45 thoughts on “IAEA’s Report on Iranian Nuclear Program – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. “But will this development add significantly more danger to the world than the accession of Israel, Russia or the U.S. to that club? Not at all.”

    That’s not comforting, given that we came pretty close to WWIII with the Russians on more than one occasion (in one case just because of a technical glitch on the Russian side which made them think for a few minutes that we were attacking them). Now we might have one more region with two countries that hate each other, both with nukes. Also, there’s an element of self-fulfilling prophecy in all the worry about a possible Iranian bomb. If Israel is panicky about it and if we end up with a Republican President (not that I’m so crazy about the Democrats either) who has campaigned on the need to bomb Iran to prevent them from acquiring a bomb, then yes, the world is in much greater danger. But it will be in large part because of us. But I think you agree.

    As for Iran, I don’t know what to think regarding their motives, but it’s just one more nation where we have to worry about the sanity of the people with their fingers on a nuclear button. In general, the fewer of those the better.

    1. I should add that we all ought to be mildly skeptical about this new report. Maybe Iran is doing research on nuclear weapons technology, but maybe not–

      link

      It’ll be interesting to see if the mainstream press in the US does a better job presenting the evidence than they did back in 2002 with respect to the alleged Iraqi WMD’s. (The Knight Ridder papers did a good job, but the NYT was pretty much a mouthpiece for the Bush Administration.)

  2. Richard, you had me laughing.

    Kudos to the Professor and the other signatories. I am doing the “Iranian finger snap” and whistling in praise.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Cf5L7i0C8RA in case others are curious what that is 😉

    Israeli bombing is not an option. Common sense overrides propaganda here: bombing any nuclear facilities would endanger civilian populations in surrounding regions within an extremely large radius. To bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities even with conventional weapons would be an act of nuclear sabotage. The attack would not set back Iran, but unify Iranians worldwide as a supermajority would view it as unjust given the lack of evidence and the timing of these fabricated claims (Saudi Plot, then this). Really, it would be a human tragedy – one that would be caused by Israel, and no one else but Israel. But as much as I would like to think Netanyahu is a lunatic, I sincerely believe he highly respects all notions of self-preservation.. I mean, I think he would throw the entire US population under the bus to save his own life if given the option, but that’s just me… and probably other mic’d up world leaders… back to my point….

    This is clearly another means of advancing fabrications to tighten sanctions on Iran – and it won’t work. The reason for tightening sanctions on Iran is to soften the country up for invasion and to prevent Iran from playing its natural role in the region. The last time the sanctions were passed were because Russia and China used it as a means to eliminate US and some Western influence in Iran’s private sector. Iran has the 17th largest GDP, despite all of these sanctions, and 50-60% of it doesn’t come from oil (that’s slightly larger than Turkey’s). This time, China and Russia have been given opportunity to provide support to Iran’s position and reject the sanctions as they did for Syria.

  3. There is an astonishing money-shot in that IAEA report: “The information indicates that prior to the end of 2003 the above activities took place under a structured programme. There are also indications that some activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device continued after 2003, and that some may still be ongoing.”

    Read that again, and ponder in what way – exactly – that is different to the 2007 NIE report that said the Iranians halted their nuke program in 2003.

    Answer: there is no essential difference.

    The 2007 NIE said that systematic weapons-research ended in 2003, and this IAEA report is saying that “some activities” may have continued after 2003 (i.e. systematic research ended in 2003).

    Half-empty, half-full.

    After all, you can pull the plug on *any* large-scale project and still decide that “some activities” (e.g. “nanodiamonds”) are worth continuing, precisely because you can conclude that they are valuable in their own right.

  4. [Poor, Hezi. Tryin’ to get back into the game here any way he can. Hezi, you broke the rules. You’re banned. Let us know when you’re house-trained & we’ll consider letting you back in the house.]

