tagged w/ Nuclear Program
-
Around the world, the price of fuel seems to be going up everyday. The main reason for this price mark up is the rumors of war and the mass media’s effort to fuel the fire (no pun intended). Oil speculators are betting that Israel will strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in the near future. Also, they know that Iran is trying to block the Straits of Hormuz where most of the oil traffic is located. With all this developments in the Middle East region- no wonder oil speculators are jumping for joy. It’s like the Iraq War all over again.Around the world, the price of fuel seems to be going up everyday. The main reason for... more
-
-
The New York Times...
.
February 29, 2012
North Koreans Agree to Freeze Nuclear Work; U.S. to Give Aid
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and CHOE SANG-HUN
.
PHOTO:
Korean Central News Agency, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Kim Jong-un met with soldiers from the Korean People’s Army in southwestern North Korea in February.
.
WASHINGTON — North Korea announced on Wednesday that it would suspend its nuclear weapons tests and uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors to monitor activities at its main nuclear complex. The surprise announcement raised the possibility of ending a diplomatic impasse that has allowed the country’s nuclear program to continue for years without international oversight.
The Obama administration called the steps “important, if limited.” But the announcement seemed to signal that North Korea’s new leader, Kim Jong-un, is at least willing to consider a return to negotiations and to engage with the United States, which pledged in exchange to ship tons of food aid to the isolated, impoverished nation.
A freeze on nuclear activity, if it holds, could significantly ease anxieties over North Korea’s behavior at a time when the Obama administration, in an election year, is focused on halting Iran’s nuclear program and reducing the possibility that Israel could attack Iran. The last significant effort to negotiate a dismantling of North Korea’s nuclear weapons collapsed in the waning weeks of George W. Bush’s presidency more than three years ago.
The United States and other nations have been watching closely to see whether Mr. Kim’s rise to power late last year after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, would result in a change in North Korean behavior. The signals have been mixed. Only days ago, Mr. Kim delivered a bellicose speech suggesting that he could resort to military actions against South Korea as he consolidated his power.
North Korea also agreed to a moratorium on test launchings of long-range missiles, which have in the past inflamed tensions in the region. But joint statements by the State Department and North Korea’s official news agency gave no indication of when substantive negotiations over the country’s nuclear program — involving the United States and North Korea, along with Russia, China, Japan and South Korea — might begin again.
North Korea must first arrange with the International Atomic Energy Agency to send its nuclear inspectors, a process that officials said could raise new obstacles and take some time. And senior administration officials cautioned that North Korea still had to show its sincerity before broader discussions could resume. “We’ve made clear that we’re not interested in talks just for the sake and the form of talks,” a State Department official said.
North Korea has agreed in the past to halt its nuclear efforts, only to back out and then return to the table before breaking off talks once more with a flurry of accusations against the United States. The North Korean statement appeared to leave wiggle room for doing so again, saying the country would carry out the agreement only “as long as talks proceed fruitfully.”
“The United States, I will be quick to add, still has profound concerns,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said when she announced the agreement at a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Wednesday. “But on the occasion of Kim Jong-il’s death, I said that it is our hope that the new leadership will choose to guide their nation onto the path of peace by living up to its obligations. Today’s announcement represents a modest first step in the right direction.”
Officials and analysts offered different theories about why Mr. Kim’s government’s would agree now to allow inspectors to return, but most said it could prove to be a significant concession. After years of negotiations, North Korea expelled inspectors and went on to test nuclear devices in 2006 and 2009. American intelligence officials believe that the country has enough fuel for six to eight weapons, but the progress of its newly disclosed uranium-enrichment program at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, conducted without international scrutiny, remains unclear.
Victor Cha, a senior analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that the agreement announced Wednesday differed little from previous ones that had failed to produce breakthroughs, but that it was nonetheless significant because the return of inspectors could shed light on the country’s nuclear progress.
“We haven’t had any eyes on this program for over five years now,” Mr. Cha said in a telephone interview from South Korea’s capital, Seoul. Some analysts and officials said the agreement might signal that the young and inexperienced Mr. Kim had consolidated power and had the backing of his country’s military.
Although administration officials said it was too soon to draw conclusions about Mr. Kim’s intentions, they said there was no doubt that he had directly authorized his negotiators to reach the deal, which the United States first offered in talks last July. An agreement appeared close during a second round of talks, but then the elder Mr. Kim died.
