Posted on 08/10/2004 4:56:49 PM PDT by Clive
Iran has issued an extraordinary list of demands to Britain and other European countries, telling them to provide advanced nuclear technology, conventional weapons and a security guarantee against nuclear attack by Israel.
Teheran's request, said by British officials to have "gone down very badly", sharply raises the stakes in the crisis over Iran's nuclear programme, which Britain and America believe is aimed at making an atomic bomb.
Iran's move came during crisis talks in Paris this month with senior diplomats from Britain, France and Germany.
The "EU-3" were trying to convince Iranian officials to honour an earlier deal to suspend its controversial uranium enrichment programme, which is ostensibly designed to make fuel for nuclear power stations but could also be used to make fissile material for nuclear bombs. Iranian officials refused point-blank to comply, saying they had every right under international law to pursue "peaceful" nuclear technology.
They then stunned the Europeans by presenting a letter setting out their own demands.
Iran said the EU-3 should support Iran's quest for "advanced (nuclear) technology, including those with dual use" - a reference to equipment that has both civilian and military applications.
The Europeans should "remove impediments" preventing Iran from having such technology, and stick to these commitments even if faced with "legal (or) political . . . limitations", an allusion to American pressure or even future international sanctions against Iran.
More astonishingly, Iran said the EU-3 should agree to meet Iran's requirements for conventional weapons and even "provide security assurances" against a nuclear attack on Iran.
This is a reference to Israel's nuclear arsenal, believed to include some 200 warheads and long-range missiles to deliver them.
The EU-3 are still debating over how to respond, but British officials said the Iranian letter was "extremely surprising, given the delicate state of process". Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, will have to decide whether to adopt a more confrontational policy.
America is demanding that the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which meets next month, refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. US officials are also openly discussing "covert" means of disrupting the Iranian nuclear programme, while Israel has openly threatened military action.
However, there were signs yesterday that the next report of Mohammed ElBaradei, the IAEA director general, may give Iran a boost.
A key mystery for the past year has been the source of traces of highly-enriched uranium (HEU) found by IAEA inspectors at several sites in Iran. Teheran claimed this was "contamination" of equipment imported from other countries, rather than proof that it had secretly made HEU.
According to diplomats, inspectors have confirmed that in at least one case the contamination did come from Pakistan, as Iran claimed.
Other contamination issues remain unresolved, and may never be settled. Moreover there are several other open questions.
The Saudi Arabians announced today that they are upping their daily production. I was running the vacuum cleaner and didn't turn it off in time to hear the exact number - but it's a hefty one if I caught what I thought I heard.
At the same time, Pres. Bush is socking away 100,000 barrels of oil daily - just to have a nice supply to release in case it has to. Plus our Navy and AF, okay, our Military happen to need that fuel if we get into a squeeze play.
The White House had to warn Israel off. North Korea is currently testing missiles that have the range to hit Israel.
If Israel gets into the fray, kaboom! It gets hit from multiple sources.
The ME is blowing up, bigtime. This is no joke. The Arabs are seeing independence coming into Afghanistan, soon to include Iraq and they just can't have that. They will do anything to stop it, including under the table funding of Iran.
India has bought every piece of ship material that Russia has been willing to sell: aircraft carriers, subs, destroyers. Granted they are all going through retrofit because Russia isn't so stupid that they are going to leave the electronics on the ships/boats/jets. But still, a growing Navy in India, which Pakistan will feel obligated to follow, rumors that Saudi Arabia thinks they, too, need a Navy - and we are heading for a mess at sea. Add to that our "littoral" problem, the fact that Anti-Submarine Warfare was dismantled after the fall of the Soviet Union and is only spinning up now, with no new systems being built, and systems that were used that could be brought back online aren't being worked on because "they" don't know about them (don't you just love the comparmentalization of clearance, where if you haven't got the right tickets, you can't find out what used to exist or what some other branch of the Military had? Yeah, great.) and we are so screwed in this department, it makes me sick to my stomach.
Here we are, fighting over whether there should be a DNI or DIN or not, and we don't have the capability at sea and Intel that we used to have when we had to worry about Ivan. Now that it's Ahmed and Akbar, we are in a tough place.
This nation simply cannot afford to have sKerry win. We are so screwed if he gets the White House. And sadly, 50% or more of the population of the US hasn't a clue and will vote either for "anybody but Bush" or how they are told by their union bosses to vote, or even worse, won't bother to go to the polls at all, believing, wrongly, that it just doesn't matter.
If you haven't volunteered for the Bush/Cheney campaign yet, I hope that this article is the impetus to get you off of your butt and out there, walking the streets, putting up signs, writing letters and making phone calls.
What excellent analyasis, Truthie. I am most impressed.
