Replies

Bush administration stepping up pressure to stop Iran's nuclear program

Knight Ridder - By Warren P. Strobel
Aug 13, 2004

WASHINGTON - Get ready for another crisis over weapons of mass destruction.

Convinced that Iran is covertly speeding toward making nuclear weapons, the Bush administration has begun a diplomatic campaign to sharply increase the pressure on Tehran.

The sudden sense of urgency follows the apparent collapse of a three-nation European initiative to persuade Iran to freeze its nuclear program. Iran is trying to renegotiate the deal and insists that its nuclear program is for civilian energy purposes.

The Bush administration faces a fundamental dilemma similar to the one it faced two years ago in Iraq: Should the United States continue to work with allies who favor negotiation or should it take pre-emptive, unilateral action to stop Iran?

President Bush's go-it-alone course in Iraq continues to draw criticism, both from foreign allies and many Americans as they prepare to select their next president. But action to confront Iran may be more necessary than against Iraq, some officials and private experts argue, because Iran has a far more advanced nuclear program and much closer ties to terrorist groups than Iraq did in 2003.

Concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions have bubbled for more than a decade, but they've taken a back seat to Iraq and the war on terrorism. That could soon change.

"Iran is going to be the 800-pound gorilla of American foreign policy come September," said a State Department official.

A senior European diplomat in Washington agreed. It is "one of the two or three biggest issues that we'll have to deal with in the next period," he said. Both spoke on condition of anonymity, citing diplomatic sensitivities.

U.S. officials say they will begin a new push to have Iran's nuclear activities referred to the United Nations Security Council, which can impose sanctions. The next crossroads is a mid-September meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been monitoring Iran's nuclear work.

"This is a troubling development ... and you just can't ignore it any longer," Secretary of State Colin Powell said recently.

A senior administration official went further in an interview this week. He hinted that if Bush is re-elected, the use of U.S. military force to stop Iran from going nuclear - even by overthrowing the government in Tehran - wouldn't be out of the question.

U.S. credibility on Iran, however, has been undercut by the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction that the White House warned of in Iraq.

"This administration has been discredited by the WMD experience" in Iraq, said Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter.

Said another State Department official: "Would it have been better if prewar Iraq intelligence had been better? Sure. ... But it doesn't mean we're wrong" on Iran.

Brzezinski co-chaired a task force sponsored by the private Council on Foreign Relations that last month called on the White House to open a broad dialogue with Iran, rather than waiting until the nuclear issue is settled.

"The problem with this administration is, it doesn't know the difference between diplomacy and unilateralism," Brzezinski said. "If it simply uses inflammatory rhetoric, it will make the Iranians dig in their heels." Moreover, Iran, which borders Iraq and Afghanistan, could make life much more difficult for the United States in those places if it chose to, he said.

The CIA's rough estimate is that Iran could have a nuclear weapon by the end of the decade. Israel puts the date at 2007.

But the real crunch date could come sooner, when Iran's nuclear program becomes self-sufficient, rendering trade bans and other sanctions irrelevant.

Vastly complicating matters, Iran's suspected weapons program uses the same basic technology involved in a civilian nuclear energy program, which it's permitted to have under the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty.

"Our ability to stop that program is very limited," said former CIA Director Robert Gates, who co-chaired the task force with Brzezinski.

Bush administration officials argue that momentum is moving behind the U.S. position, with the collapse of a deal struck by Britain, France and Germany in which Iran agreed to stop enriching uranium and associated activities.

If the international community agrees Iran is moving toward a nuclear weapons capability, "then you have to ask yourselves what are you going to do?" said the senior administration official.

Iran has resumed assembling centrifuges to enrich uranium, in violation of its pledges. At a stormy meeting with diplomats from the three European nations in late July, Iranian representatives demanded a series of concessions, including security guarantees.

Yet the Europeans remain cautious about taking the issue to the Security Council.

"The question is, what then?" said the senior European diplomat. "Taking it to the Security Council does not automatically mean you are taking a step toward solution."

U.S. plans to squeeze Tehran hit another speed bump this week when IAEA inspectors appeared to verify one of Iran's central contentions about its nuclear research.

The inspectors determined that particles of enriched uranium found at Iranian industrial sites came from equipment purchased abroad, buttressing Iran's denial that it has been conducting home-grown enrichment of uranium for a bomb program.

IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming declined to comment, pending a Sept. 3 report by the agency.

It now appears the United States will not have enough support to refer Iran to the Security Council when the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors meets in mid-September. The issue could come to a head at the next meeting in December.

U.S. officials and many outside experts say there's plenty of other evidence Iran is striving for nuclear weapons.

They charge it includes Iran's construction of a heavy water reactor, ideal for producing plutonium; covert uranium processing; experiments with a substance called polonium-210, used to initiate nuclear explosions; and secret procurement of centrifuges from the nuclear smuggling network of Abdul Qadeer Khan, father of Pakistan's nuclear weapon.

Iran had denied having a covert uranium enrichment program until it was exposed by an exile opposition group in August 2002.

U.S. officials say they still hope diplomatic pressure might work. Iran, they note, is keenly sensitive to its world image, and its economy is badly in need of outside help.

"We're still at a place where we hope diplomacy can change their mind," a senior State Department official said. "They have not yet changed their mind."

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_7610.shtml