Rice Lobbies for Iran Sanctions

Rice is trying to rally support against Iran's nuclear ambitions The US secretary of state has urged China, Russia and India to back US threats of imposing sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme. Condoleezza Rice said Iran needed to get a "unified message" from the international community after reopening the Isfahan uranium conversion plant.

"We've all said that a next step to be expected would be referral to the [UN] Security Council," Ms Rice said.

In a reference to a recent report by the UN's atomic watchdog, Ms Rice said Iran was failing to honour its commitments towards the international community.

"I think that after the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) report a couple of days ago, it is clear that Iran is not living up to its obligations, and so UN Security Council referral seems to be a reasonable option," she told a news conference in Washington.

Iran last month broke UN seals at the Isfahan plant, and resumed sensitive nuclear work it had suspended during negotiations with Britain, France and Germany.

The EU had offered Iran a package of economic and security incentives in return for the suspension of its nuclear activities.

But Iran insisted it had the right to pursue a civilian nuclear programme for peaceful purposes until negotiations broke down.

Last week, an IAEA report said questions about Iran's nuclear programme remained unanswered, despite an intensive investigation.

Tehran argued the findings were politically motivated, but said it would continue to co-operate with the agency.

Some notable points in the article, besides the issue itself. The BBC hopes Russia or China will veto anything and practically asks them to. They go out of their way to support the pretence, which no one on earth believes including the in-your-face Iranian negotiators, that civilian anything is involved, even going so far as to title a subjection "civilian programme". Meanwhile the obvious fact is ascribe to Rice as "suspects". (The British government knows exactly what the Iranians are doing. This is purely a commie-press thing, not a national difference).

We've all been distracted and may not have noticed that a month has passed since Iran resumed the paused portions of its nuclear program (the hidden ones presumably never stopped). When they broke the seals, the IAEA said they would talk sense into them. The EU had just offered the Iranians the entire store in return for continued suspension, the Iranians said no.

They were holding out for a statement of their right to have a nuke program, because the only use they have for the EU is to have it stop the US from doing anything. Their own press types have been saying since the impasse that this is the EU's big chance to be somebody in foreign policy and stick it to the US.

The IAEA head has been their lapdog. He was "encouraged" that the French wanted to keep talking and the Iranians said "sure", since they already broke the seals and nothing happened. The IAEA said they would report by September 3rd. The IAEA website's last entry on the whole subject is August 25th, meeting with the Iranian minister. (Or should be say, the two Iranian ministers meeting). Nothing happened.

Back when the seals were broken, they said they wanted to hold off on a Security Council resolution until they had a chance to have that meeting. They had it, it made no difference, they haven't reported anything but whitewash. Next week the board of governors of the IAEA meets.

Nobody involved - except us wants to admit the obvious, that Iran has poked them in the eye and their pipe-dream of buying Iran's nukes to solve it all peaceful has utterly failed. Iran is going to get nuclear weapons and the world is just going to watch. Or not watch, distracted, as the case may be.

Not the west's finest hour. Rice is telling them the game is up, time to move on. They are just standing there, not knowing what to do next.

First... Great commentary! Second, to your point "Not the west's finest hour. Rice is telling them the game is up, time to move on. They [other IAEA member states] are just standing there, not knowing what to do next."

Iran is the most divisive state in our world! Yesterday, they continued to escalate pressure on nuclear negotiations with this latest maneuver that should be looked at for what it is, a bribe to divide the IAEA. REF: "TEHRAN, Sept. 10 (Xinhuanet) -- An Iranian nuclear official said Saturday that Iran has decided to offer an international tender for the construction of two new nuclear power plants in the near future, the semi-official Mehr news agency reported.

Tehran is desperately trying to sabotage these negotiations while the press paints the U.S. as the diplomatic aggressor. Our policies are proactive yes, but for good reason. We are the only country, among the thirty five member states on the board of governors at the IAEA that actualy respects the IAEA as an international governing institution. With few exceptions, the other members treat IAEA meetings like an “international atomic sales convention” IASC!!! The BBC, in this case, is missing the point at the expense of global security. Definitely not the west’s finest hour! Great commentary.

That is a bid for French and Russian commercial interests, to make a buck off helping Iran go nuclear. I am sure the Iranians would prefer to get the French.

Next week is also the German election.

I talked to a Brit government type a month ago, involved in all this. He knew they were just playing games but seemed to think negotiations would still lead somewhere, a curious attitude. It was clear the Europeans intensely dislike being in the shadow of the US. They would sell their grandmothers to avoid chosing between (1) siding with the US about anything and (2) letting the Iranians get nuclear weapons. His bottom line, though, was that they could not just sit there and let the Iranians get nukes.

