RUSSIA SAYS IRAN MOVING TOWARD NUKES

Middle East Newsline ^ | April 25, 2003

[Sawdring]

MOSCOW [MENL] -- For the first time, Russia has acknowledged that its client Iran could be advancing toward the production of nuclear weapons.

Russian officials said the government in Moscow has been struck by reports relayed by the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency of two new nuclear facilities acknowledged by Teheran last year. The officials said at least one of the facilities could produce fuel for nuclear weapons.

Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev pointed to the Iranian facility in the northwestern city of Natanz, where the IAEA found a large number of gas centrifuges. The number of centrifuges could point to an Iranian program to enrich uranium for the production of nuclear weapons.

"Such centrifuges are capable of enriching uranium to a high enough concentration for developing weapons," Rumyantsev said on Tuesday. "If the media reports are accurate, the situation is alarming."

[Calpernia]

Ping

[heyhey]

Its now time to stop talking and ACT

[faithincowboys]

of course, they are, thanks to the peaceful, benevolent, globally responsible Russians!!

Great!!!

[heyhey]

Sunday, 1 September, 2002, 12:19 GMT 13:19 UK
Russia begins work on Iranian reactor


The US is unnerved by Iran's friendliness with Russia

Russian technicians have begun assembling heavy equipment due to form part of the first reactor at a nuclear power plant in Iran.
Russia is going ahead with the $800m project - at the port of Bushehr - despite strong objections from the United States, which says it is concerned that Iran intends to develop weapons-grade plutonium there.


The plant is scheduled to begin operating in June 2004 with the loading of nuclear fuel into the reactor set for December 2003, Russia's atomic energy ministry said.

That represents a delay from the September 2003 start date originally promised by the Russian firm who took on the project which was started by a German firm in 1972 but abandoned after the Iranian revolution in 1979.

The main shell of the water-cooled nuclear reactor, built in St Petersburg, was delivered to Iran last November.

Viktor Kozlov, director general of Atomstroyexport which is building the reactor, said there were now 600 Russian experts in Iran, and the number would increase to about 2,000 by the end of the year.

"They will be joined by their families and will live in a special village that has been set up for them near the site of the plant," he said.

Warming ties

The nuclear project has been the result of warming ties between the two countries which have also seen Iranian President Mohammed Khatami travel to Moscow for friendly talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

The relationship has unnerved the US which had said the building of the Bushehr reactor was an issue of "great concern".

US President George W Bush has named Iran, alongside Iraq and North Korea, as part of an "axis of evil" which he claims is seeking to develop weapons of mass destruction.

Russian officials, however, have insisted that its nuclear co-operation programme with Iran is transparent, legitimate and in line with Russia's commitments under the non-proliferation treaty.

[heyhey]

New reality of American power


By Paul Reynolds
BBC News Online world affairs correspondent



US foreign policy no longer makes any pretence of being humble

There is a new reality in the world - American power.

It was used to achieve a swift victory in Iraq, as it had been in Afghanistan.

The question which arises, is whether it is now poised to make itself felt elsewhere in the world.

The policies have already been laid out.

They comprise the war on terror which President Bush declared soon after the 11 September attacks, and the effort to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction to so-called rogue states.

Doctrine of pre-emption

There is a doctrine which goes along with this: Pre-emptive action.

We are hopeful that a number of regimes will draw the appropriate lesson from Iraq that the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is not in their national interest

John R Bolton
US Under-secretary of State

It was a long time ago that US President George W Bush, during his election campaign, spoke of the need for American foreign policy to be "humble".

The language is different now.

Mr Bush declared at the White House on 15 April: "The United States of America, and our coalition, will defend ourselves.

"When we make a pledge, we mean it. We keep our word; and what we begin, we will finish."

Applying the doctrine

John R Bolton, the US Under-secretary of State for international security, and a man not afraid of spelling out American policy, said:


With Saddam Hussein ousted, who will be next?

"We are hopeful that a number of regimes will draw the appropriate lesson from Iraq that the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is not in their national interest."

The application of the new reality will probably vary.

But in each case, America's opponents will have to take it into account.

Was it just diplomacy which has forced North Korea to the table?

Or was it the sight of American power being deployed in Iraq?

We shall probably never know, since North Korea is harder to read than the German Enigma codes.

But it is a change of tack by the North Koreans which is worth noting.

New targets?

Iran is another case study to watch.


Wolfowitz: An insult to say Arab world cannot be democratic

It, too, is developing a nuclear industry, but Washington suspects that it is also developing a nuclear weapon.

Iran says that it is not.

For the moment, the US is letting the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, take the lead in questioning and inspecting Iran.

But it might not wait for long.

Syria is already on the defensive regarding accusations that it helped Iraq with military equipment and is hiding fugitives from Saddam Hussein's clique.

It may decide to rein back on the activities of radical Hezbollah guerrillas along Israel's border with South Lebanon.

If it does not, then it can expect further US pressure.

'Democracy domino'

There are broadly three views about this spread of US influence.

