented any corroborative evidence to substantiate their allegations. Iran denies the charges and insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.

Despite the rules enshrined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) entitling every member state, including Iran, to the right of uranium enrichment, Tehran is now under three rounds of UN Security Council sanctions for turning down West's illegitimate calls to give up its right of uranium enrichment.

Tehran has dismissed West's demands as politically tainted and illogical, stressing that sanctions and pressures merely consolidate Iranians' national resolve to continue the path.

Iran insists that it should continue enriching uranium because it needs to provide fuel to a 300-megawatt light-water reactor it is building in the southwestern town of Darkhoveyn as well as its first nuclear power plant in the southern port city of Bushehr.

Iran currently suffers from an electricity shortage that has forced the country into adopting a rationing program by scheduling power outages - of up to two hours a day - across both urban and rural areas.

Iran plans to construct additional nuclear power plants to provide for the electricity needs of its growing population.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), was quoted as saying in Brussels last Thursday that Iran might end its uranium enrichment program if there was a "legally-binding instrument for assurance of supply."

An Iranian official on Sunday criticized a nuclear deal due to be signed between the United States and India, saying that such cooperation violates the NPT, which India has refused to sign.

"This manner of transferring nuclear technology to non-NPT members will promote double standards," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, told the Islamic republic news agency.

Such cooperation will inevitably "present the international community with new crises," he said.

India and the US promised on Saturday soon to sign a pact offering India access to sophisticated US technology and cheap atomic energy in return for New Delhi allowing UN inspections of some of its civilian nuclear facilities.

Political observers believe that the United States has remained at loggerheads with Iran mainly over the independent and home-grown nature of Tehran's nuclear technology, which gives the Islamic Republic the potential to turn into a world power and a role model for other third-world countries. Washington has laid much pressure on Iran to make it give up the most sensitive and advanced part of the technology, which is uranium enrichment, a process used for producing nuclear fuel for power plants.

Washington's push for additional UN penalties contradicts a recent report by 16 US intelligence bodies that endorsed the civilian nature of Iran's programs. Following the US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) and similar reports by the IAEA head - one in November and the other one in February - which praised Iran's truthfulness about key aspects of its past nuclear activities and announced settlement of outstanding issues with Tehran, any effort to impose further sanctions on Iran seems to be completely irrational.

The February report by the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, praised Iran's cooperation in clearing up all of the past questions over its nuclear program, vindicating Iran's nuclear program and leaving no justification for any new UN sanctions.

The UN nuclear watchdog has so far carried out at least 14 surprise inspections of Iran's nuclear sites so far, but found nothing to support West's allegations.

Also in his latest report to the 35-nation Board of Governors, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei confirmed "the non-diversion" of nuclear material in Iran and added that the agency had found no "components of a nuclear weapon" or "related nuclear physics studies" in the country.

The IAEA report confirmed that Iran has managed to enrich uranium-235 to a level 'less than 5 percent.' Such a rate is consistent with the construction of a nuclear power plant. Nuclear arms production, meanwhile, requires an enrichment level of above 90 percent.

The Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog continues snap inspections of Iranian nuclear sites and has reported that all "declared nuclear material in Iran has been accounted for, and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities."

Many world nations have called the UN Security Council pressure against Iran unjustified, especially in the wake of recent IAEA reports, stressing that Tehran's case should be normalized and returned to the UN nuclear watchdog due to the Islamic Republic's increased cooperation with the agency.

Observers believe that the shift of policy by the White House to send William Burns - the third highest-ranking diplomat in the US - to the latest round of Iran-West talks happened after Bush's attempt to rally international pressure against Iran lost steam due to the growing international vigilance.

Read the rest of Graham Allison's essay here.

The vote was 82-0 with 13 abstentions but disenchantment reigned after days of wrangling between Israel and Western nations on one hand and Arab and Islamic states on the other that polarized a body that normally operates on consensus.

The rare ballot at the weeklong annual assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency was non-binding but highlighted deep tensions over Israel's presumed nuclear might and shunning of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).  A similar resolution a year ago passed overwhelmingly last year but with 47 abstentions by Western and developing nations.

To get broader approval this year, sponsor Egypt deleted clauses urging all Middle East nations not to make or test nuclear arms or let them be deployed on their soil, and big nuclear arms powers not to foil such steps.  But efforts to achieve consensus were torpedoed by competing Israeli and Arab additions, which included -- respectively -- urging all regional states to comply with obligations to the NPT and all nations to accede to the global treaty.      …

But almost all Arab League states stalked out of the Vienna assembly hall before the vote over Israeli-sponsored amendments pushed through by Western states in paragraph-by-paragraph votes earlier, changes the Arabs felt weakened the measure.

"How could we approve a call on us all to obey our international obligations when Israel itself refuses to adhere to any non-proliferation standards. This undermines the IAEA's credibility," one Arab diplomat told Reuters.

A senior Western diplomat countered: "The call for compliance with obligations was a (key) change from versions of this resolution in previous years in that it is a clear signal to Iran and Syria."

Iran and Syria, both NPT members, are under IAEA investigation over suspicions of covert intentions to make atomic bombs. They deny the allegations.

Despite approval of the resolution, diplomats on both sides spoke of being bloodied by bad-faith haggling that had caused an unprecedented poisoning of the atmosphere at an IAEA gathering.

"It has been a circus, the worst conference in the history of the IAEA. I've never seen such animosity. But it reflects the unilateral character of the age we are living in, plus the lack of a true peace process," said a European diplomat.

Approving the resolution were virtually all Western states, a handful of Asian, Latin American and African countries plus Iran and Egypt from the Islamic world. Abstainers included Israel, chief ally the United States, and Syria, a foe of both.     …

Near the end of the meeting later in the day, a second Middle East resolution revived by Arabs to brand "Israel's nuclear capabilities" a threat was kept from a floor vote by a Western-backed "no-action" motion carried by a 46-43 margin.

The same measure at last year's assembly was hastily shelved by the Arabs in the face of a similar blocking maneuver.   

Iran’s official response (1 October)  to the 15 September 2008 IAEA Safeguards report      

NPR interview with David Baer

Robert Baer, a former CIA spook, is interviewed by Terry Gross regarding his new book on Iran, "The Devil We Know."  You may have some issues with what he said, but it's a remarkably clear eyed interveiw.   Baer tthinks that while Iran is after a nuclear bomb, it would be folly for the US or Israel to go to war over it.

by: J. Sri Raman, t r u t h o u t | Perspective, October 3, 2008

Activists shout slogans during a protest in New Delhi against the Indo-US nuclear deal. (Photo: Reuters)

»

The UN nuclear assembly on Saturday passed a resolution urging all Middle East nations to renounce aspirations to build nuclear bombs in a vote most Arabs boycotted over amendments they felt took pressure off Israel.

The rare vote was 82-0 with 13 abstentions after days of wrangling between Israel and Western nations on one side of the spectrum and between Arab and Islamic states on the other, polarizing a body that normally operates on consensus.

The decision at the annual assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency was non-binding but highlighted deep tensions over Israel's presumed nuclear might and avoiding of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

A similar resolution a year ago passed overwhelmingly last year but with 47 abstentions by Western and developing nations.

