PDA

View Full Version : Iran Will Pursue Nuclear Technology


Echo2
05-03-2005, 02:48 PM
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent

UNITED NATIONS - With the world watching its every nuclear step, Iran declared Tuesday that it is determined to pursue all legal areas of nuclear technology, including uranium enrichment.

Addressing a U.N. conference on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said his government is "eager" to provide guarantees that its nuclear-fuel program will serve only peaceful purposes, as sought in talks with European governments.

Washington contends Iran's uranium enrichment program is aimed at building nuclear weapons, and President Bush has proposed banning such technology to all but those countries that already have it. Enriched uranium also can be used to generate electricity, which Iran says is its only aim.

"It is unacceptable that some tend to limit the access to nuclear technology to an exclusive club of technologically advanced states under the pretext of nonproliferation," Kharrazi said.

He also told delegates from more than 180 nations that the United States and other nuclear-weapons states should make legally binding assurances to non-nuclear states like Iran that they will not be subject to nuclear attack.

The U.S. and other nuclear arsenals are "the major sources of threat to global peace and security," Kharazzi said. He called on the conference to begin negotiation of a treaty requiring nuclear powers to guarantee non-nuclear states like Iran against nuclear attack.

In Tehran, meanwhile, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Tuesday the government would resume some nuclear activities — but not uranium enrichment as long talks continue with European governments to resolve the dispute.

France, Britain and Germany, acting on behalf of the 25-nation European Union, are seeking guarantees from Iran that it will not use its nuclear program to make weapons, as Washington suspects. The latest round of talks yielded no results.

On Monday, opening day of a monthlong conference reviewing the workings of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, U.S. delegation chief Stephen G. Rademaker demanded that Iran shut down and dismantle its enrichment equipment.

"The treaty is facing the most serious challenge in its history," the assistant secretary of state told delegates.

Because of the Iran dispute, treaty members still had not agreed on a complete agenda as of Tuesday afternoon. Conference organizers reported the Iranians were resisting a reference in the document to "relevant developments" — diplomatic code, in this case, for Iran's nuclear program. Organizers hope to have agreement before the nuts-and-bolts work of committees begins next week.

Under the 35-year-old Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, states without nuclear arms pledge not to pursue them in exchange for a commitment by five nuclear powers — the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China — to move toward nuclear disarmament. Three other nuclear states — Israel, India and Pakistan — remain outside the treaty.

The treaty is reviewed every five years at conferences whose consensus positions give valuable political support to nonproliferation initiatives. At the 2000 meeting, the nuclear powers committed to "13 practical steps" toward disarmament, but critics complain the Bush administration — by rejecting the nuclear test-ban treaty, for example — has come up short.

"We are greatly disappointed" by "unsatisfactory progress" toward disarmament by the big powers, said New Zealand's Marian Hobbs, speaking for a coalition of disarmament-minded states.

Rademaker said, however, the Bush administration is "proud to have played a leading role in reducing nuclear arsenals," via the 2002 Moscow Treaty, for example, under which the United States and Russia are to cut back deployed warheads by two-thirds, to between 1,700 and 2,200 each, by 2012.

That agreement has been criticized for not requiring destruction of excess warheads taken off deployment or providing a transparent timetable and open verification of reductions.

Rademaker sought to focus attention instead on Iran, saying, "We dare not look the other way."

The Iran question hinges on the treaty's Article IV, which guarantees nonweapons states the right to peaceful nuclear technology, including uranium enrichment equipment to produce fuel for nuclear power plants.

That same technology, with further enrichment, can produce material for nuclear bombs. Tehran denies that is the purpose of its long-secret uranium-enrichment program, but in his keynote address Annan said states like Iran "must not insist" on possessing such sensitive technology.

Following Annan to the U.N. podium, Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, renewed his call for a moratorium on new fuel-cycle facilities while international controls are negotiated.

ElBaradei has proposed putting nuclear fuel production under multilateral control by regional or international bodies. Rademaker reaffirmed President Bush's proposal for an outright ban on nuclear fuel technology, except in the United States and a dozen other countries that have it.