Two days of talks in Beijing last week between American and North Korean negotiators, as well as the Chinese, initially appeared to have produced few concrete results. But after the North Koreans returned home, the country’s leaders unexpectedly and rapidly responded. “This was very much in motion before the leadership transition,” said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association in Washington, who called the agreement a welcome step.
Other analysts said the agreement allowed Mr. Kim to demonstrate his command and to use his early months in power to improve people’s lives after years of food shortages and a devastating famine. “It helps him show to his people that he is a leader who can deal with the Americans and bring back some practical benefits, namely the food aid,” said Kim Yong-hyun, an analyst at Dongguk University in Seoul.
As part of the agreement, the United States said it would send 240,000 metric tons (about 265,000 tons) of food, though it limited the aid to nutritional supplements, rather than the rice and grains that, as two administration officials said, has in previous instances been diverted by the government or the military, or even sold abroad.
The aid is expected to be delivered in monthly shipments of 20,000 metric tons over the next year. The United States also insisted on rigorous monitoring to ensure that the aid would be provided to the neediest, especially women and children, many of whom show the stunting effects of chronic malnutrition. In its statement, the State Department said that in exchange, the United States was “prepared to take steps to improve our bilateral relationship in the spirit of mutual respect for sovereignty and equality” and to allow cultural, educational and sports exchanges with North Korea.
The State Department official cautioned that the agreements “merely unlock the door” to a resumption of negotiations over North Korea’s nuclear program. “We can’t allow the same patterns of the past to repeat themselves,” the official added. “We can’t allow wasting arguments on topics that are irrelevant to the main challenges we face. And that’s simply going to take a long time to work out.”
.
Steven Lee Myers reported from Washington, and Choe Sang-Hun from Seoul, South Korea. Mark Landler contributed reporting from Washington.
.The New York Times...
.
February 29, 2012
North Koreans Agree to Freeze... more
-
-
The Ayatollah ordered the entire nuclear project to be closed down because it was the work of the devil
Turning round a story is one of the most difficult tasks in journalism – and rarely more so than in the case of Iran. Iran, the dark revolutionary Islamist menace. Shia Iran, protector and manipulator of World Terror, of Syria and Lebanon and Hamas and Hezbollah. Ahmadinejad, the Mad Caliph. And, of course, Nuclear Iran, preparing to destroy Israel in a mushroom cloud of anti-Semitic hatred, ready to close the Strait of Hormuz – the moment the West's (or Israel's) forces attack.
Given the nature of the theocratic regime, the repulsive suppression of its post-election opponents in 2009, not to mention its massive pools of oil, every attempt to inject common sense into the story also has to carry a medical health warning: no, of course Iran is not a nice place. But ...
Let's take the Israeli version which, despite constant proof that Israel's intelligence services are about as efficient as Syria's, goes on being trumpeted by its friends in the West, none more subservient than Western journalists. The Israeli President warns us now that Iran is on the cusp of producing a nuclear weapon. Heaven preserve us. Yet we reporters do not mention that Shimon Peres, as Israeli Prime Minister, said exactly the same thing in 1996. That was 16 years ago. And we do not recall that the current Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu, said in 1992 that Iran would have a nuclear bomb by 1999. That would be 13 years ago. Same old story.
In fact, we don't know that Iran really is building a nuclear weapon. And after Iraq, it's amazing that the old weapons of mass destruction details are popping with the same frequency as all the poppycock about Saddam's titanic arsenal. Not to mention the date problem. When did all this start? The Shah. The old boy wanted nuclear power. He even said he wanted a bomb because "the US and the Soviet Union had nuclear bombs" and no one objected. Europeans rushed to supply the dictator's wish. Siemens – not Russia – built the Bushehr nuclear facility.
And when Ayatollah Khomeini, Scourge of the West, Apostle of Shia Revolution, etc, took over Iran in 1979, he ordered the entire nuclear project to be closed down because it was "the work of the Devil". Only when Saddam invaded Iran – with our Western encouragement – and started using poison gas against the Iranians (chemical components arriving from the West, of course) was Khomeini persuaded to reopen it.