  5. In the best of worlds no one should have nukes. But do we live in such world? Of course not.

    So there are some basic premises.

    1. Get nukes or get attacked or invaded by America or attacked by Israel:

    Namely, Iran might want to have the capability to have a “deterrence” and to establish “Mutual Assured Destruction”-theory. When two nations have this power the threats/escalation will decrease. In the mideast we dont see a decrease in escalation and that is why only one regime possess nukes – Israel.

    2. Respect Iran’s right to enrich uranium, which they are fully entitled to do according to NPT. US (much if not all on behalf of interest to Israel) refuse to acknowledge Iran’s right on this. They sanction Iran. Thats not ok and wont help to solve the, in my opinion, fabricated conflict. What I mean by that is that it has been created while it could have been avoided.

    3. US hypocrisy:

    Iran will never bow down to US/israeli intrests. So one simple solution is to create a nuclear-free-middle east. But US/Israel says no, because they want to maintain the monopoly over powerful weapon and the politics that come along. Say what you want about Iran but its not right (legally or moral) to single out just one nation that only MIGHT want to have the capability versus Israel that actually not only have the capability but have an estimated nuclear warhead arsenal of some 400 each.

    4. Give Iran the promise that US nor Israel will attack them:

    But today we see US keep threat Iran, keep sanction it, almost sign a house of congress bill declaring that it will be illegal to even talk to Iran (thats so backwards), THUS giving Iran just a reason to actually develope a deterrence capacity.

    I want to end with quote from the newpaper, maybe this will ease the hysterical warmongers:

    “Furthermore, the bulk of the report is historical, referring to the years leading up to 2003. Its interpretation depends largely on whether you are a glass half-full or half-empty sort of person. On the one hand, the IAEA is confirming beyond reasonable doubt that there was a centralised, heavily funded, programme (codenamed Amad and run by a man called Mohsen Fahkrizadeh from his daintily titled “orchid office”). On the other hand, the report is also adamant that Amad was halted in 2003.”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/nov/09/iaea-nuclear-iran-israel1

    There is no news, just recycled stuff that we already know (whetever the stuff are true or not since the information mosly comes from the infamous iranian-laptop that US/Israel just happend to “find”, that is, it could be fabriacted).

    1. Terrific analyzation. Let’s figure it out. If Iran would have the bomb any Sunni regime in the area will try to get one (i.e Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE which are all more terrified by the Shi’ite regime in Iran).

      Yep, you right, it’s all about Israel and not American intrests. Let’s say Saudi oil. But who cares, let’s bash AIPAC or other pro-Israeli organization. At the end – The Israelis are warmongers. That’s explains the British and French reactions to this report.

      So I say good luck to all of you/us. We’ll meet on the other world (some of us with 72 or 73 beautiful virgins).

      1. “If Iran would have the bomb any Sunni regime in the area will try to get one (i.e Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE which are all more terrified by the Shi’ite regime in Iran).”

        You forgot to add the initiator of the arms race. Israel. You cant have the cake and eat it too. Make the mideast nuclear free? I support it. Too bad warmongers like yourself doesnt agree.
        Also a majority of arab population even think a nuclear Iran is good to counter israelli, american threats and nuclear possession.

        “On Iran’s potential nuclear weapons status, results show another dramatic shift in public opinion. While the results vary from country to country, the weighted average across the six countries is telling: in 2009, only 29% of those polled said that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons would be “positive” for the Middle East; in 2010, 57% of those polled indicate that such an outcome would be “positive” for the Middle East.

        http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2010/0805_arab_opinion_poll_telhami.aspx

        Time for you to dig into sources outside the likud library.

        “So I say good luck to all of you/us. We’ll meet on the other world (some of us with 72 or 73 beautiful virgins).”

        Once again you prove your warmongering mind. Why not dig a grave if you love death and destruction so much? World wont miss warmongers.

