Western Resistance

« Russia: Feds Shoot Up and Shut Down Dagestan Jihad Group | | Denmark: Muslim Tortures Woman For "Being Christian" »

November 13, 2007

International: Actions Against Nuclear Iran - The Fallout

This article by Adrian Morgan (Giraldus Cambrensis of Western Resistance) appeared earlier today in Family Security Matters and is reproduced with their permission.

Unilateral Sanctions

On October 25, the United States Department of State announced that actions were being taken against Iran. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL) were designated under Executive Order 13382 for being parties to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Five named individuals and nine organizations connected to IRGC were also designated.

Three state-owned banks - Bank Melli, Bank Mellat and Bank Saderat - with their branches and subsidiaries were also designated under Executive Order 13224. This order has been used since September 23, 2001 to designate numerous terrorist entities. Additionally a branch of the IRGC, the Al-Quds Force was designated by the State Department on October 25. This group supplies weaponry and finances to the Taliban, Hizbollah and to Shia insurgents in Iraq. The reasons for the designations were twofold, to stem Iran's supply of weaponry and logistics to terrorist groups in Iraq, and to hinder Iran's continuing efforts to acquire nuclear weaponry. Bank Mellat has given financial support to Iranian agencies connected with illegal nuclear proliferation.

US Treasury Department Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jnr. explained: "The Iranian regime's ability to pursue nuclear and ballistic missile programs in defiance of UN Security Council Resolutions depends on its access to the international commercial and financial systems. Iran also funnels hundreds of millions of dollars each year through the international financial system to terrorists. Iran's banks aid this conduct, using a range of deceptive financial practices intended to evade even the most stringent risk-management controls..."

"...We have been working closely and intensely with our international partners to prevent one of the world's most dangerous regimes from developing the world's most dangerous weapons. Part of that strategy involves denying supporters of Iran's illicit conduct access to the international financial system; these actors should find no safe haven in the reputable world of finance and commerce."

The upcoming designation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards was openly discussed in August, 2007. Former Ambassador Mark Ginsberg called the IRGC "Murder incorporated." President Bush warned: "When we catch you playing a non-constructive role, there will be a price to pay."

The Revolutionary Guards number 125,000, and the current president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was a former commander within the unit. They also control a squad of suicide volunteers called the Setad Pasdasht Shohadaye Nehzat Jahani Islam which has mounted recruitment campaigns in Europe. The IRGC is also believed to control up to one third of Iran's economy.

The unilateral sanctions announcement came days after the chief nuclear negotiator in Iran, Ali Larijani, resigned following policy differences with President Ahmadinejad. His successor, Saeed Jalil, is a close ally of the president and is known to be more "hard-line" than Larijani.

On September 3, 2007, Iran announced to the world that it was using more than 3,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium. On April 11, 2006, Iran's president had said that his engineers had developed enrichment of uranium to create nuclear fuel, but only on a "laboratory scale". At that stage Iran had only 164 centrifuges. On April 12, Iran announced that it would complete a farm of 3,000 centrifuges by the end of 2006. Once complete, construction then would start on a 54,000 centrifuge facility in an underground bunker in Natanz.

Ahmadinejad's announcement in September, in which he said: "We have more than 3,000 centrifuges working and every week a new set is installed," signaled a new departure for Iran's nuclear arms program. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) visited Natanz in August 2007 and then reported that 1,968 centrifuges were in action. Last week, on November 7 Ahmadinejad announced that the nuclear program was "irreversible". Speaking at the city of Birjand, Ahmadinejad declared: "Today, we have reached 3,000 centrifuges."

There seems to be confusion within Iran about how far it has progressed. The contradictory claims of when the 3,000 centrifuge target had been reached are one example of official confusion. Even though nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani has disassociated himself from Ahmadinejad, he still works for the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khameini. Soon after his "resignation" Larijani visited the European Union for talks with Javier Solana, the EU chief of foreign policy.

One thing is certain - the existing nuclear power plant under construction in Bushehr, southern Iran, which has been developed with help from Russia, is a pressurized water reactor. It has no need for highly enriched uranium, so the only possible purpose for building an industrial-scale factory for enriching uranium to high levels of purity is for the construction of material for nuclear weaponry. So far, the known purity of Iran's enriched uranium from 2006 is 3.6 percent pure. This is sufficient to produce electricity. To become viable for bomb production, uranium needs to be enriched to a purity of 90 percent.

Despite the visit by the IAEA to Nantaz in August, the nature of the centrifuge used in the existing "cascade" is so far unknown. Gholamreza Aghazadeh, Iran's chief nuclear scientist, has said: "As for more advanced machines - we indeed have plans to develop such machines. Having the advanced type of centrifuges and the new technology enables one to multiply production."

The development of what is called a P2 cascade would be extremely dangerous to international interests, as such a configuration would quadruple the speed at which uranium could be enriched. Ahmadinejad has announced that he is working on constructing a P2 centrifuge system, employing technological information made by Pakistani scientist Abul Qadeer Khan. According to Iranian opposition source the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), P2 development is being carried out in Ab-e Ali and Natanz, with assistance from North Korean and Chinese scientists.

Iranian Reactions

Since 2002, when Iran's nuclear plans were first revealed, Iran has consistently played cat and mouse with the international community - offering hopes of a cessation of operations and then back-tracking. Since 2005, Iran flouted resolutions from the U.N. Security Council and the IAEA. Since April 2006, the situation has become more urgent. On June 6, 2007, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China offered an incentive package to Iran. If the nation abandoned its uranium enrichment program, it would receive assistance to develop a nuclear power industry for civilian purposes. The offer of inducements was rejected.

A week before the American sanctions were anounced, President Bush had argued that Iran's possession of nuclear weapons could lead to "World War III." As soon as the sanctions were announced, Russian president Vladimir Putin suggested they may not be effective, and warned against further sanctions which might be made by the U.N. Security Council. On a visit to Portugal, he said: "Why worsen the situation by threatening sanctions and bring it to a dead end? It's not the best way to resolve the situation by running around like a madman with a razor blade in his hand." He suggested diplomacy as a solution, arguing that it had worked for North Korea.

Iran was characteristically belligerent. Mohammad Ali Hosseini, the foreign ministry spokesman said: "The hostile American policies towards the respectable people of Iran and the country's legal institutions are contrary to international law, without value and - as in the past - doomed to failure. The ridiculous accusations by American officials cannot save them from the Iraqi crisis that they have themselves created."

Saeed Jalil claimed: "These sanctions are nothing new. Sanctions have been imposed on us for 28 years. The new sanctions, like all those before, will have no effect on Iran's policies. The sanctions will only isolate the US on the international stage."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's response was predictable. He said: "Unfortunately, our enemies cannot tolerate to see our success and try to throw obstacles in our way... Our enemies know that they are not able to take any action against us and world nations never listen to them... Victory belongs to our nation and defeat and humiliation are facing our enemies."

General General Mohammad Ali Jafari, head of the IRGC, responded: "The Islamic Republic has the strength and power of its people's faith. This power is joined with experience, knowledge and technology in the realms of defence. We will reply to any strike with an even more decisive strike."

The Iranian press has made much of a report that former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton has claimed that Colin Powell had tried to derail unilateral sanctions. Posell was said to have tried to suggest offering incentives to Iran, rather than sanctions.

Shaky Alliances

The first round of U.N. sanctions was approved in December 23, 2006, adopting resolution 1737. The declaration had been made after Iran had failed to observe a demand made on July 31 that Iran should "suspend all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities." China indicated that it viewed the 2006 sanctions as a "means to an end" - to urge Iran to return to negotiations. The 2006 sanctions were considered reversible, should Iran return to the negotiating table.

In March this year, the United Nations Security Council imposed its second round of sanctions against Iran. A travel ban was set against people or organizations involved in Iran's nuclear program, and a partial arms embargo was authorized. These generated a cool reaction from various nations.

In May, the European Union imposed sanctions that went beyond those decreed in March. A full arms embargo was made and more individuals were added to the list of banned travelers. Their EU assets were frozen.

In late August, before the United States issued its unilateral sanctions, Nicolas Sarkozy, who had been French President since May 2007, had urged for more UN sanctions against Iran. He argued that should the UN Security Council fail to impose sanctions, then the EU should impose its own unilateral sanctions. The EU has substantial trade with Iran. Germany, Austria and Italy were reported to object to this suggestion.

Currently, the European Union has neither condoned nor condemned the unilateral October 25 sanctions, though the EU is urging a third round of UN Security Council sanctions. On Thursday November 1, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened economic sanctions of its own, should the EU join with the American unilateral sanctions. He said: "If (the EU) wants to cooperate with the enemy (the US), we would consider this as an unfriendly act and will show the appropriate reaction. You are well aware what would happen to economic calculations if we made a serous turn."

This month, Javier Solana is due to report to the European Union on the Iranian nuclear situation. Even if the European Union does decide to join with the American sanctions, it is unlikely that a meeting of the relevant commissioners and leaders could take place before December.

Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the IAEA, is also due to report on Iran's program of enrichment this month. White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "If their reports are not positive, then we are headed to a third sanctions regime." He added that "any discussion of issues before the UN Security Council is going to lead to 'where does Russia stand?'."