(click on the link for the complete article)The Ayatollah ordered the entire nuclear project to be closed down because it was the... more
-
-
Tehran, Iran - A devastating explosion that leveled a missile firing range near Iran’s capital city was caused by a waffle iron, rather than by sabotage which had first been feared.
The appliance short-circuited during a ballistics test, igniting the wrong end of a solid fuel rocket, according to an investigation by US intelligence operatives.
“The Iranians often use household items to activate their weapons systems because they have been shut out of the legitimate market for sophisticated electronic controls,” an unnamed CIA source said.
“In this case, it looks like someone tried to pour syrup on the waffle before it was out of the appliance. The end must’ve come as quite a shock.”
Iranian officials are disputing the finding, charging that America is covering up “the true cause of the test base explosion -- a lucky shot by a US Air Force drone.”
“My people aren’t even allowed to eat waffles,” said Maj. Sundra Dee, an Iranian security commander. “Pancakes, yes. French toast, okay. Maybe even the occasional bagel. But waffles, no way.”
A US State Department official disagreed. “We have been monitoring this site as part of our Waffles of Mass Distraction effort,” she said.
“The program encourages Iranians to eat a big breakfast. That makes them too sleepy to work on their nuclear missile project. In fact, most of them go straight back to bed, where they stay until lunch.”
Major Dee responded with outrage to the American claim. “The Americans are trying to turn my country into an International House of Pancakes. We will not permit it. We will fight back.”
Dee explained that before the explosion Iranian scientists have been close to developing intercontinental ballistic kebabs. “We are going to hit Col. Sanders right in the extra crispy. We shall see who’s going to win this food fight in the end.”
The State Department spokeswoman said the United States is confident that it will retain its advantage: “Breakfast continues to be the most important meal of the day. Would you like bacon with that?”Tehran, Iran - A devastating explosion that leveled a missile firing range near... more
-
-
The Tehran government confirmed on Tuesday that it has invited world powers and its allies in the Arab and developing world to tour Iranian nuclear sites before a high-profile meeting late January on its disputed nuclear program....
http://www.indiareport.com/India-usa-uk-news/ap/International/75521The Tehran government confirmed on Tuesday that it has invited world powers and its... more
-
-
- CNN Breaking News...
Report: Iran now nuclear self-sufficient
Report: Iran now able to process its own raw uranium
December 5th, 2010
04:56 AM ET
Iran now produces everything it needs for the nuclear fuel cycle, making its nuclear program self-sufficient, the head of the country's Atomic Energy Organization told state media Sunday.
The Islamic republic has begun producing yellowcake, Ali Akbar Salehi told Press TV.
Yellowcake is an intermediate stage in producing uranium ores, Press TV said.
The United States and its allies fear that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear bomb, but Iran has denied the allegations.- CNN Breaking News...
Report: Iran now nuclear self-sufficient
Report: Iran now... more
-
-
The lawmakers adopted the bill in response to the latest round of sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear programme by the United Nations Security Council, the United States and the European Union.
Tehran: Iran's parliament approved a law yesterday calling on the government to retaliate against any countries that inspect the Islamic state's ships and aircraft or refuse to provide fuel to its aircraft as part of foreign sanctions, the semi-official Fars news agency reported.
The lawmakers adopted the bill in response to the latest round of sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear programme by the United Nations Security Council, the United States and the European Union.
The bill included no details of what form retaliation should take, and it was not immediately clear if it was more than a symbolic gesture of protest against the sanctions.
Uranium supply
The legislation also made the government responsible for supplying adequate amounts of 20 per cent enriched uranium for Iran's nuclear research reactors for medical, industrial and scientific use, Fars said.
The UN Security Council imposed a fourth round of sanctions on Iran on June 9 over its disputed nuclear programme, and the United States and the European Union have imposed additional sanctions of their own.
Major powers suspect Iran is using its nuclear programme to develop atomic weapons, but Tehran says it is enriching uranium only for electricity generation.
Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, told reporters in Geneva "If they want to act illegally and inspect Iran's ships, then we will retaliate."
Retaliation
Larijani, formerly Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, did not say how Iran would retaliate for searches of its ships for suspected nuclear-linked material.
In Brussels, the European Union diplomats said that the foreign ministers will adopt tighter sanctions against Iran next week, including measures to block oil and gas investment and curtail its refining and natural gas capability.