To get broader approval this year, sponsor Egypt deleted clauses urging all Middle East nations not to make or test nuclear arms or let them be deployed on their soil, and big nuclear arms powers not to foil such steps.

But efforts to achieve consensus were torpedoed by competing Israeli and Arab additions, which included -- respectively -- urging all regional states to comply with obligations to the NPT and all nations to accede to the global treaty.

Entitled "Application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East", the resolution also underlined the importance of a - as yet rocky - peace process between Israel and Arabs in establishing a nuclear weapons-free zone (NWFZ) in the region.

Arab Walkout

Almost all Arab League states stalked out of the Vienna assembly hall before the vote over Israeli-sponsored amendments pushed through by Western states in paragraph-by-paragraph votes earlier, changes the Arab felt weakened the measure.

"How could we approve a call on us all to obey our international obligations when Israel itself refuses to adhere to any non-proliferation standards. This undermines the IAEA's credibility?" one Arab diplomat told Reuters.

Other diplomats on both side spoke of an unprecedented poisoning of the atmosphere, lack of trust and double-dealing in negotiations at an IAEA gathering.

"It has been a circus, the worst conference in the history of the IAEA. I've never seen such animosity. But it reflects the unilateral character of the age we are living in, plus the lack of a true peace process," said a European diplomat.

Approving the resolution were all European states, a handful of Asian, Latin American and African countries plus Iran and Egypt from the Islamic world. Abstainers included Israel, its chief ally the United States, and Syria.

Iran and Syria are under IAEA investigation over suspicions of covert ambitions to make atom bombs. They deny such intent.

Israel is widely assumed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, though it has never confirmed or denied it.

Israel has said that while a NWFZ was a commendable ideal, it is not feasible as long as some Arab neighbors continue to refuse to recognize the Jewish state, with Islamist Iran openly calling for its elimination.

Arab diplomats point to a chronic imbalance of power in the Middle East caused by Israeli might and say it breeds instability and spurs others to seek mass-destruction weaponry.

Ref: Haaretz

It’s raining cats and dogs in Stockholm. The trees are changing colors rapidly now. It has already been snowing in the north.

It’s autumn in The Paradise.

There is an interview with former Secretary General of UN, Mr. Kofi Annan in Dagens Nyheter Sweden’s major daily quality newspaper.  He pointed at the fact that the present crisis on the financial markets in US and as it looks also in other parts of the world could lead to a loss of thrust from third world countries.

Countries like USA and other large economies have often been active in demanding safe and sound financial operations from the third world in order to get their economies working. Now it looks that some countries could have needed a slurp or two of that medicine themselves.

This is a major problem in the world.

I read that the IAEA conference of 145 states indirectly criticized Israel for their refusal to put their atomic program under international control.

What is it with that country? Do they belong to a superior race that can do whatever they wish and laugh in the face of the rest of the world? It is time somebody grabs their ear and twists it good while telling them that if they want to be a part of the international community they also have to contribute.

The world is very sorry and fell ashamed for what happened in Nazi Germany to the Jewish people but it does not put Israel as a state above the rest of us.

The conference shows that more and more countries are in favor of a Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle East, but that includes  the land Israel. Jimmy Carter, the former president of USA told the public in May that Israel have 150 atomic bombs. 150!

To me the Iranian president Ahmadinejad is a clown, but a dangerous one because he is right about Israel’s attitude when it comes to their atomic program.

Both Israel and Iran has the right to produce electrical power through Nuclear Power. But they have no right whatsoever to start a nuclear war or even create uncertainty that undermines stability. Some of the Israeli officials has exactly the same ignorant attitude that we see on the Iranian side.

If the nuclear scientist David Albright is right,  are the Iranians not far from having the capacity to build a bomb and they already acquired for example the Hot Isostatic presses that is used for configuration of the atomic bombs vital parts. This equipment is used for the final assembly of the nuke head. This equipment was also found in Iraq after the first Gulf war and IAEA cut the presses in pieces.

I can not see any solution of the upcoming nuclear treat, a treat that is not only limited to Israel and Iran, it will go far beyond that. But it is naïve to believe that the international community could success with double standards one more time.

I think it’s time to rethink on a number of fields. Why should Ivory Coast be transparent when this emerging financial crisis could start without anybody saying very much?

Trustworthiness has unfortunately became a rarely seen commodity at the world market. It’s time to change that.

Israel: North Korea adds to Mideast proliferation

Note: Additional copies of the DVD (see below) will be available throughout October, at times and locations to be announced.

Before I begin, I want to thank everybody here for coming out to get involved in the political process. What makes this country great is the ability to express a range of opinions, and debate their merits freely, without fear of governmental reprisal. While I find myself at odds with most of those that have spoken so far, I am glad that they have had an opportunity to disseminate their opinion, and I am thankful to granted that very same opportunity. Today, I am speaking on behalf of the Conservative Leadership Association, which is a non-partisan campus organization designed to give voice to our school's tiny conservative population. As one might expect, there are a range of views held by members, so I ask that you keep in mind that whatever I say, even if supported by the vast majority of the membership, does not necessarily reflect the opinions of everybody involved. I therefore ask that any issue you may choose to take with my speech is directed to me and me alone.

With that said, I will now be speaking about...

The Iranian Threat

On November 4, 1979, militant Islamists stormed the US embassy in Iran, taking hostage American civilians for 444 days. It was a symbolic gesture to the West, signaling the end of the status quo, now that an Islamic revolution had taken place in Iran. The moderate, pro-Western Shah that we had, up until Jimmy Carter, extended support to, was removed from power, and replaced by a hardline theocratic government. A state that had broken ground in the Muslim world by recognizing Israel and ending the oppression of women was, in a matter of months, destroyed. The Iran that could've been a stabilizing force in the region and a loyal American ally may exist in the hearts and minds of a tiny section of the present-day population that is fed up with the Islamist leadership. But, those are not the people in power there, making the decisions that impact American security, and the security of our allies. Rather, it is the freedom-hating, tyrannical religious regime that has spent nearly three decades in power that we must now confront. Present day Iran is one of our greatest security threats, and has been since November 4, 1979.

The ideological origins of present-day Iran come primarily from two sources. First is the Koran and other Islamic religious scholarship, which they interpret in the most hard line and extreme fashion possible. Second is the concept of Gharbzadegi, a term coined by the famed Iranian socialist Jalal Al-e-Ahmad. Translated to English, this roughly means Occidentosis, or as he explained, the loss of Iranian culture to the West by the adoption of foreign values. But what are these values being objected to? For starters, the equal treatment of men and women. As the Koran makes clear in Surah 2 verse 282, a woman is worth half what a man is. Such a concept is present in Sharia law, which requires four male witnesses to validate the claim of rape. Should a woman fail to produce that, she may be charged with having extramarital sex, and find herself subject to punishment or even death. Another of these supposedly Western values that the Iranian theocrats reject is the legal protection of homosexuals. Iranian legal code indicates that one found guilty of being gay may be executed. And indeed, the state has done exactly that. Since the start of the Islamic revolution there have been at least 110 recorded cases of public execution, often times by the barbaric method of stoning, for those found guilty of engaging in homosexual activity. Their justification is again based in the Koran, where such acts are condemned at least four separate times, and where the notion of savagely killing those who disobey Allah is frequently re-iterated.

