Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. pushes for U.N. action against Iran
Associated Press ^ | Thu, May. 08, 2003 | GEORGE JAHN

Posted on 05/08/2003 12:01:43 PM PDT by follow the money

U.S. pushes for U.N. action against Iran

VIENNA, Austria - Concerned that Iran may be running a nuclear weapons program, the United States is pushing for U.N. action against Tehran, diplomats said Thursday.

Washington is specifically seeking a declaration from the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran has violated the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which it has signed, according to diplomats familiar with the agency.

The United States has accused Iran of secretly embarking on a program to enrich uranium at Natanz in southern Iran, which American officials fear could be used to make nuclear weapons.

The diplomats said U.S. requests for support have gone out to Russia, France, Britain, Germany and other members of the 35-nation board - the key decision-maker at the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency - ahead of its meeting next month.

The diplomats were confirming a report in Thursday's editions of The New York Times.

Britain, Washington's closest ally, suggested Thursday that it was receptive to the U.S. overtures.

"We share U.S. concerns about the scale and scope of the Iranian nuclear program," said a spokeswoman for Britain's Foreign Office in London, speaking on customary condition of anonymity. "We'll be listening carefully to the (IAEA) director-general's report at the next board meeting."

In Washington, President Bush told reporters: "I've always expressed my concerns that the Iranians may be developing a nuclear program. I have done so publicly, I have done so privately. I expressed those concerns to Vladimir Putin when I was in Russia."

Noting that the IAEA was coming out with its report in June, Bush said, "We'll wait and see what it says."

A declaration, depending on its language, could restrict itself to expressing concern about a violation or increase pressure on Tehran to account for its activities by referring the issue to the Security Council.

That would further strain U.S.-Iranian relations, which took a turn for the worse last year after Bush labeled Tehran part of the "Axis of Evil" for its alleged support of terrorism.

More recently, Tehran has said it would not recognize any U.S.-installed government in Iraq. And Washington signed a truce with the People's Mujahedeen, which opposes the Tehran government, allowing it to keep its weapons although the Iraqi-based group is on the State Department's terrorist list.

The nature of work at the Natanz site was not known until last year. The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the Vienna-based IAEA, was taken aback at what he saw on a visit there in February.

"It's a sophisticated uranium enrichment plant, and they had come a long way," said one diplomat familiar with the findings of the visit and the workings of the agency. "He was struck by the sophistication and the advanced stage of the project."

The diplomat said U.S. officials "want the agency to produce a very critical report" at the board meeting.

An agency spokeswoman, Melissa Fleming, said it was too early to comment on the Iranian program and whether Tehran had violated its treaty commitments.

Members of the U.S. delegation to the IAEA declined comment.

With Russia's nuclear cooperation with Iran being criticized by Washington, it was unclear how willing Moscow would be to back a tough resolution.

The United States claims that the technology and expertise Iran is gaining from Russia's construction of the $800 million Bushehr nuclear power plant could be used for a weapons program, and that Russian companies - perhaps without official permission - have transferred weapons technology to Tehran.

Senior Russian officials earlier this week said there was no evidence Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons, while acknowledging that Tehran had to show more transparency in its nuclear programs.

A top Iranian official on Tuesday denied his country had a nuclear weapons program but told the IAEA his country would not automatically submit to tougher inspections. Iranian officials have said they have nothing to hide because their nuclear program is only meant to generate electricity.

On the Web:

www.iaea.org


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushdoctrineunfold; iaea; iran; nukes; southasia; southasialist; un; unlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Grampa Dave
But then, when was the last time we were isolationist? 1936 or so? We were by no means isolationist during he Clinton years...he stuck his head in everywhere.

Perhaps 9/11 was a reality check that isolationism DOES work...but we have never tried it...

Just a thought...
21 posted on 05/08/2003 3:33:36 PM PDT by sal002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sal002
Well, you can have your beliefs, and I can have mine.

I think that history is on my side.
22 posted on 05/08/2003 3:35:08 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (Free Republic, where leftist liars are exposed 24/7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Where we isolationist in 2001?
23 posted on 05/08/2003 3:40:36 PM PDT by sal002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sal002
Take you arguments to someone younger and dumber?

Libertariaism 101 doesn't work with me!
24 posted on 05/08/2003 3:45:31 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (Free Republic, where leftist liars are exposed 24/7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Darn fingers don't work too well today, should have been: Take your arguments
25 posted on 05/08/2003 3:46:45 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (Free Republic, where leftist liars are exposed 24/7!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
I apologize. I was just wondering because you said "history is on your side". Since something wrong happened on 9/11, that would mean to me to say that the cause must have been factual. If isolationism was the cause, as you seem to insinuate, then it would have needed to have been a fact.

Since we were not isolationist, I fail to see how isolationism caused 9/11.
26 posted on 05/08/2003 3:50:36 PM PDT by sal002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: follow the money
In related news, we're still waiting for Arafart to take action against the Palestinian terror-scum.
27 posted on 05/08/2003 5:08:58 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sal002
Sigh...what ever happened to the idea of isolationism? I long for the day when we can tell those in the Middle East - "heh...it's your problem...take care of it. We don't want to waste the money."

I agree with your sentiment. Reality is (in my best Dana Carvey, Bush Sr. Voice) "Not gonna do it!"

28 posted on 05/08/2003 7:52:37 PM PDT by I'm ALL Right!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan
PING!
29 posted on 05/15/2003 1:13:01 PM PDT by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson