The West’s Threat to Iran and the IAEA
by Peter Eyre on 22 Nov 2009 0 Comment

No matter which way you turn now days, you continue to see the constant barrage of intimidation and big boy tactics from the well developed countries, especially the G3.5 who held their notorious press conference in Pittsburgh when Obama, Brown and Sarkosy made very strong threats towards Iran...


Obama was the first to go on the attack when he said: “Iran’s decision to build yet another nuclear facility without notifying the IAEA represents a direct challenge to the basic compact at the centre of the non-proliferation regime. These rules are clear: All nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; those nations with nuclear weapons must move towards disarmament; those nations without nuclear weapons must forsake them. That compact has largely held for decades, keeping the world far safer and more secure. And that compact depends on all nations living up to their responsibilities.”


Iran’s response to claims that it was carrying out illegal activities were denied by the President who said that his government had not violated International Atomic Energy Agency rules after disclosing the existence of a new nuclear-enrichment facility to the UN watchdog. President Ahmadinejad said his country had in fact informed the IAEA a full year in advance of the deadline set by the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). He went on to say: “If you want to build the building, you can do that. If you want to lay the pipes, you can do that. Six months before you start processing itself ... then you need to inform the IAEA so it is prepared to begin its inspection programme,” “Now is this the right thing or the wrong thing to do?” he asked. “It is not a secret facility. If it was, why did we inform the IAEA a year ahead of time?” He also said that he does not have to report to Washington.


What became clear is that the “Three Musketeers” had indicated that nations with nuclear weapons must move towards disarmament and those that do not have such weapons must forsake them. Obama said that carrying out these actions would keep the world far safer and more secure. What all three fail to address is the issue of their own secrecy and that of Israel.


Their theme in general indicates to the general public that they will endeavour to stop the production of nuclear weapons and destroy existing stocks. This is far from the truth. Yes, they will abandon the larger intercontinental ballistic missiles (the so-called deterrents), but will under the disguise of conventional weapons produce “Mini Nukes” (weapons with uranium components). There is a vast array of weapons that fit into this category - Cruise, Harpoon, Maverick, Hellfire and many other missiles. One could also add to these weapons the GBU range of Bunker Busters, JADAM bombs and a new range of 4th Generation Bombs. Futuristically speaking, the proposed weapons are beyond imagination such as the “Mother of all Bombs” which they plan to use in Afghanistan in 2010. On the horizon will be Hyper Speed Missiles and other technologies too horrific to even talk about.  


So when Obama made the following statement it was very clear that there are two rules that apply here. We the West can do exactly what we want but you the developing or third world countries must toe the line. He said: “Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow - endangering the global non-proliferation regime, denying its own people access to the opportunity they deserve, and threatening the stability and security of the region and the world.” “We are committed to demonstrating that international law is not an empty promise; that obligations must be kept; and that treaties will be enforced.” “To put it simply: Iran must comply with UN Security Council resolutions.”


From his last comment on UN Security Council Resolutions it is obvious that double standards apply, especially in regard to Israel which has failed to comply with hundreds of UN Resolutions passed against it. “Nice one Mr President – that’s what I call change.” The US has continuously taken the lead in verbally attacking Iran with Clinton at the forefront, but European leaders must also be added to the list of aggressors when Britain and France jumped onto the band wagon:


The deception by the Iranian government and the scale of what we believe is the breach of international commitments,” said British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, “will shock and anger the entire international community.” He was joined in his new found outrage by French President Nicholas Sarkozy, who called for full disclosure by Iran and, short of that, a tougher sanctions regime. “Everything must be put on the table now,” Sarkozy said. The West, said Brown, has “no choice but to draw a line in the sand.” Ahmadinejad rejected the deception charges and demanded an apology from Obama, while dismissing the French and British leaders as irrelevant. Their thoughts were reinforced by Merkel who was not present.


We were soon to learn that Iran had decided to allow IAEA inspectors to investigate the facilities and a date was set for the team to arrive in Iran on 25 October 2009. What became apparent was that even thought this offer had been made and a date set, the West continued to apply aggressive pressure.


