Iranian Nuclear Ambitions and American Foreign Policy
…The controversial issue of Iranian ambitions for a civilian nuclear energy project ironically began with the assistance of the United States during the reign of Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlevi. In 1957, Iran signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States as part of the United States Atoms for Peace Program. Additionally, under this program Iran purchased a research nuclear reactor from the United States that was put into operation in 1967.
Thus, these recent Iranian aspirations for nuclear weapons as purported by American policy makers are not a recent occurrence; the Shah in 1974 established the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and stated that Iran would have nuclear weapons without a doubt very soon. This pursuit of nuclear aspirations both for civilian power and regional military deterrence of Egypt and Iraq began before Israel was considered as a target, as is widely purported today; in fact during this period prior to the 1979 Revolution in which the Arab coalition had an oil embargo in place, Iran was an implicit supplier of petroleum products to Israel.
In addition to the financial and technological assistance from the United States, France and Germany signed several agreements with the Shah to provide Iran with enriched uranium, nuclear reactors and research centers. However, following the 1979 Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini immediately suspended construction indefinitely at all nuclear facilities in the “Islamic State” because as aforementioned, fundamental Islamic religious and jurisprudential beliefs consider all weapons of mass destruction as immoral.
Even during the Iran-Iraq War, Iran never explicitly announced a decision to pursue proliferation of weapons of mass destruction albeit their neighbor to the West, Iraq, was offered arms and military guidance from the United States and its Cold War allies. Throughout this period of internal institutional change and external military engagement with Iraq, Iran never resorted to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction even though Saddam Hussein, a secular dictator in control of a nation with a Muslim majority, began to produce and amass a stockpile of lethal nerve agents such as Sarin and VX nerve gas and other unconventional weapons which he would later use on his own populace in the first Gulf War.
Additionally, it has been widely reported in intelligence circles but never truly confirmed, that Israel has a nuclear program in place for defensive military purposes which was assembled hastily with American and Norwegian support during the Six-Day War against the Arab coalition. Thus, despite these aforementioned geopolitical threats throughout the Cold War and the collapse of Arab nationalism which were great periods of instability in the region, Tehran never restarted their nuclear program which was originally started by the Shah nor resorted to proliferation of non-conventional weapons.
informationclearinghouse.info
Iran rejects Israel’s accusation on Tel Aviv bombing
TEHRAN: Iran on Saturday dismissed as “baseless” remarks by Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz accusing Iran and Syria of being behind a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that wounded 19 people.
“Shaul Mofaz’s comments are baseless,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in a statement. “The crisis in Palestinian lands are because of the inhuman policies of Israeli leaders and such comments show the desperation of the Zionist regime.”
Currency War
A funny thing happened to the Europeans on their way to get the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors to refer Iranian nuclear fuel-cycle programs – all Safeguarded and certified by the IAEA to be for peaceful purposes – to the UN Security Council by March.
They were on their way – reluctantly – at the insistence of Bush, Cheney, Bolton and Condi-baby. Reluctantly, because the Security Council will likely throw the IAEA Board referral – if obtained – directly into the waste bin as being frivolous.
Why? Well, Bush wants the Security Council to apply Article 39 of the UN Charter to the IAEA Board referral.
“The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
Threat to the peace? Act of aggression? How can Bush et al. expect the Security Council to conclude that IAEA Safeguarded programs constitute a threat to the peace or that pursuing them is an act of aggression?
Or expect the Council to take measures under Article 41 (sanctions), much less Article 42 (use of force)?
Obviously, as the Iranians, themselves, have pointed out, Bush had sent the Europeans on a Fools Errand.
Fortunately, the recent temporary curtailment of Russian natural gas supplied to Western Europe by a pipeline which passes through Ukraine, and the terms agreed to by Ukraine and Russia for restoration of supply, may have put a hitch in the Europeans gitalong.
And perhaps that hitch caused them to slow down long enough to reflect upon the Iranian Bourse that is scheduled to become operational – coincidently? – as early as March.
What is the Iranian Bourse and what has a Russian natural gas curtailment got to do with it?
Well, to answer the second question; in future, some gas delivered to Ukraine and perhaps on to Western Europe via pipeline will be Iranian.
And, according to Iranian officials, the Iranian Bourse will be a state-owned international oil, gas and refined products exchange, operating principally over the Internet, with transactions denominated principally in Euros.
The Iranian Bourse will be competing directly with London’s International Petroleum Exchange and New York’s Mercantile Exchange, both of which are owned by US corporations, and whose transactions are denominated in Dollars.
This may give context to the Georgia pipeline blast.