You bet I'm part of the Bush/Cheney re-election campaign and have written several published letters to the editor, talked to people and e-mail articles around to "undecideds" constantly. We can't afford Kerry and I will do everything I can to see he is defeated.
There are predictions by stock market gurus that oil will be over $60 a barrel in two months. They figure that the oil will continue to be blocked coming out of Iraq, the Saudi's won't bother to make up the shortfall, the Russian oil company is close to being taken over by Putin, and Mexico has never bothered to help us. If oil goes that high, there goes the recovering economy and that makes it very tough for the President to run on the economy. yet for the first 6 months of this year, the economy was improving at 20-year highs. WHY don't we hear that statistic on the alphabet-soup stations and in the newspapers? Because THEY don't want Americans to know that Pres. Bush's handling of the economy has been exactly right. Not too hot, not too cold. And imagine what Kerry will do to us, with all of the tax increases to pay for all the programs that he's said he wants to do, but it will be OUR money in the form of taxes that pays for all of that healthcare (which his running mate has driven up, thanks to his damn lawsuits.)
Ahh, but that's the "sitting President". He will do the right thing, even if it costs him re-election.
But what about the jerk who gets the White House? Because I'm afraid I'm betting that most of Americans aren't willing to put Pres. Bush back into the White House. It scares me to death that anyone would think like that, but apparently there are plenty of them who think "anybody but Bush."
I suppose we aren't supposed to know that Iran blows off energy that we could use - throws it away because there's so dang much of it, they can't use it. Yet we are supposed to believe that they want nuclear energy for "peaceful purposes"? Not a chance.
Yet you seem pretty clear that they're the ones behind the nuclear deals with Iran. If they have that kind of power, then it's pretty likely that they're the "power behind the throne", so to speak, if not the actual "throne" itself.
See? That's what using up too much of that Saudi oil will do to you. ;-)
They are debating on how best to deliver Israel into Iranian hands at maximum profit to Europe.
ping
Iranian BUMP here!
Thanks for joining in and welcome aboard! I am inclined to agree with your opinion.
With the missile test happening and this declaration now.. I think you are right. Mulahs do have the bomb most likely. What I think they are trying to do now is squeese out some concession in return for not openly testing the weapon.
Situation is really bad. We cant launch preemptive attack since we most likely dont even have a clue were the bombs and the rockets are stored. Even if we do any disarming strike against something like that would have to be nuclear and that is very unlikely to happen.
Some time ago I heard on the news that Israel was testing or even already had operational a missile defense system. Would it be able to intercept a rocket that was tested by Iran?
"TEHRAN, Iran (Reuters) -- Iran says it has carried out a successful field test of the latest version of its Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missile, which defense experts say can reach Israel or U.S. bases in the Gulf."
The UK needs to watch their backs when dealing with the French and Germans.....While the UK is facing the situation in Iran, the French and Germans are probably helping the mullahs.
I believe the diplomacy would be enough to handle the obstacle of probable confrontation in the NKorea Nuke development program because it win very limited support its everlasting greatest supporter china whose government have the concern of :
1.expanded presence of U.S military expansion in the west pacific
2.consolidated U.S-Japan-Taiwan-SKorea Coalition
3.accelerated deployment of TMD in the Area and dramatic acceleration of NMD
4.most importantly, a probable outbreak of a new turn of jeopardizing arm race,and probably nuclear arm race
the North Korea is diplomatically isolated.And also it is the primary reason why six-sided nogotiation instead biliteral or tri-literal dialogue of US-NKorea or US-SKorea-NKorea
recently the pentagon is attempting to make most of the 2nd infantry division pulled back from the frontline close to the de-militarized zone.
when the 2nd division is ready creating a buffer that can decelerate the speed the NKorea Army of more than a million troops by using blocks,landmines,and remote precision-strike and seriously paralyse the C4I and logistic structure of North Korea,the North Korea will not be in a state of initiative, and that is also why the Chinese failed to squash the U.N forces in Korean War in early 1950s even though its army have a couple a millions of voluntary troops,preponderance in number.
though the outbreak of war in the peninsular will cause significant bloodshed on both side, the initiative may not be easy to be on the side of the North Korea and even though diplomacy fail, it is still possible or even easy to deter the North Korea.
the greatest danger of the iran missle isn't direct threat to Isreal or US gulf forces,but American homeland,I seem to have still remember the cargo that deliver conventional arm from Iran shortly after Sept.11th.
you are absolutely right,the background is much stronger than the foreground in my point of view
The only country in the world that I can truly say I trust 100% with nuclear weapons is the United States. Maybe Britain to a lessor extent, but the thought of other countries having them scares the hell out of me.
I'll hand over something all right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.