“When I said there is a possibility of negotiations, there are certain conditions that need to be realized. If these conditions are met, the form (of negotiations) is not important. The way they have treated our people here has left no ground for talks. They [the US government] think no one can live without them and this is a wrong notion. We have proved we can live without them. As long as they take that overbearing position of strength and threats, nothing will happen.”
- Ahmadinejad
Ahead of a major meeting of six major world powers in Paris to discuss the future of Iranian nuclear pursuits, there is a question that begs asking: “How do we handle non-compliance?”
The talks are technically still aimed at answering whether Iran has a right to brew and still nuclear glory, and European Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana is interested in seeing a direct dialogue between the United States and Iran (something president-elect Barack Obama has promised he will do.) The IAEA also desires such talks. “If there is a direct dialogue between the United States and Iran, I think Iran will be more forthcoming with the agency,” Reuters quoted IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei as saying at a news conference in Prague today.
Despite the possibility of a dialogue, there have been indications that Iran has tested nuclear weapons. The IAEA says that the facts on the matter still are not clear. Meanwhile, as of a few hours of this article, Iran has successfully tested the Shahab-3 in Kurdistan, a missile with a range of up to 2000km. Such tests were thought to be a result of Israeli military exercises. However, these kinds of aggressive displays should not be ignored in the face of the P5+1 meetings.
One of the most interesting aspects of Iran’s over-confidence and perhaps, outright cockiness- are the “how’s” and “why’s”…How and why the nation has been able to continue it’s operations, uninterrupted. Two of the nations which will be present at the P5+1 talks have spoken on Iran’s behalf, against stalling their nuclear operations. One such country has had sanction’s placed against one it’s main arms exporter for alleged sales of restricted materials to Iran: Russia. The other nation has strong ties and reliances on Iran’s petrol industry, and has grown very close to Iran, as it’s imports to the nation continue to rise, and are expected to exceed $25 Billion by the end of 2008. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-China_relations)
China and Russia have effectually stood in the way of western intervention in Iran’s nuclear pursuits, suggesting, as the whole of the Iranian government has, in the past, that their interests lie solely in generating Nuclear power for the country. Despite this, it continues to grow more, and more evident that Iran’s interests are not peaceful ones. So, why is China aiding Iran? More likely than not, because of petrol interests. There have even been suggestions China could be or will choose to “help” Iran’s nuclear development, as they are currently doing with Pakistan. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/16/world/main4527309.shtml)
During the time that has been spent negotiating political hurdles with our international match, Iran has been able to create more than 4000 centrifuges
( http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch/Detail/?ots591=4888CAA0-B3DB-1461-98B9-E20E7B9C13D4&lng=en&id=93030 ) and the latest report by the IAEA (http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2008/gov2008-38.pdf) suggests that Iran has produced up to 28 tons of Uranium, and may be recieving help from a Russian scientist.
Over all, the agency has seen considerable trouble in getting Iran’s cooperation:
“On 2 April 2008, the Agency requested Iran to provide, as a transparency measure, access to
additional locations related, inter alia, to the manufacturing of centrifuges, R&D on uranium
enrichment, and uranium mining and milling (GOV/2008/15, para. 13). Iran has not yet agreed to the Agency’s request.
13. On 3 September 2008, the Agency conducted an inspection at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant. All of the fuel assemblies imported from the Russian Federation for use at the plant have remained under Agency seal.”
Most interestingly though, the report provides a troubling parallel between the very recent missile tests and Iran’s nuclear program:
“(e) Some important parameters reflected in the documentation relating to the re-design of the
payload chamber for the Shahab-3 missile re-entry vehicle are the same as those reflected in
the documentation referred to in paragraphs (c) and (d) above (e.g. dimensions). The Agency
proposed discussions with Iranian experts on the contents of the engineering reports
examining in detail modelling studies related to the effects of various physical parameters on
the re-entry body from time of launch of the missile to payload detonation. The discussions
would be aimed at ascertaining whether these studies were associated with nuclear related
activities or, as Iran has asserted, related only to conventional military activities. In addition,
the Agency requested access to three civilian workshops identified in the documentation.”
The Iranian problem drills much deeper than any politician will admit. They could potentially have nuclear weapons as we speak. But, as long as China and Russia stand in the way of disarmament neither the US, nor the European Union can take direct action. Both China and Russia have been politically aggressive, and picking up speed in the past few years.
Russia’s democratic reforms have been rolling steadily back. Both the mafia and the government have become much more aggressive, and the Kremlin is back in the wary public eye again, as it plans to move it’s next pawn. A very interesting article (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jDX1B9fKmdtRjNhAGvwOK4Qrddmg) shows that Russia is more than ready to test Obama.
China is less interested in testing the United States, and more interested in doing whatever it pleases, in the face of our ailing nation. The US policy towards China has been one of walking on eggshells, so as not to wake the sleeping giant. Many people think this would be a very poor move, indeed, given that the United States is overstretched in it’s Middle Eastern proxy war- a red herring in which China was most assuredly pleased in throwing.
As China continues to create strategic alliances with the most oil-rich nations on earth (Venezuela, Iran, Russia., etc.) and puts it’s stranglehold on others (Sudan, and it’s strategic pipeline), it becomes more evident that the United States will have to face them, perhaps at the cost of keeping nuclear weapons out of the reach of Iran, perhaps at the cost of a bigger issue. But, even if Iran’s project can be quelled by “talks” (this is doubtful- as Iran is interested in having the power that comes with possessing nuclear weapons), more trouble is just around the corner.
This is not an issue of Palestine and Israel. This is an issue of greater proportions.