Thing is, I suspect the bottom line of France, Russia, and China is, they will under no circumstances side with the US. Making this security council trip an exercise in embarassing them for being irresponsible, but not a useful piece of policy making.

What is in the background is simply this: George Bush cannot allow a terrorist regime such as that of the Ayatollahs to achieve the Bomb. He understands, and has been told by the Israelis, that they will work hand in glove with Al Qaeda to destroy Israel. Not that the French or anyone else in Europe gives a Continental damn.

I am convinced that deep within the bowels of the Pentagon, plans are being drawn up for the 509th Bomb Wing and other groups, such as our B-1 Wing out of Louisiana, to strike deep buried targets in Iran. The problem is that Mossad has to find and catalogue the targets first: this takes time, research, and extensive espionage. It does no good to send a JDAM down an air shaft if it explodes in the air shaft and not in the weapons research cavern 150 feet below.

Further, I don't expect a major strike while we have thousands of troops exposed in Iraq. That's like asking for the Pasdaran to come over and inflict casualties on us. Not that we couldn't embarrass them, but they might feel the need to use chemicals or biologicals on us.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

"Not that the French or anyone else in Europe gives a Continental damn."

Not quite all. You can count on the UK and Poland maybe a couple of others.

"Further, I don't expect a major strike while we have thousands of troops exposed in Iraq."

You're right. The timing for an attack is going to be tricky. We still don't really know how long we have before Iran is able to assemble a working nuke. If we still have to keep troops in Iraq for the next couple of years, we may have no choice but to strike anyway. Maybe it's for the best, though. Some commentators reckon a US/Israeli strike on Iran could be the prelude to an Iranian uprising against the mullahs, but there's plenty of reason to fear that it will actually shore up support for the hardliners: from what I've read popular Iranian opinion seems to support their country's nuclear program as a matter of national pride. If that's true, a US/Israeli strike would more likely be the opening shots in a regional war. Maybe it would be better for us to have boots on the ground and ready for a shooting war? I dunno.

Informed opinion would be welcome...

I don't expect a major strike, period. The political constraints are tighter than you suppose.

You can be sure president Hillary will not lift a finger on such a potentially disasterous political issue. The Israelis are going to expect us to do it, the Brits are going to expect some unspecified dream of a solution short of war. Republicans are going to want to wait until after the mid-term elections, only signing off on economic sanctions before then. The French, Russians, and Chinese see trade with Iran has half the point, and sticking it to us as the other half, so they are not remotely going to help and will in fact work diligently to undermine even mild economic measures. They have already worked diligently to give the Iranians several more years, better diplomatic cover, and direct assistance, nuclear tech and military.

No, the world is going to sit and watch while Iran gets nuclear weapons. The reason is our domestic left and the political threat they present to anyone risking doing anything about it. Comprehensive defeat of the defeatist left at home would be required, for any long run, rational, and credible policy against proliferation.

When I point this out to people they always say, of but this is so serious men would never let that happen. As though communist victories in Russia and China, nukes stolen by spies and given to Stalin, hundreds of millions enslaved and millions murdered throughout the cold war, are not serious or did not happen. Or were not actively aided and furthered by our decidedly disloyal domestic opposition. They blinked at millions slaughtered and they will blink at Iranian nukes, do nothing themselves, and viciously attack anyone who tries to lift a finger. And our pols know it and are scared of them.

Bribes to split the IAEA work... another point to Iran!

Iran and Russia Oppose Security Council Referral -- The Associated Press -- TEHRAN, Iran / WASHINGTON -- Monday, September 12, 2005 -- Iran warned Sunday that referring it to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions over its nuclear activities would lead to a no-win situation with "certain consequences," and a top Russian diplomat on Friday warned against "hasty steps" in the growing crisis over Iran's nuclear program.

I don't think he is bluffing about economic sanctions. I just don't think those will matter a darn. He hasn't promised anything more than that, other than a generalized "we can't let this happen", with no dates or means attached. He let the EU lead to bring them on board and show he respects their opinion. But also as a way of kicking it down the road. Well, here we are down the road.

I don't see any improvement from the delay. Not in facts on the ground, not in military balance, not in the domestic politics of trying to get support for it, not in the diplomacy of it. At best, we may get Britain to go along with sanctions. And if we listen to another year or two of their foot-dragging, maybe a wee bit of their actual help, which we only need for political purposes.

Basically we've cashed in not being ready to do anything politically for a miniscule amount of increased diplomatic support from the British. We've solved nothing. I'd love to be wrong, but so far I don't see anything meaningful happening --- yet.

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.