        1. “Also a majority of arab population even think a nuclear Iran is good to counter israelli, american threats and nuclear possession” – It seems that you don’t know what happens in the ME. Check on the facts and come back to us. I hope you will get out of your pro-Iranian/anti-Israeli Library soon. check this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-saudis-iran And this was one year ago.

          “This year’s poll surveyed 3,976 people in…” No more to be said.

          But if we look seriously about these results “in 2009, only 29% of those polled said that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons would be “positive” for the Middle East; in 2010, 57% of those polled indicate that such an outcome would be “positive” for the Middle East” – Sure. that’s will be good to the ME. Common. Are you joking with me? or what?

          ““So I say good luck to all of you/us. We’ll meet on the other world (some of us with 72 or 73 beautiful virgins).”
          Once again you prove your warmongering mind. Why not dig a grave if you love death and destruction so much? World wont miss warmongers.” – Warmonger. Do you have other words in your arsenal? a nuclear bomb just get us closer to another war. I assume that you don’t understand it. I invite you to the ME, then maybe you will understand what happens here.

          1. “It seems that you don’t know what happens in the ME. Check on the facts and come back to us. I hope you will get out of your pro-Iranian/anti-Israeli Library soon. check this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-saudis-iran And this was one year ago. ”

            Its very telling that you avoid to recognize and realize that arab favor nuclear-Iran. That came as a shock to you since you dont read news outside the Likud library. Funny how you act with denial, one of the premises for being brainwashed.
            As for saudi arabia, there is no news that wahabbism and zionism sleeps in the same bed.

            “Warmonger. Do you have other words in your arsenal? a nuclear bomb just get us closer to another war. I assume that you don’t understand it. I invite you to the ME, then maybe you will understand what happens here.”
            Because you are a staunch warmonger like your idol netanyahu. What people like you dont understand that Israel initiated nuclear arms race, now deal with it or expect that someone will eventually seek a deterence, taking in regard the constant threat Israel make towards its neighbours.

          2. Israel has between 200-400 “nuclear bombs” & brings us a lot closer to nuclear Armageddon than a single or even 5 Iranian bombs will. But if you truly don’t like nuclear weapons propose a nuclear free zone in the ME. I’ll go with that if you have the guts to propose it. But you don’t.

      2. Jonds, please stop the nonsense about the 72 virgins. This is not mentioned anywhere in the Koran but is for the most part just used as a part of the zionist hasbara playbook.

          1. I can’t stand Jews declaiming on Islamic theology any more than I can stand Muslims holding forth on halacha. When you can tell us which primary sources, which Islamic theology courses, which scholars you studied with–then we can judge your bona fides as a Koranic scholar. Till then, give it a break.

      3. The British, French, Americans and Israelis are the imperialist powers in the world. Iran is the natural opposition to western democracy whether expressed in territorial expansion and dispossession of people or economic invasion of “global” markets. So, yes, let’s blame warmonering Israeli and AIPAC, the most dangerous and uncontained force for aggression and war today, even including the US.

  6. Lets ditch the delusions.

    Iran despite all the denials is diligently pursuing a nuclear armaments capability. A nuclear armed or capable Iran devastates Israeli hegemony in the region, terrifies Sunni/Arab states and thereby seriously complicates US strategic interests in the region, especially the Persian Gulf.

    Unless the whole global community stands united and solidly backs sanctions as in the case of Rhodesia and S. Africa, such are exercises in futility. Great powers like Russia and China have proven time and time again they won’t go along, besides a host of regional and lesser powers.

    Using conventional armaments to bomb Iranian nuclear sites has also been proven time and time again to be utterly unworkable. Its widely assumed bombing would set back Iranian developments temporarily. The FUBAR in this scenario is that it more than likely will accelerate Iranian efforts exponentially.

    And as far as using nukes is concerned, in every biblical sense woe to the first state that dares dropping such a bomb today.