But, of states governed by irrational, hateful ideologies, what makes Iran a special case? It is that, rather than confine its insane policies to its own boarders, Iran foments the flames of Islamic jihad and anti-Western violence around the world. Close partnership with anti-American socialists in Latin America like Hugo Chavez and Evo Moralas are alarming enough. But Iran has made every effort to provide the support needed to a range of terrorist groups that seek the annihilation of the United States, the broader Western World, and our Israeli allies.

Part of the Hezbollah charter says, “As for our culture, it is based on the Holy Quran, the Sunna and the legal rulings of the faqih who is our source of imitation.” And what is Faqih? It is an Islamic religious principal that says the heads of state must be scholars of Islam, and set national policy in accordance with Sharia law and the Koran. The concept was first resurrected and put into practice by Ayatollah Khomeini to justify the Islamic Revolution of Iran. It is found in the Hezbollah charter because, while the leadership presently claims to accept Lebanon's multi-faith composition, it originally sought the creation of a Shia Islamic Republic similar to that which is found in Iran. Even if the organization has permanently abandoned this goal for an Islamist Lebanon, they have not abandoned the Iranian proclivity towards violence. During the 1980s, they carried out more than three dozen terrorist attacks, claiming more than 650 lives, including 241 Americans in the 1983 Beruit Marine Barracks boming and another 17 when they bombed our local embassy that same year.

Hezbollah has not stopped since then. Indeed, they attempted to attack the American embassy again earlier this year. Of course, their actions are not limited to attacks on Americans, but world Jewry. I speak not only of the frequent and illegal attacks against Israel, but of their charter's calls to destroy Israel, which mirror those from the Iranian government. And, I must also note their involvement in bombing a Jewish community center in Argentina that killed 85, which was done in collaboration with Iran. The highly advanced weapons used by Hezbollah during the 2006 Summer War they started against Israel, and the battlefield guidance by high ranking military officials, both came from Iran. Indeed, according to military intelligence, it would appear that Hezbollah now has long-range missiles from Iran, capable of hitting any major city inside Israel's borders. Is there any doubt that if Iran goes nuclear they'll have access to that technology as well?

And, alarming a prospect as it is, a nuclear Iran is a very real possibility unless immediate action is taken. Five years of negotiation by the EU-3 have only given the Iranian more time to build their covert weapons program. Information leaked from an IAEA report earlier this month indicates that Iran has attempted to fit their long range missiles to be capable of carrying a nuclear payload, and have activated an additional 500 nuclear centrifuges since May, bringing the total to over 3800 active centrifuges.

Some undoubtedly believe the regime has peaceful intentions for this technology, and claim it is acting in accordance with international law. But the IAEA information on their missile program would seem to indicate otherwise. And certainly the statements coming from the regime display an incredible bloodlust and an interest in obliterating their enemies through any means possible. I do not regard references to the United States and Israel and the 'Great and Little' Satans to be anything more than regional posturing; rhetoric designed to rally the base. But they have made some very real, very alarming statements regarding their ambitions. In several instances, Mahmoud Achmadinejad has threatened to wipe our closest ally and important regional partner Israel off the map. Even if we accept the translation advanced by the Iranian apologists, and acknowledge that he was instead seeking the elimination of the so called “Zionist Regime” rather than the land itself, we must put in the context of his wish to give that entire land to Muslims. His statement therefore still requires that he slaughter millions of Israeli Jews in some fashion or another. And that is simply not acceptable.

Achmadinejad dreams of another Holocaust, as do the religious authorities who outrank him in Iran. At present, they threaten our allies, and the provide support to groups that threaten our own security. To let the situation become worse by allowing Iran to go nuclear is too risky. We, as a nation, must wake up and face the Iranian threat while time is still on our side!

I would like to close by asking you to stick around and see Dr. Richard Swier of the Florida Security Council speak at 6:40 about national security,. I would further suggest those of you who've not yet seen the groundbreaking documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West pick up a copy of the DVD, which my organization, the Conservative Leadership Association, in partnership with the Florida Security Council and the Watch Obsession campaign is providing free of charge (over there –point to table). 

With China dismantled and USSR dissolved, two superpowers has been removed from the mission radar; and with allies well under my control, it is time to stamp-out other threats to the mission. Following the 9/11 event, the right of passage to invade any potential threat is deemed endorsed under the ‘war against terrorism'.

So, who shall I invade this time...?

Candidate country must be a weak, preferably third world yet rich with natural resources, particularly huge OIL Reserves. With Afghanistan and Iraq out of the way, scanning the mission radar has highlighted a country by the name of Iran. In my Mayhem series, I have mentioned that:

• Continuous twitching into Iran's affairs by the U.S. using IAEA and U.N. as conduits has gone deeper.
• Countries like Pakistan and Syria are next on the invasion radarscope.
• Israel's archangel, the United States has often used its veto power to block anti-Israel resolutions or to play down any defiance to UN resolutions by Israel.

Despite continuous Iran's claim that nuclear program is for good cause, United States and its allies fear the enrichment program could be used to produce a nuclear bomb, and the U.N. has demanded Iran suspend the program. Similar to  the point put forward by Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, that the U.S. will only ‘pick-and-choose' what they want to discuss (regardless of others), Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that the US tries to make the extensive road of cooperation between Iran and the IAEA a one-way street. 

So-called expert now claims that Iran is close to nuclear weapon capability within 2 to 5 years. However, this we have heard over too many times even during the Reagan's administration. Quoting the earlier report, in 1984, the Reagan administration warned that Tehran would have the capability to build a weapon within two to three years. Eight years later, in 1992, the CIA predicted nuclear weapons in Iranian hands by 2000. Gregory L. Schulte, U.S. ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said in late 2006 that the soonest Iran could produce a weapon is 2010 to 2015. Last year, ElBaradei said Tehran was "three to eight years away even if Iran wants to have a weapon."

Don't you think is purely a propaganda by the U.S. to instill unnecessary & unfounded fears amongst the world population and to ‘legitimize' the invasion of Iran?

Spicing up the ‘legitimacy' for any invasion, Syria, an ally of Iran, which is the subject of a much longer-running, and now stalled, IAEA investigation in also under scrutiny as reported by Reuters.
Adding the surrealism to the fabricated threats and fears, AFP reported Israel will install two massive radar antennae near the Dimona nuclear plant to bolster its defence measures against Iran. This was purposely done is to ‘hype-up' the propaganda fabricated by her archangel, United States. Israel whose legitimate existence has never been accepted by the neighbors continuously creates ‘sparks' within the region and has been defying ALL U.N. Security Council resolutions without any reprimand. In separate report by AP, Israel now accused North Korea of supplying at least half a dozen rogue Mideast regimes with nuclear technology or conventional arms.

I don't see any global stability not in the near future as long as there is no equitable power distribution the across the globe, but rather dominated by singular superpower with few of the allies. My guess, such journey is still far-fetched as human greed continues to plough this earth. Despite the current threat to the U.S. economy, I can see that, US will pursue their Iran invasion campaign with Russia and North Korea dragged into the entanglement, and Pakistan and Syria be next on the queue.

