Felicia Whatley
Iran Should Not be Trusted with Nuclear Power
PAF G 632
Contemporary Issues in World Politics
The United States and the Middle East
Dr. Leila Farskh
Young men run past a burning bus during a riot in Tehran on June 13, 2009. (OLIVIER LABAN-MATTEI/AFP/Getty Images)
Although legally the U.S.’s position on the Iranian nuclear program is not justifiable, because of the Non Proliferation Treaty, politically Iran’s nuclear program is a threat to U.S. interests. A nuclear Iran would threaten the security of Israel, which is a strategic ally of the U.S., and it would create an imbalance in the regional politics. This would trigger a nuclear arms race in Middle East and endanger the U.S. control on the flow of oil in the Persian Gulf. Though the people of Iran need nuclear power to assist in basic needs, I would not trust Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a toaster, let alone nuclear capacity.
“We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt. It is in your own interest to distance yourself from these criminals [Israel]…This is an ultimatum,” said Ahmadinejad on the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio, in Oct. 20, 2006. This statement was a direct threat to Europeans and Americans regarding their interests in Israel. Israel will always remain an ally and Ahmadinejad and his Iranian regime will never be trusted.
“The Iranian people and other peoples will not stop until all of Palestinian territory liberated…[World Powers] should not think the Iranian nation and other nations in the region will take off their hands off the throat of the Zionists and their supporters,” said President Ahmadinejad in Agence France Presse, October 5, 2007. Threats against the United States and Israel by Iranian President Ahmadinejad and the advances in his Iranian nuclear weapons program, support for terror, and resistance to international negotiations on its nuclear program, demonstrate that Iran is a security threat to our nation that requires much attention. The seriousness of the Iranian threat has been amplified by the recent rocket attacks against Israel by the Iranian-backed Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah, which, according to press accounts, has received as many as 10,000 rockets from Iran, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte said in his assessment in his 2006 Annual Threat Report. He was concerned of Iran’s pursuit for nuclear weapons.
It is important to delineate between Iran’s insistence that they just want nuclear energy and not nuclear weapons. “Nuclear energy and weapons are two different things, but they will absolutely have nuclear weapons as soon as they can, because then they will have sole control of their natural resources without fear of outside influence or invasion,” said UMB veteran and student Jason Mezula. Iran continues to insist they do not intend to build nuclear weapons, but is pursuing its legitimate right to process uranium for power plants like the one at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf coast. But Israel, which has its own undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal, has been warning for some time that Iran is far closer than we thought to being able to build a nuclear bomb.
U.S. President Obama has repeatedly said that he wants a diplomatic exchange with Tehran to defuse the "urgent problem" of the nuclear dispute. But he has also hinted at tougher sanctions if Iran does not meet international demands.
Let’s not forget history of Iranians’ actions against Americans. On November 4, 1979, the revolutionary group Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line reacted to the fact that the recently deposed Shah had been allowed into the United States for cancer treatment. The MSFIL occupied the American embassy in Tehran and took U.S. diplomats hostage. Fifty U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days. America responded by freezing Iranian assets, which is a sensitive topic for the Iranian government. After the 1979 seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, the United States froze about $12 billion in Iranian assets, which included bank deposits, gold and other properties. According to U.S. officials, most of those were released in 1981 as part of the deal for the return of U.S. hostages taken in the embassy kidnapping. But the effects are still there; some assets—Iranian officials say $10 billion, U.S. officials’ s account less—remain frozen pending resolution of legal claims in the aftermath of the revolution.
Victims from the Beirut bombing said their lawyers began looking for Iranian assets to seize after winning the $2.7 billion judgment in 2007. A federal judge in Washington D.C. ruled that Iran's intelligence Service, the Ministry of Information and Security, directly oversaw and assisted the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in coordination with Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. Before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, that terrorist attack was the largest ever inflicted on U.S. citizens, in which 241 servicemen died.
Legally, Iran has the right to nuclear power. Iran has legally justified ambitions to acquire nuclear energy. The Non Proliferation Treaty clearly states every country has the right to obtain peaceful nuclear energy. Article IV states that nothing in this Treaty should be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all countries to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this Treaty. All the countries applicable to the Treaty can undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. These countries can also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world, (http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/npt1.html)
Iran may have the legal right to nuclear energy, but America can not trust the Iranian regime to solely focus on nuclear assets just for the use of heating homes and improving infostructure. I don’t think Israel will allow Iran to get much farther with their testing and contrary to this insightful quote, I do believe this issue is a security threat to America and entire Middle East. “Iran doesn’t or won’t pose a threat to our national security, but to our economic security. Yes, this is because they have the worlds’ 2nd largest oil reserves. They want to protect their sovereignty and keep Iranian oil in Iranian hands--similar to what happened in the early 1950's--but they can’t do that unless they have something that will deter outsiders (America, etc) and in the coming years when resources are dwindling down. Countries will do anything and everything to secure access to the worlds’ waning resources.” said Mezula.