    Whether the Iranians stop at the threshold point like Japan, Brazil and other nuclear capable states, or is actually committed to building a nuclear deterrence matters little. Once they have mastered all the technologies the gig is up and there’s nothing Israel or the west can do about the fait accompli.

    From everything I’ve read on the subject it’s probably already too late for the US, Israel or any ‘coalition of the willing’ in preventing Iran from accomplishing its goal.

    The name of the game is delay as long as possible and in the event adjust and adapt.

    1. Your post should begin with: let’s put aside all facts and go with my opinions.

      Israel is a tiny state with no means of natural regional hegemony over States that have tens of millions of citizens. It’s hegemony comes by way of the gun and nuclear arm supplied by bothersome non-mutually beneficial relationships with the West. It skirts international laws and causes devastation to human life.

      Iran, save for these sham fabrications, that come only a week after another bogus Saudi Assassination assertion, has been compliant with the NPT fully.

      1. Yes, this is right. It is about hegemony in the region and Israel needs its nuclear monopoly (almost) to extend its control and Iran challenges that tiny state of badly behaved people. So, we should all require that Israel give 200 of its reputedly 400 warheads to Iran so there can be a standoff in that dimension and the game of geopolitics can continue by other means.

  7. Which country?

    Which country is bordered by a nuclear-armed Pakistan on its south-eastern border?

    Which country is a neighbour of a nuclear-armed Russia across its northern sea border?

    Which country is surrounded by hostile foreign occupation troops from a nuclear-armed superpower, on its eastern border with Afghanistan?

    Which country is surrounded by hostile foreign occupation troops from the same nuclear-armed superpower, on its western border with Iraq?

    Which country had its democratically elected government overthrown in a 1953 coup d’état backed by the same nuclear-armed superpower?

    Which country was invaded by its Arab neighbour Iraq (with the support of the same nuclear-armed superpower), in a bloody and devastating 8-year war in the 1980s?

    Which country is threatened by its other Arab neighbours (client states of the same nuclear-armed superpower), who secretly conspire with and encourage nuclear-armed foreign states to attack it?

    Which country witnessed its western neighbour being softened up with sanctions, relentlessly threatened, then finally invaded in 2003 (under false pretenses) by the same nuclear-armed superpower?

    Which country is regularly threatened with military bombardment, and has even been threatened with nuclear weapons, by leaders of the same nuclear-armed superpower that forcibly occupies its neighbours?

    Which country is regularly threatened with military bombardment by the leaders of a nuclear-armed regional power which is financially, diplomatically and militarily backed by the same nuclear-armed superpower?

    Which country, which has not launched any wars of aggression in modern history, is under constant military threat from two (2) nuclear-armed foreign states which have a long history of launching wars of aggression and are currently occupying five (5) other countries in the same region?

    Which country, if attacked militarily, will probably develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent to future military invasions?

    Which country, once attacked militarily, has the right to defend itself?

    1. those hemiplegic hasbarists are such a pain in the ass. One day, you’ll figure no one bothers reading your endless hammered litanies after the first line.

        1. Logic is not a substitute for actual evidence. The Iranians could have another plan.

          Particularly as they have attacked nobody in recent centuries.

  8. UUS AND ISRAEL MAKING ONLY FAKE PROPAGANDA AGAINST IRANI NUCLEAR PROGRAMME, WHEREAS US NIE 2011 CONFIRMS THAT IRAN ABANDONED HIS NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMME IN 2003. BUT USA AND ISRAEL HAS NEVIL PLANS AGAINST IRAN. USA FIRST DEAL WITH TNUCLER WEAPONS OF ISRAEL WHICH POSSESS APPROXIMATELY 300 NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THEN ASK
    QUESTIONS FROM IRAN. IF USA IS SERIOUS IN ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN MIDDILE EAST SO HE ADVISE ISRAEL FIRST TO DESTROY HIS NUCLEAR WEAPONS. USA IS ALSO ADVISED TO MAKE EFFORTS FOR A NUCLEAR FREE MIDDLE EAST FOR WHICH IRAN IS READY, BUT ISRAEL OPPOSES. ISRAEL IS NOT SERIOUS FOR A NUCLEAR FREE MIDDLE EAST.