A draft declaration prepared for a meeting of EU foreign ministers showed they would approve a decision taken by EU leaders on June 17 to adopt further sanctions over Tehran's nuclear programme, and also call on Iran to resume talks.
The measures, which go beyond steps approved by the United Nations on June 10, are designed to put pressure on Tehran to return to talks on its uranium enrichment programme which Western powers believe is designed to produce nuclear weapons.The lawmakers adopted the bill in response to the latest round of sanctions imposed on... more
-
-
A senior Iranian lawmaker says the new round of anti-Iran UN Security Council sanctions is an open declaration of war against Iran by the six major powers.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=134263§ionid=351020104
============================================================
In another article:
Netanyahu Pushes the United States to Make War on Iran: Will Obama Say No?
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's visit to the United States last week was capped off on Sunday with the broadcast of a previously-taped interview on Fox New Sunday. The interview covered a range of important topics, including the state of the U.S.-Israel relationship and prospects for Israeli-Palestinian peace. But it is the Prime Minister's remarks on Iran that deserve special attention -- for these remarks suggest that Netanyahu is embarked on an extremely dangerous course. Netanyahu is pushing the United States to take eventual military action against Iran.
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/leverett120710.htmlA senior Iranian lawmaker says the new round of anti-Iran UN Security Council... more
-
-
The Obama administration, seeking to build on the momentum of the Iran resolution passed last week by the United Nations, announced Wednesday that it had imposed sanctions on more than a dozen Iranian companies and individuals with links to the country’s nuclear and missile programs.
link : http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/world/middleeast/17sanctions.html?hpThe Obama administration, seeking to build on the momentum of the Iran resolution... more
-
-
suzane
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
-
-
eva2
-
added this
-
2 years ago
- |
-
heeeey, remember this? man haven't heard conservatives screaming about this in a while. Now of course, because of obama, the only real threat is from WITHIN the nation. I guess the truth is...anything the conservatives are scared of we can feel pretty secure about never actually having to worry about. For example, I never heard ANY fear about Bush.
...iiiiiiiiinteresting.
__________________________________________________________________________
VIENNA - Iran is not going to produce a nuclear weapon any time soon and the threat posed by its atomic program has been exaggerated, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said in a published interview.
The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.
Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there was no concrete evidence that Tehran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program.
"But somehow, many people are talking about how Iran's nuclear program is the greatest threat to the world. In many ways, I think the threat has been hyped," he told the specialist Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
ElBaradei said there was concern about Iran's future nuclear intentions and that the Islamic Republic needs to be more transparent with the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.
"But the idea that we'll wake up tomorrow and Iran will have a nuclear weapon is an idea that isn't supported by the facts as we have seen them so far," said ElBaradei, 67, who will step down in November after 12 years in office.
The interview was conducted in July but released late on Tuesday.heeeey, remember this? man haven't heard conservatives screaming about this in a... more
-
-
If Israel does attack Iran, the US is going to get blamed for it anyway, says former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton. Moreover, the worst outcome would be if an Israeli strike fails to destroy their nuclear program.
Seven years of failed diplomacy regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions has only put Tehran even further down the road towards nuclear development. John Bolton noted in an interview with RT that the international community is now facing two unappealing scenarios: either to use military force against Iran, or Israel faces the reality of Iran eventually possessing nuclear weapons – both of which are equally unattractive.If Israel does attack Iran, the US is going to get blamed for it anyway, says former... more
-
-
To be sure, the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program has been the focus of much international attention ever since it came to light in 2002, the sort of attention, of course, that has so far led to three devastating rounds of economic sanctions imposed on Iran by the United Nations Security Council. To be sure, the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program has been the focus of much... more
-
-
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Monday froze a lucrative civilian nuclear pact with Russia, the first big penalty imposed on Moscow after its war with Georgia but one that can be reversed.
"The president intends to notify Congress that he has today rescinded his prior determination regarding the U.S.-Russia agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation, the so-called 1-2-3 Agreement," said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
While Bush's decision to withdraw the agreement from congressional review was seen as punitive, it was also meant to preserve the deal, a senior U.S. official said.