Admiral Mike Mullen's remarks came after a report two weeks ago by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which said Tehran, Iraq had significant advances in its enrichment of nuclear chemicals. The report claimed an increase in Iran's reported stockpile of low-enriched uranium at its Natanz plant since last November to 1,010 kg. “This is technically enough, some physicists have said, for a conversion into highly-enriched uranium to make one bomb.”
The West does have a problem. Iran is flagrantly defying the IAEA, and thereby also the UN. So did Pakistan and India and for Realists who believe that a democracy will not fight with another have obviously been proven wrong. Although, I would not call Iran a democracy. It is the black robe’s interpretation of a democracy. God help you if you are an Iranian and disagree with the regime. A policy of confrontation only confirms the view of Iranian extremists that the Christian West is set on a path to intervention and that everyone, even innocent sailors, is part of that struggle. We can not allow this to happen. I wonder if Ahmadinejad really has a master plan to destroy Israel. That kind of mentality can not be coddled.
"The real reason Iran can't be trusted: As they confront Iran's nuclear aims, negotiators must mind the Shiite doctrine of deceit called 'taqiyya,'" said Mamoun Fandy. In Iran, the teachings of Shiite Islam govern all aspects of life, and taqiyya -- dissimulation and concealment -- is one of the key concepts of the Shiite faith. While some outsiders are surprised by Iran's concealment of its nuclear installations, those who study the Shiite faith and recognize the signs of taqiyya are not surprised.
Many governments lie about strategic secrets, especially secrets about nuclear weapons. Remember that Israel concealed its intensions and growth of its nuclear capabilities. Also former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping counseled his country to "hide its brightness" - for strategic reasons. Iran's approach to its nuclear ambitions, however, is a different form of deception and denial. Whatever cultural terms Iranians want to call it, its belligerence is not embraced by hegemonic states. Certainly states do not need a religious edict to lie or deceive.
What if Iran gets nuclear power? Mezula goes on to say “A nuclear Iran will strike a crushing blow to our, and other western energy interests, but not to the physical security of our nation. They have no intentions of attacking you, nor could they without being blown off the map.” I disagree. I think the minute Iran gets nuclear energy; they will sell the configuration to Syria, amongst others and further destabilize the region. And what can Iraq do to defend themselves from that? Because of the Iran/Iraq war, the Iraqis still do not trust Iran’s intentions. For now, the insurgency in Iraq is mostly funded by Iranians to the south and Syrians to the north. I fear to think what would happen if they had that kind of power.
While the government they have is corrupt, a change will have to come from within. This year’s past elections showed what a distraught dictatorship Iran has. There is no freedom of speech. Protesters who rightly speculated Ahmadinejad’s win was rigged were killed rioting on their own streets and journalists were forbidden to broadcast the entirety of the situation.
But if a democratic change can happen anywhere it can happen in Iran since it happened before with hope from the Shah. The Iranians have seen it in their lifetimes. If we are looking at it from the best interest of Americans, we would work to undermine the Ahmadinejad’s government, help see to it that a leader emerges who is friendly to the West, and treats their own citizens as human beings. Then we can invest in Iraq’s economy and again have access to their oil. But I want to know, when will the three American hikers be released? Are they going to be coming home in body bags?
At the UN race conference this year, diplomats from 33 countries got out of their seats and walked right out of the door during Ahmadinejad’s racist speech. It was humorous but sad for a leader that says the Holocaust was a myth, death to Americans, and that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. “This shows the truth. Ahmadinejad takes to the podium at the Geneva conference on racism and as soon as he starts attacking Israel and the Jews, half the place walks out. (And neither the Americans nor the Israelis were even there),” said Rosenberg. “I wish this type of reaction was inflicted on every racist demagogue in the world. But this is nice in and of itself.” As for Ahmadinejad, I'll bet this is the most popular youtube in Iran (topping even Susan Boyle). What joy it must be for Iranians to see the Iranian boob ridiculed like this. Ridicule is a marvelous weapon, said Rosenberg.