  9. Thank you for a well written piece Richard.

    I concur that Iran will go nuclear soon or later. Where I find fault with Iran, is not that she wants to go nuclear, but that she uses the certainty of her going nuclear to needle and taunt Israel.

    Ahmedinejad is quite happy to let war mongers believe that he issued threats. Perhaps it’s his way of getting some of the power, he doesn’t really wield. He is just a figurehead.

  10. Here’s the real shock! horror! story to come out of the release of this IAEA report: the Russians have decided that this has gone on too long.

    Russia has now come out and said that they do not believe anything in that IAEA report, which they are insisting has been written to be deliberately provocative.

    They have, in short, all-but accused Amana of abusing his position to further the strategic interests of the USA by “sexing up” the evidence.

    That is an astonishing attack upon an American Pet Poodle by Russia, and I suspect very much that the Americans are reeling from it.

    Expect there to be a sudden deafening silence from Washington.

    All the too-clever-by-half plans for leveraging this IAEA report will be shelved once it dawns on the Washington brainiacs that Maybe We Have Gone Too Far This Time.

    After all, “the West” need Russia and China to sit on the sidelines while they gang up on Iran, and Russia (and I suspect China to follow) has just said they aren’t buying what Amano is peddling.

    In short: the only effect that this report will have is to shift Russia from the sidelines and into the Iranian camp.

    Remind me again how that helps the Americans and hurts the Iranians?

  11. Johnboy, no shock at Russia’s attitude.

    The USA is really going too far in picking a fight. If I were a war mongerer, i’d cheer it on, for it would be the sure demise of the USA.

    An impotent USA against Iran, Russia, South American and China, will be wiped of the pages of history. Oil will be cut, trade will cut, the begging bowl will be out.

  12. Bring it on Russia!

    Obama should learn from Putin. He had a chance to make America great once more, instead he is just following in Bush’s footsteps. He has been a big disappointment.

    The OWS crowd are right about one thing, and that is new leadership is required. A radical overhaul of the system, not just a new Messiah led by the old pack which is what Obama is.

    1. There appears to be a view in Washington that America can just keep ratcheting the pressure up, up, up, and up because there is nothing that Iran can do about it.

      And Iran can’t do anything about it, because it has no friends or allies.

      Now the Russians have come running in from the sidelines with the (un)diplomatic equivalent of “This Is Outrageous! You Have Gone Too Far! Stop. This. Now!”

      Well, gosh!, what does the USA do now?

      If it keeps going on then the Russians will break these sanctions.

      If it pulls its head in then, heh!, remind me again what this was all about?

      American strategy required two things:
      1) that Iran be left with no friends or allies, and
      2) that the USA plays a deft-hand to stop Iran from acquiring either.

      But instead the USA installed a Pet Poodle in the IAEA and then proceded to use him to bludgeon Iran, and as a result of that crude bludgeoning Iran is about to (re)acquire its friends.

      Good move, brainiacs.

    2. Despite the avalanche of presumptions, Obama is no George Bush, Senior or Shrub.

      Obama’s job one is not to make “America great once more.” The strategic disaster of 19 March 2003 is so enormous in its scope it may require a generation or never to correct.

      His principle duty is ‘retrenchment,’ leading a wounded America through a jungle of blunders inflicted by the previous 3 US administrations.

  13. Note this gem from haaretz:
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/u-s-officials-wary-of-new-iran-nuclear-sanctions-despite-damning-iaea-report-1.394672

    The report claims that the USA won’t sanction Iran because “These officials are concerned about the effect such sanctions might have on the economy, particularly on the energy market”

    [chortle] How do these guys write this stuff with a straight face?