That official said the administration wanted to ensure the accord did not go to a vote in Congress, where it could have been rejected following Russia's military action in Georgia. If rejected, it would be difficult for a new presidential administration to pursue the agreement in the future.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Monday froze a lucrative civilian... more
-
-
A U.S.-India nuclear deal faces its next hurdle this week when a multinational group that monitors sales of civilian nuclear technology takes it up, exposing the pact to close scrutiny.
The members of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group face an important challenge during their special plenary session Thursday and Friday in Vienna. India and the U.S. will ask the group to allow, for the first time, the transfer of nuclear technology to a country that hasn't signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
"India is the dossier everyone cares about," said a European diplomat familiar with the matter. "And India is asking the NSG to allow an exception to its guidelines."
The deal, which would see the U.S. supply India with nuclear fuel and technology for civilian purposes, got a boost in late July, when Indian President Manmohan Singh called a confidence vote in his government after left-wing allies withdrew their support, saying the deal was too favorable to U.S. interests. Mr. Singh's government won handily. This month, the board of governors of the United Nations' atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, unanimously approved an inspections agreement with India that was a crucial precondition to completing the pact.
Better access to nuclear power through the deal has been a key aim of the Congress party, which leads India's coalition government. Booming India needs to increase its power generation, and nuclear energy could offer price protection against the volatility of fossil fuels and help India reduce its reliance on more-polluting coal-fired power plants. The U.S., for its part, sees the nuclear pact as a way to create stronger ties with the South Asian nation and provide a counterweight to China's influence in the region.
A U.S.-India nuclear deal faces its next hurdle this week when a multinational group... more
-
-
ivxx
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Iran's response to an incentives package aimed at defusing a dispute over its nuclear program is unacceptable, U.S. officials said Tuesday, making the prospects of new sanctions against the country more likely.
The officials told The Associated Press that a one-page document Iran presented to European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana in Brussels is not, as had been sought, a definitive reply to the offer from major world powers to suspend uranium enrichment and reprocessing in exchange for economic and other benefits.
Instead, the officials said it was a restatement of Tehran's earlier insistance on the right to conduct peaceful nuclear activities and essentially a transcription of portions of recent telephone conversations to that effect between Solana and chief Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili.
One U.S. official familiar with the document described it as "more obfuscation and delay" and not a "real response" to the package, which was presented earlier this year by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany.
The officials, who said they were not surprised by the response, spoke on condition of anonymity because Solana's office has not yet characterized the Iranian reply.
In Brussels, an E.U. diplomat said the Iranian response would be analyzed and discussed "very soon" by Solana and senior diplomats from the six countries that made the offer - Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.
The State Department said those diplomats would hold a conference call on Wednesday to discuss the way ahead and the U.S. officials said a discussion of new sanctions on Iran could begin as early as then.
Shortly after Solana's office received the document and forwarded copies by e-mail to the six governments involved, the department said that anything less than full acceptance of the package would force the grouping, known as the P5-plus-1, to seek new sanctions against Iran.
"We are looking for a clear, positive response from Iran, and in the absence of that we're going to have no choice but to pursue further measures against them," said spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos.
The offer was reiterated to Iran on July 19, when senior diplomats from the six nations and the European Union met in person with Jalili to set an informal two-week deadline for Iran to either accept or reject it.
The meeting was notable because the Bush administration broke with its long-standing policy and sent the third-ranking State Department diplomat to the session aimed at proving its seriousness about the package.
The United States and others accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian atomic energy program. Iran denies the charge, insisting its program is peaceful, but it has thus far refused to halt enriching uranium, which can produce the ingredients for a bomb.