They reflect the curious phenomenon that the US is at the same time praised and attacked but also doubted.

The first view is that US power - whether exercised through military might or diplomatic and economic persuasion - is good for mankind as it helps to spread freedom and democracy.

Just as Germany and Japan changed, this argument goes, so too can other countries.

The "democracy domino" effect is much talked of in Washington.

Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defence secretary said recently that it was an "insult" to the Arab world to think that it was not suitable for democracy.

People had said the same things about the South Koreans, he said.

'Compliance not democracy'

In a recent interview, the Peruvian author Mario Vargas Llosa called for more action led by America against dictators.

Our paradigm now seems to be: Something terrible happened to us on 11 September and that gives us the right to interpret all future events in a way that everyone else in the world must agree with

Former US President Bill Clinton
"If a dictator could be popular in Germany, one of the world's most civilised countries, any nation could find itself under dictatorship," he said.

"Dictators are in power because of lack of international mobilisation."

The second view is that what the US wants is not democracy but compliance.

It has insisted on this in its own hemisphere for more than a century, runs this side of the argument, and is now intent on insisting on it in the rest of the world.

The US, it is argued, will act in the 21st Century as Great Britain did in the 19th Century, and that is in its own interests.

The guns of the Royal Navy have given way to the precision guided weapons of the US Air Force.

Hostile sentiment

US actions have already divided the Western allies and have called into question the future of the UN and Nato.

But sentiment hostile to American policy unites quite a range of political forces from left-wing to right-wing.

The former US President Bill Clinton reflected some of the unease, even among Americans.

"Our paradigm now seems to be: Something terrible happened to us on 11 September and that gives us the right to interpret all future events in a way that everyone else in the world must agree with," he said in a speech.

"And if they don't, they can go straight to hell."

US 'on probation'

Then there is the third point of view.

It was summed up by the British writer Timothy Garton Ash, champion of freedom for Eastern Europe during the Cold War.

"America is on probation," is how he put it.

"America can still prove, by what it does over the next few years in the Middle East, that it was right in what it did during this last month of war."

But the third point of view is still waiting to be convinced.

It is not ideologically for or against the use of American power but looks at the results.

What it does know is that there is this power, and that it is the new reality.

[Filibuster_60]

Iran says that it is not.

That could mean Iran's up next. The pattern has been laid out with Iraq:

1. The US assumes you're developing WMD
2. You deny it
3. Under US pressure, you allow UN inspectors to enter your country, with a mandate to disarm you lest you suffer "serious consequences"
4. The UN finds nothing, as US military forces mass in your front yard
5. America strikes

Simple as that.

What about North Korea? NK is almost untouchable for now as they're not going to fall into this trap. They've seen the consequences of a rogue state denying that it has terrible weapons when it actually does.

[meenie]

So if they admit to nuclear weapons they are home free? I don't really follow the logic.

[Mr. Mojo]

This story is right out of the Twilight Zone. Hasn't Russia helped Iran to develop nukes for the past decade or so?

[GodfearingTexan]

Yes. Maybe Russia is going to do some pre-emptive attack on Iran just to show they are capable of it, then set up a satellite govt there and try to maintain a presence in the region, since the US has Iraq. This probably is not going to happen since, as mentioned, they are generally friendly with Iran and would also not have a "direct threat" position to fall back on like we did with Hussein.

But their actions in Kosovo prove that Puty-poot don't like to be pushed around close to home.

[Mr. Mojo]

But their actions in Kosovo prove that Puty-poot don't like to be pushed around close to home.

He may not like it, but there's not a damn thing he can do about it. Aside from its nuclear arsenal, Russia is just about impotent. And our overwhelming success in Iraq has driven home that point ...to their horror.

[AmericanVictory]

Surprise, surprise -- not!
The Russians ought to know, since this was their intent.

[slasher82]

I say we step over to the next door and kick it down also, then combine the two and form our 51st state. They can become Americans and enjoy all our freedoms including religion while we, of course, benefit from increased oil reserves. Everybody that matters WINS!!!!!!!!!! France, Germany, and Russia Who?????????

[RussianConservative]

Russia has a uranium rod exchange contract with Iran and Russia refuse to mine and process Iranian Uranium. Other countries helping Iran.

[RussianConservative]

Nuclear weapons spells immunity. If you can't blow up city of enemy you can blow up his forces while they mass. No country will disarm either, not after seeing Iraq. It is now a good day for arms suppliers and dealers.

[Faraday]

This business about nukes as the vaccine preventing US action is a lie. What it will prevent is the military strategy used in Iraq--"take out the missile/tank but leave the building next to it standing". We will have to use moderate yield nukes to render unusable/uninhabitable areas which contain enemy nukes. This must be made clear to those societies who think they can get a free ride by playing the "nuke card." Pyongyang may have to be vitrified. Does Tehran want the same?

[Sawdring]

It is now a good day for arms suppliers and dealers.

i.e. Russia.

[RussianConservative]

Yes Russia too, but US still 50% of world's arm markets.

[Orion78]

PING!