"However, this cooperation will not be in any way at the expense of disclosing our military sites or causing a threat to our national security," Othman said. >>>>>

Ali-Asghar Soltanieh (IRNA)02 October 2008

Iran's Representative to the IAEA Ali-Asghar Soltanieh said on Thursday that since mutual talks between Iran and IAEA on guaranteeing fuel recycle have failed, Iran has no alternative but to continue uranium enrichment independently and generate fuel cycle.

Talks between Iran and IAEA on generating nuclear fuel started in 1987, he said.

Iran's envoy made the remarks in a meeting hosted by European Security Institute (ESI) in Vienna on Thursday.

Iran is to continue enriching uranium while there is no legally-binding international assurance of a nuclear fuel supply, he said, adding that the West has not remained committed to its pledges in the past and Iran should continue with uranium enrichment and there is no technical or legal justification to halt it.

All countries should take part in talks on guaranteeing nuclear fuel supply, he underlined.

"If other countries would like to enter into the business, they should put forward their proposal on supply of nuclear fuel or construction of nuclear power plants through tenders," he said, adding that it is necessary to save nuclear fuel supply for emergency cases.

Former head of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission Hans Blix as another lecturer in the meeting said that talks on nuclear fuel supply and guaranteeing nuclear fuel supply failed in 1980s.

Elsewhere in his remarks, he said during his tenure at IAEA, the US prevented delivery of nuclear fuel to Iran.

Due to lack of confidence on the part of the West, Iran is entitled to act according to NPT's letter of association and make use of its undeniable rights, he said.

He called for settlement of Iran's nuclear issue through peaceful means.

30 September 2008

Iran’s envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency declared on Monday that Tehran will not allow the agency to continue to threaten Iran’s national security.

In dealing with Iran’s nuclear dossier, the IAEA has tried to turn Iran’s voluntary actions into ‘legal commitments’ and by entering into the domain of Iran’s conventional military activities has gone beyond its mandate, and at the “behest of certain Western members of the Board of Governors, it has threatened the national security of Iran, and the Islamic Republic of Iran will not allow this process to continue,” Ali Asghar Soltanieh stated at the annual IAEA general assembly meeting in Vienna on Monday.

In some cases, the agency is used as a tool through the interference of certain Western countries, especially the U.S., in the work of the IAEA secretariat, which undermines the authority and neutrality of the IAEA, he added.

He went on to say that “political motivations” are behind the interference in the activities of the agency.

There is always great concern about access to nuclear fuel to run atomic reactors, Iran’s ambassador to the IAEA pointed out.

“The absence of any enforceable legal document to ensure access to a nuclear fuel supply is a reality which no one can deny.”

No country would ever take the risk of spending billions of dollars to construct nuclear power plants without a guarantee of a nuclear fuel supply, Soltanieh noted.

And this is the reason why Iran was forced to initiate a program to produce its own nuclear fuel, the diplomat explained.

Iran’s nuclear power plant in Bushehr was supposed to become operational three years ago, but the process has been delayed up to now because certain parties reneged on their legal commitments and promises, but no country or organization is prepared to compensate for the losses incurred due to the delay, he stated.

Iran plans to produce 20,000 megawatts of nuclear power and has invited every country to make bids for the projects, he added.

• Liberalizing the economy in the 90s as Finance Minister with Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao.

• Breaking the shackles of nuclear isolation in 2008

Its an envious stature for a person who was always mentioned as the "reluctant PM" unlike so many of his detractors and rivals who believe the PM's post is god given for them.

Encyclopedias of data are around to stress either sides of the nuclear deal.  Only time will tell who was right or wrong. As of now, let's see how this deal will affect India.

The deal with the US entails India to continue with its dual path of nuclear technology; for both military as well as civilian uses (energy, medical, space etc).  The nuclear reactors for civilian purposes will be open to IAEA inspections.  The reactors meant for military purposes will be out of bounds for the IAEA. India can buy / tie-up for nuclear material and technology from any country.   In fact, India has already signed a treaty with France that has given it unlimited access to technology as well as reprocessing of the spent fuel.  A similar deal with Russia is expected to be signed when the Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev visits India in December. India can still pursue its nuclear weapons technology without any hindrance. In short, the world now, has the 6^th declared nuclear power in the form of India.

If India explodes a nuclear bomb (for testing purposes)

The US will stop all nuclear co-operation.  India will have to return all the fuel given to it till then.  There will be a one year cooling down period where both parties (India & USA) will talk, deliberate and break heads on how to go along or if not they should part.  During this one year period, if they reach a deal, they continue or else its all over between them.

How does this affect India's deal with France (already signed, details yet to be released) or Russia (details of which will be available only after the December signing), will be only known in some time to come.

India's position on nuclear testing

Soon after the nuclear testing in 1998, the Vajpayee led BJP government declared a unilateral moratorium over further testing.  The Vajpayee government assured the world, that it would keep its promise of keeping a lid on further testing.  So, that demolishes all the opposition that BJP has over testing.  The Congress government has merely reiterated what the BJP government had proclaimed in 1998.  Its an accepted fact that India no longer needs any more testing (according to scientists and the party in power in 1998).  Any more noise that the BJP makes over this issue is just plain politicking which can be ignored.

Economic benefits for India due to the nuclear deal

• The agreement could open up around $27 billion in investments in 18-20 nuclear plants over the next 15 years, according to the Confederation of Indian Industry.

• By 2030, the overall economic benefits that will accrue to India's economy as a result of nuclear trade could touch $500 billion, says Imagindia Institute, an Indian lobby group.

• The deal is expected to double nuclear power's share in India's electricity supply to five to seven per cent in the next two decades.

• With nuclear fuel in short supply, India's nuclear power plants are running at 55 per cent of their capacity of about 4,000 megawatts.

• India's electricity supply, about 15 per cent short of demand in peak hours, will get a boost after the deal, but any new nuclear power plant may take a decade to be completed, leaving the country dependent of coal and liquid fuels.

• Indian media say the country's monopoly Nuclear Power Corp has tentatively picked four suppliers, including US-based Westinghouse Electric and France's Areva, for planned new projects. Westinghouse is a unit of Toshiba Corp. Areva said on Monday that it hoped to sign a contract with Indian authorities to deliver two advanced EPR reactors.

• India is also reported to be negotiating with General Electric, Hitachi and Russia's atomic energy agency Rosatom.

• Russia is already building two 1,000 megawatt reactors at Kudankulam in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu as part of a deal signed in 1988. Indian officials say the two countries will begin discussions on a multi-billion dollar agreement to build four more nuclear reactors in Kudankulam which has been delayed because of international restrictions against New Delhi. Russian nuclear reactors cost up to $2 billion each but India could expect to get a hefty discount on such a major deal, as Russia competes with the United States for influence in India.

Above info courtesy: IBNlive

This is not to count the approximate generation capacity of 60,000 MW of power by nuclear means by the year 2030 and the billions of dollars of technology exchange between India and the other countries in Space technology, Medicine, Science and other high tech industries.

Why is the Left against the deal?

