Iran Attacking US...??

Monday, 22 October 2007
Recently the political temperature has once again been raised regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions. First George W Bush said at a press conference, "I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War three, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." Then Tony Blair proclaimed when talking about the 'deadly ideology' of Islamic extremism, "This ideology now has a state, Iran, that is prepared to back and finance terror in the pursuit of destabilising countries whose people wish to live in peace." Vice President Cheney also said in reference to Iran's nuclear ambitions, "Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions,''To shed some light on what is really behind the statements of US and British politicians we reprint a translation from Arabic of a question and answer originally issued in April this year: QuestionThe Nuclear crisis of Iran has now become an oft-repeating issue, negotiations, failure of negotiations and now referred to the UN Security Council, which passes a resolution and allows Iran a deadline of a month or two to comply with it. Then there is a report by its Secretary General to the effect that Iran has not complied. This is followed by yet another resolution and another deadline for Iran to comply, and this goes on…..How has this crisis developed and what is its current status? What are the chances of either the US or Israeli carrying out an attack? Further is there a link between this crisis and the North Korean Nuclear crisis?Answer:It is known that the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) was carved out in 1968 C.E and Iran had become its signatory in 1970 C.E, and Iran under the Shah had begun its nuclear activity in collaboration with some European firms (French and German).

Khomeini had pulled a stop on Iran’s nuclear activity in 1979 C.E. Rafsanjani later resumed the nuclear programme in 1995 C.E and it continued during the reformist period (1997-2005 C.E) under Khatemi. During this period (summer 2003 C.E), after the occupation of Iraq, the exiled Iranian opposition announced that Iran was pursuing a secret and unsafe nuclear programme under cover and hiding it from the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Based on this, the chief of IAEA, Mohammed el Barada’ee prepared a report and presented it to the IAEA. This is when the Iranian Nuclear Crisis gained momentum and began a round of give-and-take in the dialogue with the European ‘Troika’ of Germany, France and Britain. It was followed by a protocol signed on 25th October, 2003 C.E during the rule of Khatemi and was named as the ‘additional protocol’ which allowed the IAEA to carry out surprise inspections. This was aimed to prevent accusations against Iran that it covers up the sensitive matters from the inspectors during routine and scheduled inspections. Despite this and in spite of Iran ceasing the enrichment process for the sake of negotiations, the noose continued to be tightened against Iran without guaranteeing its right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Iran therefore resumed its uranium enrichment programme.

The matter continued like a growing ice-berg which would sometimes warm up a little and the ice would melt somewhat, only to magnify again until the UN Security Council passed its resolution 1737 on 23rd December, 2006 C.E which called for ceasing of the uranium enrichment. But Iran refused to renounce its right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes as guaranteed in the international treaty. The UNSC met again on 23rd April, 2007 C.E, this time to pass its resolution 1747 and gave a deadline of two months to Iran to stop the enrichment process which amounts to requiring Iran to renounce its right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Though it is common knowledge that those countries that object to Iran using uranium for peaceful purposes are themselves engaged in enriching uranium for military use and for making nuclear weapons which the US actually used during the Second World War!What is apparent is that while Europe is engaged in negotiations with Iran on its nuclear conflict, the US is remote-monitoring the situation and even sabotaging the negotiations:For instance, while the European ‘Troika’ was engaged in negotiations with Iran to find a solution to the problem, the US was busy trying to delay a solution, but outwardly always maintained that it supported the European solution to the issue. Whenever the negotiations reached a point of a near-solution, the US officials would issue a statement with an implied warning that the US had all options open to it to further agitate the crisis!Again for instance on 27th April, 2007 C.E i.e. two days after his meeting with Larijani on 25th April, 2007, Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief envoy, called upon Washington to open all channels of communication with Tehran including the nuclear issue and added that the Iranians, including their higher authorities are open to such a dialogue.

Solana had in his talks with Larijani proposed that both parties abandon their positions in favour of a mid-way solution in good faith. But Washington backed off insisting that Iran first suspend its uranium enrichment as a pre-condition for any direct dialogue with it, although it was well aware that Iran’s nuclear enrichment was well within 5%, the limit for enrichment for peaceful purposes, whereas for the nuclear process to be of use for military purposes, a very highly enriched uranium (97%) is required. This speaks volumes for America’s so-called fears that Iran’s nuclear programme is headed towards military applications!