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.
Well, there goes the apple cart. Somebody, what's Israel's phone number?
LOL!
I registred in response to it, in order to comment.
For those who know diplomacy: this is the diplomatic equivilant of the middle finger. If Iran is really behaving like this we've got every reason to be very worried about what stage their program is at.
First off, welcome to Free Republic. Second, what do you know? C'mon, spill the beans, we won't tell. LOL! How diplomatic is that? :-)
I liked Jack Kennedy's observation that Presidents don't make decisions between right and wrong, that is done at a lower level. Presidents decide between awful and Gawd-awful.
They have to debate it???????????????
If they have advanced nukes why do they need to demand them from the Euros? I think the threat is for state sponsored terrorism if the Euros don't comply. They are under extreme internal pressure as evidenced by the arrest of 200 plus women for "dress" violations. Plus we are on their flank and nearly have them surrounded. I think they are desperate and are making threats with terrorism (implied) to try to get the nukes they will need to survive. They are finished.
Bravado like this is dangerous. It puts us in the position of needed to respond to it, or we'll be letting them establish themselves as a declared nuclear power. Our window for dealing with Iran before they attain 'North Korean' status is shrinking rapidly. If we don't deal with them soon, we'll be stuck with a radical Islamic state with nuclear weapons.
This reminds me of North Korea.
"Feed us and Build us a nuclear plant and we will stop our nuclear program".
"Lies...lies...lies...lies.
And the arguement against pre emption is what again????? WTF this sheeeeet is out of control God help us all if Kerry winds up in THE WHITEHOUSE were all f'd. 4yrs of appeasing our enemies and in no time IRAn will be another North Korea with a healthy stock PILE of nukes and lots of demands for us.
Exactly so. They're right on the verge. Which is why Charles Krauthammer, maybe ten days ago or less, said on Fox and also in a column, that doing something about Iran wouldn't wait until the next presidential cycle -- in other words, before Jan. 2005. So it looks as if we don't have 90 days. Tough. Either Bush does something, or Israel will.
The military will use the nukes if necessary, and that use will drown out all complaint from any quarter for a long time to come. Nukes may not be necessary against Iran or N Kor, and permission for gratuitous use will be denied.
Would you like them dropped from 30,000 ft. or 40,000 ft.
Israel will not force Bush's hand. However, the Gulf War and the occupation of Iraq were both done to keep Israel out of the conflict. If, or probably when, Israel has no choice and must act, then Bush will do the acting. The US is better able to take the heat.
Well, suppose the following:
Iran uses a nuke to destroy a US Infantry Brigade stationed in Iraq.
Do you think we could get away with the proper response- namely the anhillation of a large Iranian City?
I sincerely doubt it.
Did I ever mention how impressed I am by European negotiating tactics? Looks like they had their way with Iran, and it's ever so much better than Iraq. Gotta hand it to them, we'd hve never thought of this.
Frankly, I expect this year's "October Surprise" to be synchronized Iranian and North Korean nuclear tests.
By us or them?
ping
They are pushing us to take them out before the election... gambling that we will take out systems they can easily replace or are duplicated elsewhere... and that it will trigger election of France's candidate; John Effing Kerry, who wll back down from the pan arab state we are at war with as a proxy for the communists worldwide and their satellite states.
Holy S#%T.
Shaking head in complete and utter disbelief. I keep thinking this story must be one BIG typo...
By the way Francis- welcome to FR!
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.