Simply because their masters in China have paid them to behave that way.  The Left (CPI – CPM) never had any issues with China being a nuclear power or their nuclear testing. They sided with China during the 1962 war.  Its just natural that the mongrel is being faithful to the master.  The Commies have problems with everything US and when asked why they were not complaining against the Indian deal with France, they had no comments.  That simply shows how hollow their ideology is.  They love to oppose for the sake of opposing.

Why is BJP against the deal?

Because they just cant believe that a person who was so reluctant to be the Prime Minister has pulled off the deal.  Its a known fact that the BJP was on the verge of signing the NPT deal and giving away the nuclear sovereignty on a platter.  Even though the BJP was in power when the nuclear testing happened, its the Manmohan Singh government that has brought India out of a 34 year nuclear isolation.  They simply can’t accept the fact that their Iron man (sic) LK Advani, the perennial PM in waiting couldn’t get a chance to negotiate the deal.  Its a plain and simple case of the fox that didnt get the grapes and declared it sour.

Why the SP is in favour of this deal?

The Amar Singh - Mulayam Singh combo of Samajwadi Party needed someone to cling on to.  The Mayawati government was hot on the heels of the SP duo in UP fostering cases of corruption against them, hence the temporary deal with Congress.

So, will the Congress win the elections on this issue?

NO.  They wont.  The Indian electorate still loves mandir, masjid, gurudwara, church, SC, ST, OBC, hindutva, swadeshi, sycophancy, religion, region, family kinda politics.  And then they wonder why the country is so screwed up.

+++

He actually seems surprised to discover that nations like Iran and Saddam-era Iraq would try to hide their nuclear programs. Say it ain’t so, Mohamed!

Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the crux of the problem was that some countries under investigation, the latest being Syria, had failed to ratify an agency protocol permitting short-notice IAEA visits to sites not declared to be nuclear to ensure no bomb-related work was going on at secret locations.

“Our legal authority is very limited. With Iraq, we have discovered that unless we have the Additional Protocol in place, we will not really be able to discover undeclared activities,” he said on the sidelines of the agency’s annual 145-nation General Conference in Vienna.

“Our experience is that any proliferator will not really go for declared diverted activities (that would quickly reveal them as violators of the Non-Proliferation Treaty), they will go for completely clandestine undeclared activities,” he said.

(Hat tip:Chas)

Iran would consider stopping sensitive uranium enrichment if guaranteed a supply of nuclear fuel from abroad, an Iranian official suggested on Thursday.

For that to happen, U.N. inspectors would have to verify Iran's disputed nuclear programme is wholly peaceful and a range of international sanctions against Tehran be lifted. There is little prospect of either on the horizon.  Iran has previously brushed off big power offers of an assured foreign fuel supply, possibly via a production centre under the impartial control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), if it renounced enrichment.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, said the reason why the Islamic Republic was enriching uranium was the lack of an legally binding international accord on security of fuel supply.  Asked if with such a deal Iran would shelve enrichment, he said that arrangement would be a first step but it would have to be implemented, and Iran would need to retain some enrichment as a contingency in case supplies were cut.

"This is a first step ..., then the next step is to see it really implemented," he told reporters at a Brussels conference.  If this were carried out, "then Iran would be able to reconsider the position that we have now. The situation would be different, we would have to see," Soltanieh said.  "Plus every country has to be cautious to have as a contingency plan a fuel reserve in case of interruption."

There have been countless other suggestions along the way.  A major caveat is the complex multi-cameral quality of the Iranian foreign policy apparatus.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mottaki emphasized at a Thursday conference that there were limits to Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA:

Iran will not be dragged down an 'unending road' in dealings with the U.N. atomic watchdog, Iran's foreign minister said on Thursday, adding Washington was perpetuating a 'huge lie' about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Speaking at a think tank in New York, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki reiterated Tehran's position that it would press ahead with its nuclear program and had no ambition to build an atomic bomb. He added that it had cooperated with the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Former U.S. weapons inspector to Iraq David Kay said yesterday that Iran was still “two to five years” out from building a bomb, although it is unclear what precise data he is relying on.  Unfortunately, he is a believer that Iran is intent to build one.

Kay, who led the Iraq Survey Group from 2003 until early 2004, said the U.S. should line up international support to pressure Iran to give up on a nuclear weapon, while also preparing for the strong possibility that effort will fail. Preparations could include offering security guarantees to Iran's neighbors and shoring up Middle East stability and economic growth.

Iran is 80 percent of the way to a nuclear weapon, Kay estimates, but the last 20 percent of development is the most difficult. He noted that Iran has worked on the program for 20 years without successfully producing a weapon.

"You've got a clear record of country that is damned determined at some point to develop nuclear weapons," Kay said in a talk at the Nixon Center. "The real question to ask is, `What are the political strategies we can follow now that can lessen the impact?'" of a nuclear Iran.

Iran denies it is seeking a weapon or hiding a bomb program behind its known drive to perfect nuclear technology that could be used to produce electricity. Estimates of Iran's progress vary. Western intelligence agencies generally agree that if Iran chose to, it could field a nuclear device within a few years. Iran has accelerated its uranium enrichment program this year.

"My personal guess is they are two to five years away from having a sufficient amount of fissile material and weapon design work to put them in a place where you believe they have the capability of putting a warhead on the end of a missile," Kay said.

Kay said there is "virtually no possibility" Iran will give up its uranium enrichment program, which can be used to fuel civilian reactors for domestic energy use as well as make fissile material for warheads.

More ammo for the hawks.

From the Café Orwell

The real reason for this post is to impose snippets of postmodern Western kultur on the unsuspecting progressive public.  Like cockroaches, I am confident these sacred relics will be the sole artifacts to survive a nuclear holocaust. 

So, without further ado, here is our future president Sarah Palin playing the flute at a Miss Alaska talent contest.  She lost, blessings be to Allah.  It is to die....

Dear All,

Greetings. I hope you are continuing to enjoy the summer. My summer has turned out to be as lively as the academic year usually is. Let me briefly report.

* Last week I got together with my undergraduate classmates in a Shiraz University reunion held in San Diego! San Diego and Shiraz are both beautiful cities, in different ways. We had a panel organized on Rumi's poetry. Besides that, I read poetry to music.

* Another exciting piece of news is that I have accepted to be the honorary Co-Chair of a vibrant emerging organization called "Iranians For Peace" (IFP). Our Board consist of five very able and dedicated women of Iranian heritage (more to be added). The main goal of this non-partisan group is to prevent war through promoting peaceful cultural education on Iran. On some level, this is what I have been engaged in for a sometime. These windows are an example of that. I hope you get a chance to visit our website, stay abreast of the activities, and provide us with your support: http://www.iraniansforpeace.net.

|

* On the subject of my summer activities, let me give the links to two articles which I have recently published. On July 16, I had an editorial in the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the link is: "A 21st-century warning from a 13th-century poet."

* And on August 2nd, I had a piece published in the online newsletter Counterpunch: http://www.counterpunch.org/keshavarz08022008.html.  I hope you find them useful!

Who Are Iranian Americans?

* Enough of my activities. Many Americans are working hard to bring about an understanding of the diversity of Iranians in Iran and in the US. Watch this fascinating clip which was sent to me by my friend, and a board member of the IFP, Leila Zand: http://www.searchles.com/channels/show/4563 (or view below!).
|

|

What do Do Iran and America Exchange?