The Tehran government is negotiating on and off with Germany, France and Britain about shutting down its enrichment operations in return for economic incentives.

Meantime, Tehran has proposed establishment of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East, a move that would require Israel to give up its nuclear arsenal.

North Korea pulled out of the treaty in 2003 and said in February it has already built nuclear weapons. But the review conference is not expected to focus heavily on this first treaty defector, in order not to complicate efforts to draw Pyongyang back into the treaty fold through now stalled six-nation talks.

OldPhart
05-03-2005, 03:04 PM
I think they should move the UN headquarters to Broadway. The acting, dancing, and theatre of it all should be considered the longest running "performance" in show business history.

Another great idea that failed in application.

500lbguerilla
05-06-2005, 07:49 PM
If the US was really interested in reducing nuclear arsonals this proposal:
Meantime, Tehran has proposed establishment of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East, a move that would require Israel to give up its nuclear arsenal. would be taken seriously. Unfortunatly the same circles of people control Israel and the US acting like the two are conjoined at the hip. We're even providing cover for them in pretending they want peace. The settlements are still being built illegally and in violation of the supossed roadmap to peace and yet Bush takes it like a bitch and smiles the whole time. Afgahnistan was just the first in a string of mass-murdering 'liberation.' Afgahnistan was just a distraction while justifacation for invading Iraq was cooked up. Get the US trained anti-imperialist terrorist army on the payroll (afgahnistan). Set up a bunch of permanant bases and secure a long desired resouces to supply them (Iraq). Now they just have to decide which ountry besides Israel and Saudi Arabia they want to displace the leaders of. I vote Iran given all the pushing lately and that their justification for Syria fell through.

Also given BushCo's resusitation of the nuclear arms race prompting most other major powers to do the same. But all the while pushing a fuzzier, friendlier so-called "tactical nuke"; I can't see how anyone could not see the blantant hypocracy of this.

And given BushCo's treatment of NKs "announced real threat of nuclear attack" V. Iraq's "we swear we have no weapons and will let you search anywhere you want and hold elections in 2 years if you dont invade" who can blame them even if they do want Nukes. Seems to me and probably the rest of the world that thats the safest way to be, by US example.

Just a little more of the double speak being done lately.

500lbguerilla
05-07-2005, 12:31 PM
And more...
++++++++++++++++
Bush Administration Lies to Besmirch Iran
Pacific News Service | May 07 2005

The frustration of the Bush administration with Iran regarding its nuclear program is obviously boiling over when an administration official issues an outright lie about Iran in a public venue, as Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns did on television on May 5.

Burns made the following statement on PBS's NewsHour program to interviewer Margaret Warner.

WARNER: But as you know, I mean, Iran says that under the (Nuclear Non-Proliferation) treaty, it has an inalienable right to continue pursuing this technology for civilian purposes.

BURNS: But the agreement that Iran entered into November of last year in Paris with Britain, France and Germany, is that it will not just suspend its nuclear fuel cycle activities. It will actually lead to cessation and dismantling. That means that Iran would not be able to have the possibility to enrich or produce fissile material which, as you know, is the essential ingredient in the capacity to build a nuclear device.

Burns' statement is untrue. The Nov. 15 treaty, a public document, does not stipulate any agreement on Iran's part to dismantle any part of its peaceful nuclear development program. Moreover, Iran's cessation of enrichment activity was specified as voluntary in the treaty.

Burns' remark is designed to show that Iran is in violation of a treaty subsequent to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), thus perpetuating the Bush administration portrait of Iran as an outlaw nation and "treaty violator." What Burns failed to point out is that Iran also subscribed to the following unambiguous statement in the November treaty:

"Iran reaffirms that, in accordance with Article II of the NPT, it does not and will not seek to acquire nuclear weapons. It commits itself to full cooperation and transparency with the IAEA. Iran will continue implanting voluntarily the Additional Protocol [for enhanced inspections] pending ratification."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/May05/070505_Iran.html
+++++++++++++++++