Iran is currently under three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions and could soon face a fourth unless it accepts the incentives package. In addition, the United States, the European Union and individual E.U. members have imposed their own unilateral sanctions against Iranian banks and other institutions.WASHINGTON (AP) -- Iran's response to an incentives package aimed at defusing a... more
-
-
ivxx
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
When it comes to observing US and international laws, treaties and norms, the Bush administration is a serial offender. Since 2001, it's:
-- spurned efforts for nuclear disarmament to advance its weapons program and retain current stockpiles;
-- renounced the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and asserted the right to develop and test new weapons;
-- abandoned the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) because it expressly forbids the development, testing and deployment of missile defenses like its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and other programs;
-- refuses to adopt a proposed Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) that would prohibit further weapons-grade uranium and plutonium production and prevent new nuclear weapons to be added to present stockpiles - already dangerously too high;
-- spends more on the military than the rest of the world combined plus multi-billions off-the-books, for secret programs, and for agencies like the CIA;
-- advocates preventive, preemptive and "proactive" wars globally with first-strike nuclear and other weapons under the nihilistic doctrines of "anticipatory self-defense" and remaking the world to be like America;
-- rescinded and subverted the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) to illegally develop new biowarfare weapons; in November 1969 and February 1970, Richard Nixon issued National Security Decision Memoranda (NSDM) 35 and 44; they renounced the use of lethal and other types of biological warfare and ordered existing weapons stockpiles destroyed, save for small amounts for research - a huge exploitable loophole; the Reagan and Clinton administrations took advantage; GHW Bush to a lesser degree;
-- GW Bush went further by renouncing the US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 that prohibits "the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons....;" on May 22, 1990, GHW Bush signed it into law to complete the 1972 Convention's implementation; what the father and Nixon established, GW Bush rendered null and void; "Rebuilding America's Defenses" is his central policy document for unchallengeable US hegemony; among other provisions, it illegally advocates advanced forms of biowarfare that can target specific genotypes - the genetic constitution of individual organisms.
* * * * *
Much more at link.When it comes to observing US and international laws, treaties and norms, the Bush... more
-
-
Excerpt:
Barack Obama said Friday that Iran should promptly accept an international call to freeze its uranium enrichment program, which some nations see as a potential step toward obtaining nuclear weapons, and not wait for the next US president.
The US presidential candidate met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris, where they discussed Iran, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, climate change and other issues.
Speaking later at a news conference, Obama said Iran should accept the proposals made by Sarkozy and other Western leaders. He urged Iran's leaders not to wait for the next U.S. president to push them "because the pressure, I think, is only going to build."
The United States and other Western nations accuse Iran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons and demand that it freeze its uranium enrichment program. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.
Obama said that he and Sarkozy agreed that Iran poses "an extraordinarily grave situation." He said the world must send "a clear message to Iran to end its illicit nuclear program."
* * * * *
Iran is a signatory of the Non Proliferation Treaty and has not broken it. Iran has always allowed IAEA inspections of its nuclear installations. The US, in spite of being a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty, has broken that treaty numerous times and won't allow IAEA inspections. Its nuclear program is totally illicit. Israel has refused to sign that treaty and won't allow IAEA inspections - its nuclear program too is totally illicit. Obama making such a statement is being totally hypocritical.Excerpt:
Barack Obama said Friday that Iran should promptly accept an international... more
-
-
Muhammad Sahimi: Has Iran answered the IAEA's questions about Pakistan's 'merchant of menace"? (Part 2 of 6)
"When the agency questioned Iran about it [a document from Kahn that pointed to the making of a nuclear weaopn], Iran responded that when they bought the technology for uranium enrichment from the A. Q. Khan network in Pakistan, for the network to sweeten the deal and get a better deal in the future, they also threw in this document without Iran asking for it. And Iran claimed that they actually haven't done anything with the document."Muhammad Sahimi: Has Iran answered the IAEA's questions about Pakistan's... more
-
-
Professor Muhammad Sahimi challenges assumptions about Iran's nuclear program.
"Iran wants to put itself in a position such that if an international crisis arises and there is an external threat to the national security of Iran, Iran can be in a position to make a nuclear weapon in an emergency as a deterrent against a foreign threat. Otherwise, Iran has no intention whatsoever of making a nuclear weapon, because Iranian leaders are fully aware that if they cross the line and somehow they make nuclear weapon, that will start a very bad nuclear arms race in the Middle East, which will ultimately will not be in Iran's benefit or in any body's benefit in that region."
Muhammad Sahimi is the NIOC Chair in petroleum engineering and professor of chemical engineering & materials science at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. In addition to his scientific research, which has resulted in over 270 published papers and five books, Muhammad has written extensively on Iran's political development and its nuclear program. In particular, Muhammad has concentrated on the legal and technical aspects of the dispute between Iran and the Western powers regarding Iran's nuclear energy program. He is a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an organization dedicated to making the public aware of the dangers of weapons of mass destruction, as well as polluting the environment.Professor Muhammad Sahimi challenges assumptions about Iran's nuclear program.... more
-