* Sometimes it appears that Iran and the U.S. only trade harsh political attacks. The truth is more interesting exchanges take place as well, but somehow do not qualify as news. Once I reported in these windows that the American women softball team was in Iran for a match with their Iranian counterparts. A lot of you were surprised. Well, here is another fun headline which does not make it to your evening news: An Isfahani young man, Arsalan Kazemi, the first Iranian to get an NCAA scholarship to play basketball in the US. Take a look at him in action. Thanks to my friend Omid Safi who has shared this interesting piece of news: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/luke_winn/07/15/kazemi/index.html

* Before I put the finishing touches to this window, I recieved a great clip from another friend Ladan Foroughi-Hedayati related to the subject of Iranian basketball. It is an MSNBC report on the recent visit of the Iranian Basketball team to the U.S. The report is great in showing a side of Iran that we rarely see in our media here. However, sadly, the report follows the general tradition of connecting all Iran related news to the American hostages. We even listen to President Bush declaring Iran to be a member of the axis of evil before we see a few minutes of the game. The formula prevents one from seeing the humanity or normality of Iran because we are first told about all the possible differences, disagreements, and political conflicts. Still, I hope you enjoy the basketball part: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25796284#25796284.

Current Issues

* Speaking of political conflict, despite the apparent calm, the predictions concerning the Iran/US relations are not hopeful. What you hear in the mainstream media is that Iran is about to turn down the EU package of incentives and there should be more UN sanctions. However, the view from the other side is different. Take a look at this article discussing the views of Francis Boyle, the influential intentional lawyer, to get a different perspective on the situation: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/07/29/10672/.

* There is an interesting clip, that my friend Bahar Bastani sent this week. It highlights a part of the famous interview that Mr. Mike Wallace conducted with President Ahmadinejad which has not been included in the official broadcast of the interview. Since Mr. Ahmadinejad 's words are often used as justification for sanctions or possible attacks on Iran, it is important to know exactly what he has said regardless of our personal interpretations of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onNzrNEFs1E (or view it below!).

|

|
* And there is yet more grim news from Mr. Seymour Hersh. This is his latest reference to a strong tendency among certain members of the current U.S. administration to create a clash that would lead to a war with Iran. Matt Miller has kindly shared this piece with me. Thanks Matt! http://www.truthout.org/article/hersh-cheney-plan-creating-false-flag-attack
|

The Amazing Paintings of Iman Maleki

* If you are familiar with Persian culture, or have been following these windows regularly, you know that painting is among the most popular art forms in Iran. I have usually been sending you paintings of Iranian women, in part because it counters the myth that they are subjugated, inactive, or unable to express their creative talents. In this window, however, I want to introduce the works of young man, an amazing master painter whose works have been getting him international fame in the recent years, Iman Maleki (1976-). Maleki has experimented with a variety of styles but he is mostly a realist whose works have a strong cultural flavor. Click here to see a slide show of some of his tremendous work: Iman Maleki Paintings. Enjoy!

I hope you enjoy this window.

Until the next one,
I Wish you all the Best,
Fatemeh
===================================
Fatemeh Keshavarz, Professor and Chair
Dept. of Asian and Near Eastern Languages and Literatures
Washington University in St. Louis
Honorary Co-Chair, Iranians For Peace
Tel: (314) 935-5156
Fax: (314) 935-4399
==================================

From Bloomberg:

"There is a lot of interest on the part of extremist groups to obtain nuclear material,'' ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in Vienna during the annual conference of the 145 nations in the IAEA. "It's the No. 1 security threat right now.''

Nightmare #2: But the IAEA can't do anything about it because the UN nuclear agency is out of cash. “I must stand here today and let you know that all is not well with the IAEA," ElBaradei said.

That's pretty bad news, considering the threats this agency is meant to address [See Nightmares 1 through 8].

But do not despair, for a new organization has been set up to thwart nuclear proliferation to terrorist groups. The World Institute for Nuclear Security (WINS), the brainchild of the Washington-based Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), will bring together nuclear security experts, the nuclear industry, governments and international organisations, said NTI head and former US senator Sam Nunn.
It will provide a forum for collecting and sharing information and best security practices so that dangerous materials can be kept out of terrorists' hands.

But there is a catch, and with it, Nightmare #3: WINS, which will be based in Vienna and will have an initial staff of around five, will work closely with the UN atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Five people? Only five? How many terrorists are trying to get their hands on a nuclear bomb? Less than 5, more than 10? Are five people enough to stop them? And working with the cash-strapped IAEA? Is that a sound decision?

But there is light at the end of the tunnel: WINS is starting with donations of $6m and planned to expand to a staff of around 10 in "a couple of years". [To keep pace with the terrorists].

Fourth Nightmare: Not only does ElBaradei's agency not have any money to do its job, it can't even do its job with the money it does have, and lacks the tools to expose secret nuclear work.

ElBaradei said the crux of the problem was that some countries under investigation, the latest being Syria, had failed to ratify an agency protocol permitting short-notice IAEA visits to sites not declared to be nuclear to ensure no bomb-related work was going on at secret locations.

Which leads straight to:

Nightmare #5: Syria is making a serious play for a seat on the IAEA Board of Governors.

From Reuters:
"Syria said on Tuesday it would pursue its bid for a seat on the U.N. nuclear watchdog's governing body despite U.S.-led opposition to Damascus, which is under investigation for alleged covert atomic work."

Syria on the Board of Governors of the IAEA? That sounds almost as implausible as Libya chairing the UN Human Rights Commission. Wait a minute, hold on, that actually did happen.

Nightmare #6: Right after Syria makes its IAEA bid, Israeli security sources tell A Shark-al Awsat that Israel believes Syria has resumed its nuclear program with the intention of attaining nuclear weapons along the Iranian model.

According to the report, Israeli military officials are concerned that Syria hopes to construct a number of nuclear facilities across the country simultaneously.

I wonder if the timing of the Israeli briefing to the Arab newspaper has anything to do with an Israeli attempt to thwart Syria's bid for an IAEA chair.

Nightmare #7 for ElBaradei: He told his board of directors that the nuclear inspectors' point man in Syria had been assassinated, according to The Los Angeles Times blog.

"ElBaradei's cryptic comment came at the end of his presentation, when he suddenly said the agency's "interlocutor" in Damascus had been killed. He didn't elaborate, But his statement implied that this killing had slowed down the IAEA's investigation into U.S. and Israeli allegations that Syria was building a plutonium factory out in its eastern hinterlands with the help of North Korean engineers.

Speculation in Vienna was that ElBaradei must have been talking about the assassination of Brig. Gen. Mohammed Suleiman, at a beach resort in the northern port city of Tartus, in early August."

Good thing that Iran withdrew its candidacy for an IAEA chair, because it is on a path to nuclear weapons [Nightmare #8]: ElBaradei was quoted in the Friday edition of the Sueddeutsche Zeitung daily as saying that there is "a whole list of countries that posses the ingredients to assemble an atomic weapon in a matter of a few months, that possess fissile material or the technical means to create it."
"Iran is also on this path," the paper quoted El-Baradei as saying.

Nightmare #9: This from the Washington Post:
"North Korea asked international nuclear inspectors yesterday to remove surveillance cameras and seals from the deactivated reactor at Yongbyon, amid rising concerns that the diplomatic deal to dismantle the country's nuclear weapons program might be unraveling."

I wonder how Mr. ElBaradei is sleeping this week.

Since 2002 when details of Iran's nuclear program first came to light there has been much talk on the part of Western politicians and journalists about the need to prevent the regime from developing uranium enrichment and other technology that could potentially be used in military applications.

As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), under which all nations are guaranteed the right to enrich uranium to a level needed to make fuel for nuclear power, Iran is obliged to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA). However for the first 18 years of existence Iran's nuclear program remained a secret and no IAEA inspections were carried out, a fact which more than any other has caused the Iranian regime to be viewed as untrustworthy by the West.

What most Western commentators fail to understand is that Iran might have had a very good reason for not openly declaring the existence of its nuclear program, when you consider the fate of the nuclear reactor at Osiraq in neighbouring Iraq which was completely obliterated without warning by the Israeli air-force in 1981 - in accordance with Israel's policy of preventing any Muslim nation from acquiring nuclear capability, however peaceful. Indeed, as one of Israel's own leading military historians, Martin van Creveld put it: "Obviously, we don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons and I don't know if they're developing them, but if they're not developing them, they're crazy."

Meanwhile the state of Israel itself not only has nuclear weapons but has consistently refused to sign up to the NPT.

Since 2003 Iran has allowed unprecedented access to the IAEA inspection teams (when was the last time the nuclear programs of the Western imperialist powers were subject to this kind of scrutiny?), however in the case of Iran it would seem that there is a double standard at work here.

The Iranian government, we are repeatedly being told, has crossed "crossed the line" by deciding to end the freeze on its nuclear activities which it had itself voluntarily imposed during negotiations with the European Union from November 2004 until late 2005. It was only after those negotiations collapsed, essentially over the EU's insistence that Iran import all of its fuel for nuclear power generation from the West and abandon any attempt at self-sufficiency, that the decision to reopen the Natanz facility was taken.

Since late 2005 Iran has been locked in a standoff with the West over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment and implement the so-called "Additional Protocol" which would allow IAEA inspectors to carry out their inspections without giving any prior notification (again, something that it would be very hard to imagine any Western government permitting on its territory).

There remain strong suspicions that despite its declarations to the contrary the Iranian regime is in fact trying to develop nuclear weapons technology, although both the IAEA and US intelligence agencies have so far failed to find any conclusive evidence of this. In fact, the most recent US National Intelligence Estimate (from December 2007) stated with "moderate-to-high confidence" that Iran currently does not currently have any nuclear weapons although it insisted that the Iranian regime is still looking to develop them in the medium to long term.

Meanwhile between December 2006 and March 2007 the United Nations passed a number of sanctions against Iran, mainly targeting the sale of nuclear-related technology as well as the offshore assets of the state bank Sepah.

In March this year additional harsher sanctions were introduced which banned the sale of any items which could have a potential military application as well as mandating inspections of all goods being shipped in or out of the country. More Iranian banks have also had their offshore assets frozen and visa bans have been imposed on many Iranian government officials.

All of these sanctions were supported by the New Zealand government.

More recently the US and its allies have been calling for even tougher sanctions which will affect not just the Iranian regime but also the people of Iran themselves, while also brandishing the threat of military strikes.

As I have already pointed out, the hypocrisy of the Western campaign against Iran's nuclear program alone makes the moral case for sanctions highly dubious (especially since the US just concluded an agreement for the sale of nuclear technology to India, which unlike Iran has a confirmed nuclear weapons program and is not even a signatory to the NPT!).

But a more fundamental question which deserves to be asked is will such sanctions (with or without the added inducement of US air strikes) actually do anything to weaken the position of the undoubtedly reactionary and unpleasant regime in Tehran? Unfortunately many leftists who have few illusions in the democratic credentials of governments such as those of Israel and the US seem inclined to support Western intervention against Iran on the grounds that it will weaken or even topple the theocratic Iranian regime and create a space for trade unions and other "civil society" to flourish.

However the experience of the last five years has been exactly opposite - in response to the deteriorating economic and political situation in Iran the "moderate" (i.e. liberal capitalist) wing of the theocratic regime represented by Mohammad Khatami which drew most of its support from the bazaari merchant class has been shunted aside by the more hard-line elements represented by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad whose powerbase lies in the state security apparatus.

With the imposition of UN sanctions and the threat of foreign invasion in the air the government of Ahmadinejad has been given the perfect pretext to brutally repress all domestic dissent in the name of "national security". Strikes such as those of the 3000 workers employed by the Vahed bus company in Tehran who wanted to form an independent trade union have been met with scores of arrests and the indefinite detention and torture of the strike leaders.

Likewise the student movement in Iran which since the defeat of Khatami has become increasingly radicalised has also come under intense persecution. Following a December 2007 protest to mark the anniversary of the deaths of several revolutionary student martyrs at the hands of the Shah's royalist forces in 1953 over 60 student leaders were arrested and several of the most prominent charged with "plotting against the Islamic regime". In a number of cases the prosecution has argued that the student movement activists are acting in concert with and accepting money from Western governments, hoping to discredit them.

The job of the Iranian revolutionary left and working class activists is thus made all the more difficult by the atmosphere of permanent siege created by Western attempts to meddle in the domestic politics of Iran. This situation has obvious parallels with the way in which the war with Iraq in the 1980s was used by Ayatollah Khomeini to justify the suppression of the shoras or workers councils which had been the original driving force behind the 1979 revolution before it was hijacked by the Islamists, as well as the executions of thousands of members of communist groups such as the Tudeh Party, Fedayeen and the supporters of the Trotskyist Fourth International who were seen as rivals for the leadership of the revolution.

As Iranian Marxist Torab Saleth points out in a recent interview in our paper The Spark, the 1^st Persian Gulf conflict was openly welcomed by Khomeini as a "godsend" as it was

...under that war the theocracy established itself. [Now with] ...the threat of this new one it is defending its life against the rising tide of the revolution and adjusting the levers of power in its favour.

The radical left in Iran is rebuilding its forces, with groups such as Iranian Students for Freedom and Equality providing the driving force behind the protests of last December. Much of their popularity derives from the fact that unlike other forces opposed to the Islamic regime they have not allowed themselves to be compromised by accepting dirty money from the CIA or other Western sources, as unfortunately happened to the Fedayeen guerrillas based in Kurdistan during the 1980s or the Peoples' Mujahedeen. However the tighter the imperialist encirclement of Iran becomes the easier it will be for the Islamic regime to find a pretext to jail and put to death these courageous activists.

Here in New Zealand the task for the left must therefore be to oppose all imperialist sanctions and military intervention against Iran while at the same time extending avoiding falling into the trap of becoming apologists for the mullahs. Already organisations such as Hands Off the People of Iran which brings together Western and exiled Iranian leftists are playing a vital function in providing a welcome "third camp" and counterpoint to the lesser-evilism of those leftists who advocate a simple choice between Washington DC and Tehran. It is our clear and obvious duty to join with these efforts in arguing that the emancipation of the Iranian people is a task that belongs to the Iranian workers and students themselves, and to extend our full political and practical solidarity to our Iranian comrades wherever possible.