What could be the repercussions of Iran getting closer and closer to obtaining nuclear power? Will it get wrapped up with the War on Terror, but this time sanctioned by the UN because the U.S.’s concern for the Iran’s ambitions is not just an American fear? “Iran is much different than Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a big, semi-modern state of 80 million people, compared with 20 million each for Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombers can easily attack Kabul and Baghdad. Doing likewise to Tehran, a city the size of London, should be unthinkable. Iran's politics may be unstable but its national pride is fierce. To challenge it would be disastrous, a final sign that western democrats can no longer contain the globalized moral arrogance shown by their leaders,” said British journalist Simon Jenkins.
As for the economic tensions, more than $2 billion is supposedly being held on behalf of Iran in Citigroup Inc. accounts that were secretly ordered to be frozen last year by a federal court in Manhattan. This appears to be the biggest seizure of Iranian assets abroad since the 1979 Islamic revolution. The legal order was put forth 18 months ago by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It is now under lock and seal and hasn't been made public. The court acted in part because of info provided by the U.S. Treasury Department. Our President Barack Obama has promised to enact new economic sanctions on Iran by the year’s end if Tehran doesn't respond to international pleas for negotiations over its nuclear-fuel program.
Iran's government clearly intends a nuclear capability beyond what is considered acceptable by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The ruling parties in Iran would like to go further and join the nuclear weapons club. Since the Non-Proliferation Treaty failed to disarm India, Pakistan or Israel, many Iranians can not see why they are different. It is their outspoken hatred towards the U.S. and Israel that has everyone nervous and edgy.
Tehran's nuclear progress has come despite CIA efforts to sabotage shipments of centrifuge components on their way into Iran and entice the country's nuclear scientists to leave. Iran still faces considerable difficulties. The country launched a 60-pound satellite into orbit this month. If Iran wanted to launch nuclear rockets they would need to be able to carry more than 2,000 pounds to deliver a first-generation nuclear bomb.
There are indications that the U.S. and Iran are trying to hold serious diplomatic discussions for the first time in three decades. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said this week that his nation was "ready to hold talks based on mutual respect," and Obama indicated that his administration would look for opportunities "in the coming months."
“Taqiyya doesn't mean the West should give up all negotiations with Iran, or that Iran can never be trusted. Tehran's concealment is a means to an end: It wants nuclear weapons to provide security for the clerical regime and the Shiite community. So long as Iran feels threatened, it will deceive. But if the West can ease Tehran's anxiety with strong assurances, then negotiations will be more truthful,” said Fandy. But how close is Iran to producing a nuclear weapon?
Mullen told CNN in March 2009, when asked if Iran had enough material to manufacture a bomb, "we think they do, quite frankly. Iran having a nuclear weapon, I believe, for a long time, is a very, very bad outcome for the region and for the world."
A supporter of defeated Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi shouts slogans during riots in Tehran on June 13, 2009. Hardline incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared winner by a landslide in Iran's hotly-disputed presidential vote, triggering riots by opposition supporters and furious complaints of cheating from his defeated rivals. (OLIVIER LABAN-MATTEI/AFP/Getty Images)
References
1.http://www.aipac.org/Publications/AIPACAnalysesMemos/AIPAC_Memo_-_Words_of_Hate_Iran.pdf
2.Rosenberg, MJ “Beautiful Moment: Delegates Jeer and Walk Out As Iranian President Spews Hate” The Middle East Peace Pulse: April 20, 2009 http://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com/blog/beautiful-moment-delegates-jeer-and-walk-out-iranian-president-spews-hate
4.Interview with UMB Political Science student Jason Mezula.
5.Ahmadinejad’s speech on Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio, in Oct. 20, 2006.
10.Black, Ian “U.S. Fears that Iran has Capability to Build a Nuclear Bomb” Guardian.co.uk; March 2, 2009
11.Jenkins, Simon “Imposing idiot sanctions on Iran is a direct route to war” Guardian.co.uk, 1 December 2009.
12.Solomon, Jay “U.S. Freezes $2 Billion in Iran Case” The Wall Street Journal; December 12, 2009
13. Miller, Greg “U.S. now sees Iran as Pursuing Nuclear Bomb” www. Wsj.com; February 12, 2009.”
14. Editorial, “More Hatred from Mr. Ahmadinejad” The New York Time; April 21, 2009.
15. Agence France Presse, October 5, 2007.
16. Fandy, Mamoun “Taqiyya: Why Iran can't be trusted” Christian Science Monitor, November 20, 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment