[Marxism] Iran defends sovereign right to nuclear research -- will this be Washington's excuse for attack?

Fred Feldman ffeldman at bellatlantic.net
Thu Jan 5 02:15:32 MST 2006

Note that the article proclaims "non-negotiable' in the headline but the
word does not appear in the statements quoted from Iranian officials. In
fact, they claim to be looking forward to negotiating. 
 It is possible that an administration that faces a mounting political
disasters in the Middle East (including Iran's growing influence in much
of Iraq -- even including its relations with the de facto Kurdistan)
gations into corruption, the methods used to sell the war during the
runup (a process which certainly turned out to be costly to Washington
in the long run), and possible investigations into
administration-ordered NSA spying, may see a huge military adventure as
the way to strengthen its political position and the US world position
at the same time..
At the same time, there is no sign yet of a coherent opposition to the
administration's course.  The Alito nomination to the Supreme Court,
which will  be likely to create a fairly solid right=wing majority on
the court for the first time since the early 1930s, seems to be sailing
through with little Democratic opposition and what ought to be a
shocking lack of mobilization by women and others threatened by this
prospect.  On Iraq, Murtha remains a voice crying in the Democratic
wilderness. (He recently announced he would not join the military if he
was a youth today.)
So the Democrats are so far acting in a way that can only encourage a
belief in the administration that they can "take arms against a sea of
troubles and by opposing, end them." (Of course, this quote from
Shakespeare refers to committing suicide, not murder, but the speaker
Hamlet had the two things pretty mixed up anyway, as may the
I am far from convinced that an attack on Iran is foreordained, but I am
beginning to believe it is  likely unless the current divisions in the
ruling circles sharpen quite a bit and quickly -- including around this
issue.  Rather than engage in a long and tangled campaign to line up
Congress and the UN, the Bush administration may -- in tandem with
Israel -- decide to present one and all with a fait accompli that they
hope will remove Iran as a contender against US power in the Middle East
and deal a blow to humanitythat will send a chill of fear to Latin
America as well.
Hope for the best,  agitate and mobilize against the worst, is the best
way to go on this one until the rulers are genuinely forced to back off.
Fred Feldman
 <http://www.nytimes.com/> The New York Times 


New York Times
January 5, 2006

Iran Declares Its Nuclear Plan Nonnegotiable 

By ELAINE  <http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=ELAINE
SCIOLINO&inline=nyt-per> SCIOLINO

PARIS, Jan. 4 - Iran
s/iran/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>  vowed Wednesday to proceed with a
plan to restart nuclear research next week, though the government has
yet to explain to the United Nations' nuclear monitoring agency what
activities it intends to carry out.

Ali Larijani, the senior official in charge of nuclear issues, was
quoted on Iranian state television on Wednesday as saying the decision
to resume nuclear research was "nonnegotiable."

Responding to criticism that the decision would violate Iran's formal
agreement with Europe to suspend all uranium conversion and enrichment
activities, he said: "Research has its own definition. It is not related
to industrial production. Hence, it was never part of the negotiations."

Late Tuesday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took a similar hard line.
"We will not take a step back on our path," he was quoted by state
television as saying.

The Iranian news agency ISNA further quoted Mr. Ahmadinejad as saying
Western countries "are so rude that if we allow them, they will tell us
to shut down all our universities, whereas research has no restrictions
or red lines."

Iran informed the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna in
writing on Tuesday that it planned to resume nuclear fuel research and
development next Monday and asked the agency to make the necessary
preparations to monitor the activities.

Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency's director, pressed Iran's ambassador to
the I.A.E.A., Muhammad Mehdi Akhondzadeh, for an explanation of Iran's
intentions and warned him that Iran should not proceed, according to
officials from two European nations briefed on the meeting.

Dr. ElBaradei told the ambassador that the decision to restart nuclear
research on its fuel cycle was a regrettable development, adding that
Iran must consider the potential consequences, the officials said.

The ambassador responded that Iran was not ready to provide the agency
with the technical details of its decision, the officials said. The
technical meeting was tentatively scheduled for Thursday, when Muhammad
Saeedi, the deputy head of Iran's atomic energy agency, is expected to
arrive in Vienna to lead the delegation that will clarify Iran's
announcement, they added. 

The officials insisted on anonymity because their governments do not
authorize them to talk on the record. I.A.E.A. officials declined to

Criticism of the Iranian decision continued Wednesday. "We regard the
recent announcement by Iran of its intention to resume research and
development activities with concern," Martin Jaeger, a spokesman for
Germany's Foreign Ministry, said at a news conference in Berlin. "We
would encourage Iran to abstain from unilateral steps."

The French Foreign Ministry spokesman, Jean-Baptiste Mattei, told
reporters that the announcement was "very worrying" and added, "We
firmly call on Iran to revoke this announcement."

On Iranian state television on Wednesday, Foreign Minister Manouchehr
Mottaki insisted that "Iran is ready for negotiations with the European
Union" this month.

The next round of talks is scheduled for Jan. 18. But Britain, France
and Germany, the three nations that negotiated the November 2004 nuclear
accord with Iran, have said Iran's decision could jeopardize talks. 

*	Copyright
<http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html> 2006The
New York Times Company <http://www.nytco.com/>  

More information about the Marxism mailing list