    Only in passing does it also mention “This is in addition to the fact that China and Russia – both of whom have veto power in the UN Security Council – have unequivocally declared that they will not support new sanctions.”

    Riiiiight…….

    The USA has been dumbstruck by the response of the Russians to this IAEA hatchet-job, and no mistaking.

    They put Amano into that chair precisely so Their Guy In The IAEA can sex up the report, and much to their astonishment the people who really matter – the Russians and the Chinese – not only aren’t buying it; they are outraged that the USA is treating them as fools.

    You know, maybe conning Russia and China into abstaining over that Libyan “We Gotta Stop The Genocide!” Security Council Resolution wasn’t such a good idea after all….

    1. …”Senior U.S. officials are ambivalent about initiating more punishing sanctions against Tehran at the United Nations, even though this week’s report by the International Atomic Energy Agency is seen by the Americans as a vindication of their long-held assertion that Iran is aiming to develop nuclear weapons, sources in New York said on Wednesday.

      These officials are concerned about the effect such sanctions might have on the economy, particularly on the energy market, the sources said…”

      Do I not hear echos of “adjust and adapt” to the inevitable?

    2. Russian & Chinese responses to the IAEA report is hardly surprising to US officials. And considering the shocking candor that secretly transpires between national leaders as opposed to their public rhetoric, the opposition of these other great powers may be more welcomed than abhorred.

    1. Wither Israel?

      Now very likely to run into some shiny-new S-300 anti-air missiles should they launch their F-16s into Iran, I would suggest.

        1. No. They didn’t because the Russians won’t cry if Israel will attack Iran. The price of the gas will uprise and the big winners would be them.

          1. You’ve been reading nonsense published in the Israeli press. Those same Russians which the Israeli article said would secretly welcome an attack on Iran just publicly damned the IAEA rpt & said they would on no account ever support new sanctions. So much for pro Israel hasbara.

        2. Russia began delivering and upgrading the Tor M1 9M330 Air Defense System back in 2009.

          http://defense-update.com/products/t/tor.htm

          The Iranians has acquired a few early versions of the S-300P (SA-10 Grumble) in the early 1990’s, though the news agency FARS claimed in 2009 that Iran had acquired 4 S-300PT air-defense missile systems.

          http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/05/iran-announces-acquisition-of-s-300-air-defense-systems/

          Iran and China have both demonstrated an interest in acquiring Russian air defense technology and incorporating such into their domestic arms industry.

          The Tor system all by itself is a daunting, short range anti-air/missile defense system, but teamed up with a high altitude, long range, bona-fide or facsimile of an SA-10 Grumble would make the targets its defending nearly impregnable.

          So in the face of the virtual worthlessness of US and Israeli intelligence, the big question of the hour no one can answer satisfactorily is how successful the Iranians have been at accomplishing it.

          It may be that’s why the Israelis want the US to do it, and maybe one of a score of reasons why the US isn’t all fired up for hell and high leather like it was over Iraq.

        3. “I thought Russia held back on supplying those new S-300s under Israeli-U.S. pressure.”

          Apparently true.

          “Did they install them?”

          If they haven’t yet they will now.

  14. Fact Check: IAEA Report on Iran’s Nuclear Program
    by Enver Masud

    The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) “aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to additional states while ensuring fair access to peaceful nuclear technology under international safeguards (audits and inspections).

    “There are two categories of parties to the treaty — nuclear weapon states (NWS) and non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS). Under the treaty, NWS are defined as the five states that exploded a nuclear device before January 1, 1967 (United States, Soviet Union [now Russia], United Kingdom, France, and China).” Iran is a non-nuclear weapon state.

    The following examines the November, 8, 2011, IAEA report, “Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” with respect to specific provisions of the NPT. . . .

    CONTINUED AT http://www.twf.org/News/Y2011/1111-Iran.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link