At the end of October, Mohamed ElBaradei claimed that there was no evidence that Iran was building nuclear weapons. He described the American administration of adding "fuel to the fire" with warlike rhetoric. ElBaradei told CNN: "I have not received any information that there is a concrete active nuclear weapons program going on right now. Even if Iran were to be working on a nuclear weapon.. they are at least a few years from having such a weapon."

The French Defense Minister, Herve Morin, disputed the IAEA chief's claims. He said on October 29: "Our information, matching those of other countries, gives us the opposite feeling." He argued that if ElBaradei was correct, then there should be no reluctance for Iran to open its doors to IAEA inspectors.

On Tuesday November 6, Nicolas Sarkozy visited George W. Bush in Washington. The visit marked the end a period of frosty relations set in train by the disdain for US foreign policies voiced by Sarkozy's predecessor, Jacques Chirac. The visit was amicable, and Sarkozy made reference to the historic friendships with France - recalling the Marquis de Lafayette, a friend of George Washington who took part in the American Revolution.

Thomas Jefferson helped to write the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, and the Statue of Liberty was a gift from France in 1886. French/U.S. relations only began to cool after World War II, when General de Gaulle opposed France joining NATO. In 2001 on the last state visit of a French president to the U.S., Jacques Chirac caused offense by asserting that France was the antidote to American "hyperpower."

During his Washington visit, Sarkozy said of Iran's nuclear situation: "The hypothesis of a nuclear weapon in the hands of the current leaders of Iran is for France unacceptable." However, he advised that "one must remain open to dialogue, with a hand extended."

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, visited George W. Bush at his private ranch in Crawford, Texas, on Friday November 9. Before she left Germany, she had told a Berlin newspaper: "The United Nations is the place where sanctions [against Iran] are negotiated... We need the international community to be united on this, including Russia and China. I will commit everything to achieving a diplomatic solution. I'm sure the American president will have an open mind when I say this."

Her visit is the first by any German leader during the Bush presidency. She said on Tuesday last week: "I am aware that given the particular threat to Israel of an Iranian nuclear program, these words [of support] must not be empty words. They have to be followed by deeds, and my government is following its words with deeds." She claimed that the European Union was considering "a diplomatic solution, and that also means that Germany is definitively prepared for sharper sanctions against Iran."

At Crawford on Sunday, Merkel said: "I'm deeply convinced that the diplomatic possibilities have not yet been exhausted." She spoke of the diplomatic moves made by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, but admitted that if these and IAEA moves failed, then "we need to think about further possible sanctions. And we do not only need to think about them, but we also have to then talk and agree on further possible sanctions.. Germany needs to look somewhat closer at the existing business ties with Iran."

On Friday November 9, an agreement was reached between Britain, France, Germany, America, Russia and China. They resolved to push for further rounds of UN Security Council sanctions against Iran. The decision to go ahead and push for UN sanctions will be dependent upon Mohamed ElBaradei's official report. If the IAEA chief decides that Iran is making progress in "trying to address concerns" about its nuclear plans, then they will not move to impose such sanctions. The six nations' representatives will convene again on November 19 to discuss ElBaradei's findings.

Israel stands to become the first potential victim of Iran developing a nuclear arsenal. Ahmadinejad has marked his tenure as president with comments about "wiping Israel off the map". Other suggestions by Ahmadinejad involving a metaphor of a burned tree have hinted that he will use nuclear weapons to achieve his goals against Israel. On Thursday November 8, Israel's deputy prime minister Shaul Mofaz said: "Replacing ElBaradei is the right option. He is saying that he doesn't know about an Iranian nuclear weapons program, it's as if he's not familiar with his job."

Over the weekend, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reassured doubters that the unilateral sanctions package was not a prelude to war against Iran. Referring to a September Senate decision to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization, she said: "There is nothing in this particular resolution that would suggest that. This resolution is saying that there need to be strong measures taken against Iran, which we have definitely done."

Britain - The Weakest Link?

Germany's reluctance to engage in unilateral sanctions Iran are based upon the high commerce between German companies and Iran. Such a decision could affect her political status at home. Britain has few business links with Iran. Its soldiers in Iraq have been placed at risk by Iranian-produced weaponry and insurgents who have been funded from Iran.

On Wednesday, October 31, the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, expressed his distance from America's unilateral sanctions package. At a briefing in New York, he said: "The most important thing is that the unanimity of the international community is valued by all six [UN Security Council powers] and sends a very clear signal to Iran and we need to keep that going."

Miliband maintained that European banks and businesses were making their own moves to reduce suport for Iran. He said that European investment in Iran had fallen by 40 percent this year.

Before the American sanctions against Iran, Miliband had argued on September 7 that Britain would support tough measures against Iran. He refused to rule out the possibility of an armed confrontation with Iran, but maintained: "I think that the whole of the international community wants a non-military, diplomatic solution to this problem. I don't think it does any good to speculate any wider than that."

In August, it was reported that Gordon Brown would support military action against Iran. Senior Pentagon officials had said that Britain's unelected prime minister Gordon Brown had agreed in principle to supporting air strikes against Iran. Brown had apparently made the pledge only on the condition that Iran should mount large-scale insurgent attacks against British or American troops in Iraq. Brown's promise had apparently been made in July, shortly after he had become prime minister.

A former White House intelligence official, Vincent Cannistraro, had said: "The British understand there's a possible need to strike - not strategic bombing of nuclear sites but facilities in Iran in support of Iraqi elements. This understanding was reached shortly after Brown took office."

Brown took the reins of power on June 27. Initially he gained from a surge of popularity among the voting public, the so-called "Brown bounce". That popularity has diminished over the fall, with some polls placing Brown behind the main opposition party, the Conservatives (Tories). Brown gave strong hints that he would call an election, to legitimize his role as "prime minister by default". Negative polls apparently dissuaded him from this course of action.

It appears that Brown is now so fearful of the electorate's potential hostility to any rerun of the situation with Iraq that he has back-tracked on his July pledge to the American administration. On November 11, the Sunday Telegraph reported that the administration of George W. Bush is "losing patience" with Gordon Brown.

An official from the U.S. State Department with close ties to Condoleezza Rice said: "It would be helpful if he (Brown) took a tougher line in public. We've got to convince Iran that the West will not tolerate them developing nuclear weapons. At the moment, I don't think Iran takes the threat seriously. We need Iran, and the rest of the world, to realise that this is not just a bunch of crazy Americans on the one side and flaky Europeans on the other - that we are united on this one."

Under Tony Blair, the Labour party was a staunch ally of President Bush. Brown has demonstrated that he is more close to the traditional leftist roots of the Labour party, and he has been keen to distance himself from the Republican dominated U.S. administration. As soon as he came to power, Brown demonstrated this by banning his cabinet ministers from using the expression "war on terror".

Brown voiced his opinion on Iran on November 3, when he said: "We are not going to rule anything out. The road that we want is a diplomatic road and the sanctions, we believe, are an important element of persuading the Iranians about the strength of feeling in the international community."

The opposition Conservative party in Britain supports a tough line against Iran. In May 2007 David Cameron, Tory party leader, said: "Every week, every month that goes by brings Iran closer to possessing a nuclear weapon." Like the Labour party, the Tory party has chosen poor advisers. Labour has employed the services of the Muslim Council of Britain, whose leaders have espoused extremist causes. The Conservative Party had set up its own Muslim advisory body, the Conservative Muslim Forum.

In October, days before the United States announced its unilateral sanctions against Iran, the Conservative Muslim Forum issued a report which criticized Britain's relations with Israel and claimed: "Given Iran's position in the Middle East, facing a nuclear-armed Israel, Iran appears to have legitimate reasons for seeking nuclear weapons for defensive purposes."

Unless Britain can produce a leader with the passion and conviction of Tony Blair, or better still Margaret Thatcher, the future for the "special relationship" between Britain and America is looking decidedly bleak.

Update

Last night, Gordon Brown made his first Foreign Policy speech since he assumed power on June 27. He addressed dignitaries at the Lord Mayor's Banquet at the Guildhall in London, wearing a $6,000 suit and introduced by a fanfare of trumpets. Perhaps stung by criticism of his aloof position regarding the administration in the U.S., he spoke of his support for the United States.

He said: "It is no secret that I am a life-long admirer of America. I have no truck with anti-Americanism in Britain or elsewhere in Europe and I believe that our ties with America - founded on values we share - constitute our most important bilateral relationship. And it is good for Britain, for Europe and for the wider world that today France and Germany and the European Union are building stronger relationships with America."

Brown did not mention support for President Bush as he is known to have close links with members of the Democrat Party. Even the BBC's American correspondent Jonathan Beale has spoken of a "distinct autumn chill" in the relations between Britain and the U.S. Beale added: "The question is can relations with Gordon Brown be as close as with Tony Blair?"

Brown also spoke of Iran, without mentioning the American sanctions initiative of October 25. He said: "We will lead in seeking tougher sanctions both at the UN and in the European Union, including on oil and gas investment and the financial sector."

When questioned about the possible effect that such an approach would have on fuel prices, Brown's spokesman said: "When we are dealing with nuclear proliferation, this needs to be taken seriously."

The speech is the first time Brown has tried to sound like a statesman, but his comments indicate that his support for "America" is only generalized, and not an endorsement of the current actions of the U.S. State Department.

Adrian Morgan

© 2003-2007 FamilySecurityMatters.org All Rights Reserved

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at November 13, 2007 7:11 AM

Comments

Posted by: Leon at November 15, 2007 6:23 PM

Post a comment