  If I could figure out how to import .wav files into this blog, I’d include a flushing toilet.

I am not talking about the US economy (at least for now), but rather the IAEA Safeguard Agreement with Iran.  There are now plenty of danger signals that both the US and Iran have now “had it” with the IAEA and are now prepared to let the chips fall where they made.

Most significant is Iran, who is sounding more and more like it did when it withdrew from the Paris Agreement (by which it voluntarily suspended enrichment) and Additional Protocol at the end of 2005.  This precipitated the UN Security Council resolution of 2006 and the threats of war which have continued to today. 

Iran has not exactly helped its case, and there are a dwindling number of sympathetic ears to its right to defy the Security Council.  “Transparency” is not an easy term to translate, and simply crying ‘forgery’ every time the US pulls another document out of its ass is not a viable long-term strategy.  Nor are the frequent military maneuvers and missile launches designed to soften up middle roaders in Europe and Asia (of course, the US does them too).   

The Islamic Republic News Agency reported on Tuesday that:

A member of Majlis presiding board Mousa Ghorbani said on Tuesday that Iran is most likely to revise its cooperation with IAEA.

Speaking to IRNA on the sidelines of Majlis open session on Tuesday, he said the recent reports of IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei and the UNSC indicate that the West lacks good-will towards Iran despite the fact that the country has had very extensive cooperation with IAEA.

"Unfortunately, the officials of those bodies who are under pressure of the US have provided the West with various excuses to this effect, therefore under such circumstances continuation of cooperation with IAEA beyond legal framework is of no use any more," said the MP.  The latest UNSC resolution against Iran has raised this question among Iran's political circles that how long such fruitless cooperation with IAEA should continue and for the same reasons it is heard that such cooperation with IAEA should be limited, he said.

"To show its good-will, Iran provided the IAEA inspectors with full access to its nuclear sites and this trend is expected to be revised because it seems that IAEA has turned into a political puppet in the hands of the US and UK. So Iranian MPs call for revision of such cooperation," he underlined.   Iran is no longer to abide by Modality Plan, he said, adding that the country is to give a swift response to UNSC resolution.

The “Modality Plan” was worked out between the IAEA and Iran in August 2007.  Its collapse would likely trigger a wave of Western sanctions.   

And back at the IAEA …..

  IAEA Director General ElBaradei presented a somber statement to the IAEA General Conference on Monday, entitled “IAEA at a crossroads.”  He described the IAEA as short on funds, people and challenged on a number of fronts, not simply Iran. 

On Iran, Dr. ElBaradei stated: 

Six years have elapsed since the Agency began intensive work aimed at clarifying Iran´s nuclear programme. Substantial progress has been made, especially regarding the scope and nature of Iran´s uranium enrichment programme. We have been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran.

However, I regret that we are still not in a position to make progress regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran. Although Iran has so far produced only a limited quantity of low enriched uranium, which remains under Agency safeguards, this is still a cause for concern for the international community in the absence of full clarity about Iran´s past and present nuclear programme. This concern has been expressed by the Board of Governors and in a number of Security Council resolutions.

I urge Iran to implement all the transparency measures, including the additional protocol, required to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear programme at the earliest possible date. This will be good for Iran, good for the Middle East region and good for the whole world.

Note: he makes is no reference to an Iranian  nuclear weapons program.  Period.   He confirms the non-diversion of nuclear material and that Iran is only enriching to LEU levels.  This is not the stuff with which wars are made.

And what of the declared nuclear weapons states?  Dr. ElBaradei had this to say:

In connection with safeguards, I should note that nuclear disarmament, the core of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has been on the back burner for far too long. As the Commission says, "States must recommit to the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons." The Commission notes that the IAEA is not the lead Agency for nuclear disarmament, but adds: "Progress towards disarmament, or the lack of it, will deeply affect the success of the IAEA´s non-proliferation mission." One of the Commission members, former Senator Sam Nunn, put it succinctly when he said: "Whenever non-proliferation is discussed, nuclear disarmament is the elephant in the corner that´s hard to ignore."

 Quite right. 

Dear All,

I hope you are having a great summer. The St. Louis weather has been exceptionally cooperating -- so far. For those of you who are experiencing a hot summer, I will start this window with a cooling visual delight from Iran:

Frozen Waterfall

* Last winter, in the province of Khorasan in North East of Iran, a huge waterfall froze. Behnaz Seyedi, a female Iranian photographer, took advantage of the natual art display and took the following photographs. Please click here: Frozen Waterfall of Khorasan. Enjoy!

|

Iranian Women Inventors Shining in International Competition!

* Bagging 12 gold, five silver and six bronze medals, Iranian women inventors gained the first place among 25 countries participating at the international event, held in the South Korean capital of Seoul from May 8 to 10, 2008. Among their inventions: surgical equipments and electricity generators. In this prestigious international event, Iranian female inventors competed with participants from 25 countries including France, Switzerland, Japan, Romania, and Australia and got the first place. For the full article please visit: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=168969.

* The above news contradicts the images often circulating on the internet depicting Iranian women in frightening conditions. Please don't get me wrong, there are a few items on the Iranian constitution which I would like to see changed. However, much of the "information" circulating about Iranian women on the web and in the popular media is often grossly inaccurate because it is published without proper scrutiny and verification. Basically, negative news comes across as "most probably true" and therefore not necessary to be questioned. Let me give you an example, an excruciating image showing the process of burying a woman from waist down in the ground to be stoned to death circulated on the web. When the Iranian President visited Columbia University, the image was enlarged and carried by some protesters. It has now turned out to be a scene from a movie called "The Stone."

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

Time out with Art work by Iranian Women

* Enjoying creativity of artists has a great healing quality. Let us move on from the fictional "stoning" image to actual art work by Iranian women, their creativity with clay. Here is an exhibit of amazing pottery work by Iranian women. Click on the link below...and enjoy: http://www.jadidonline.com/images/stories/flash_multimedia/Women_sofalgari_eng_test/sofalgari_high.html.

|

Current Events

* The past ten days or so have been tense and rather worrisome with fiery statements and grim predictions of a possible military assault on Iran by the United States and/or Israel. Cooler heads seem to be at work to insert a note of sanity into the discussion.

* For those who think U.S. and Israel have no choice but attack Iran, I recommend a very insightful recent article written by Shlomo Ben-Ami, vice president of the Toledo International Center for Peace and former foreign minister of Israel and Trita Parsi president of the National Iranian American Council and author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the US. The article, published yesterday in the Christian Science Monitor is titled: "The alternative to an Israeli attack on Iran." Here is the link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0702/p09s01-coop.html.

* Iranian top politicians sound more positive in the past couple of days as well. In an interview with the Associated Press, the Iranian Foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Iran was considering the package presented by the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana on behalf of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany. He praised as "very constructive" Solano's response to Iran's proposals on the subject. Mottaki said he saw "significant capacities" being explored in the latest round of talks that were not present earlier. Mr. Mottaki is in New York for talks at the United Nations. He hinted there has been diplomatic progress on easing tensions with the West at a time of heightened concern. To read the full interview, visit: http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/5474.

* The truth is neither war nor sanctions solve problems. They both kill innocent individuals, and