The French Foreign Minister only the day after the inspections had started in Iran, cautioned that Israel might launch an attack against Iran soon in the absence of such a deal. Kouchner also said that he didn’t believe sanctions were an effective way to deal with Iran, noting that they wind up disproportionately harming the poor and do little to those in power.


The IAEA had once before stated that Iran was not, in their opinion, a threat and this was reinforced in a more recent report: The IAEA has insisted that the alleged “threat” posed by Iran’s civilian nuclear program is greatly exaggerated, Israel has repeatedly threatened to attack the nation if the international community didn’t force Iran to abandon it.


Within a few days of the French comment Hilary Clinton again passed comment during her visit to Jerusalem… they always say the right thing on home territory. She called on Iran to fulfill its obligations over its controversial nuclear programme, warning the Islamic republic that “patience has limits.” “Our view is that we are willing to work toward creative outcomes like shipping out the low enriched uranium to be reprocessed outside of Iran but we’re not going to wait forever,” “Patience does have finally its limits and it is time for Iran to fulfill its obligations and responsibilities to the international community and accepting this deal would be a good beginning.”


Early November saw Israeli IDF repeat its own thoughts on the Iranian issue when on 7 Nov 2009 Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Avalon warned Iran that it will not tolerate a threat by nuclear weapons: The one who’s bluffing is Iran, which is trying to play with cards they don’t have,” “All the bravado that we see and the testing and the very dangerous and harsh rhetoric are hiding a lot of weaknesses.”


We return to the current time with words from IAEA Director-General Muhammad el-Baradei, 5 November 2009: “there was nothing to be worried about.” What is remarkable in this ongoing intimidation of Iran is the fact that many experts around the world thought that this was a clear case of bullying by those who already have nuclear weapons. It is also true that the US is hurting over the fact that Iran has vast reserves of oil and gas and the US has no contracts or control.


Iran basically falls in the same category as Syria, Lebanon and Palestine - considered to be states promoting terrorism. Would anyone ever consider that the axis of evil in actual fact is the US itself. Like all potential trouble spots in the world, the US has covert operations deep within Iran.


For many years Kurdish guerrilla fighters referred to as the PJAK have been operating on cross border operations from Eastern Kurdistan into Iran. This group works in conjunction with US Covert Operation inside Iran and is CIA financed with additional weapons support. These covert operations are intended to disrupt or destabilize the political base in any country. The recent initial detention of 4 US operatives dressed in Afghan costume in Pakistan was a typical example. Locals had reported mysterious helicopter flights at night and personnel being dropped off.


These covert operatives turn peaceful locations into a potential hot bed of militia. They are even bold enough to blow up buildings and blame it on Al Qaeda, Taliban or some other militia. Once this has been achieved the area can be considered hostile and housing terrorists. Such covert operations are evil in the extreme and fully supported by the US. 


It is only a matter of time before militia that have worked in cooperation with or been trained by the US turn against them. It is obvious that US and NATO forces should close down all bases on Islamic soil and bring all troops home… only then will peace return to the world.


In closing I would like quote outgoing IAEA Director General Mohamed El Baradei’s final address to the UN General Assembly’s 64th Session in New York: “Without development, there can be no security - the reverse is also true. By helping to address the root causes of instability and insecurity, including endemic conflicts, poor governance and poverty, we make it less likely that countries will feel the temptation to seek nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction.”


The Director General advocated the use of diplomacy rather than military force and isolation in dealing with non-compliant states, and called for “a new system with effective global mechanisms for conflict prevention, peacekeeping and peacemaking. 


Peter Eyre, a former British Naval officer, worked at NATO headquarters, and spent a lot of time in the Middle East and South East Asia as a petroleum consultant; he lives in the UK and writes regularly for the Palestine Telegraph 

User Comments Post a Comment
Comments are free. However, comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate material will be removed from the site. Readers may report abuse at
Post a Comment

Back to Top