The growing Iranian threat
While the “EU Three” may believe otherwise, Iranian intentions are highly suspect and we should not be relying on good faith and diplomacy. Our thanks are due to AFI reader Anita who draws our attention to this important article in the Washington Times by Rachel Ehrenfeld and Paul E. Vallely:
One wonders what will it take for the international community to understand that Iran seriously intends to use its nuclear power to attack the “infidels.”
Iran’s latest move to ban international inspectors is just one more step that the new Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmedinijad, has taken to herald the return of the 12th Imam al-Mahdi, who is believed to have been born 800 years ago and went missing in 941 and whom the Shi’ites and Mr. Ahmedinijad believe will return before judgment day “to lead an era of Islamic justice.” According to the prophecies in the Muslim Hadith, (the traditions and sayings of the prophet Mohammed), the 12th Imam al-Mahdi will be resurrected only after “one-third of the world population will die by being killed and one-third will die as a result of epidemics.” Indeed, last year’s tsunami and this year’s devastating hurricanes and earthquakes are being used as propaganda by the radical Shi’ite clerics, claiming that the recent calamities are part of these prophecies.
On Nov. 16, Mr. Ahmedinijad stated: “Our revolution’s main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam, the Mahdi.” In all his public statements in Iran and abroad, Mr. Ahmedinijad’s messages are on target: Iran under his leadership must rise as a global power to lead the world in the footsteps of the prophets. He clearly follows up with actions — moving on to develop nuclear weapons.
The problem is that we continually write off such utterances as mere delusion or rhetoric for the masses. We fail to understand that such regimes do not place the same values that we do on human freedom, peace, democracy and tolerance; that for them, a nuclear conflagration is not the unthinkable horror that we deem it to be but rather a possible step on the road to the domination of the world by Islam.
For those who think that it is quite reasonable for the Iranians to seek nuclear power - even though the country is blessed with oil reserves that are the envy of most of the world - consider their actions, not only since the election of Ahmedinejad but even before that.
In 2002, it emerged that Iran had secretly built a massive uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak without informing the United Nations. Months later, the hapless Mohammed ElBaradei (from the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA) was dispatched to Tehran to find out what was happening.
Surprise, surprise: traces of highly enriched weapons grade uranium were found at Natanz in August 2003. But the Europeans had a plan to present themselves as global leaders without the need for the US to be involved - and also to help Iran save face. In October 2003, the foreign ministers of Great Britain, France and Germany came to an agreement with Tehran on supplying nuclear technology for non-weapons use. They trumpeted that Tehran would now be halting the enrichment of uranium. ElBaradei was happy and Iran signed a protocol for a tougher inspection regime.
Alarming reports surface early in 2004 that Iran may have been a party to the AQ Khan nuclear network, and it was found that Iran had been experimenting with polonium-210 - used to trigger the chain reaction in a nuclear bomb and had been trying to import magnets for centrifuges. The IAEA started to feel uncomfortable.
It soon transpired that the October 2003 agreement was so vague as to be worthless and more talks ensued.
By November 2004, the Iranians were setting the pace. Not only were they able to use the talks with the troika as a handy cover for carrying on with their preparations, but they now demanded that Europeans support their position at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in return for Iran fulfilling its commitments on a ‘voluntary’ basis - i.e., a worthless gesture. At the same time, they emphasized its worthlessness by pledging to resume uranium enrichment in the future.
Just days before Iran’s ‘voluntary’ commitment to halt uranium enrichment was due to come into effect, ABC News reported (link no longer available) new evidence showed that Iranian intentions were suspect:
Raising doubts about its commitment to dispel international distrust, Iran is producing significant quantities of a gas that can be used to make nuclear arms just days before it must stop all work related to uranium enrichment, diplomats said Friday.
Iran recently started producing uranium hexafluoride at its gas-processing facilities in the central city of Isfahan, the diplomats told The Associated Press.
When introduced into centrifuges and spun, the substance can be enriched to varying degrees. Low-grade enriched uranium is used in nuclear power plants. Highly enriched uranium forms the core of nuclear warheads…
Iran announced suspension of enrichment last week, and the agency said it would police that commitment starting next week, ahead of a Nov. 25 IAEA board meeting.
The main focus of that meeting is Iran, with Tehran and its allies pushing to close the books on an examination of nearly two decades of covert nuclear activities and the Americans seeking to keep open the option of Security Council involvement.
By opting to freeze and not scrap the enrichment program, Tehran has not dropped plans to run 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium for what it says will be the fuel requirements of a nuclear reactor to be finished next year.
Iran currently possesses fewer than 1,000 centrifuges. But even with 1,500 centrifuges, experts say Iran would be able to make enough weapons-grade uranium for about a bomb a year.
A cat and mouse game with the Europeans ensued through early 2005. This was all before the election of Ahmedinejad, who pledged an “irreversible” commitment to uranium enrichment upon his installation as president in August this year.
The Russians decided to offer a compromise deal in which Iran could carry out uranium enrichment at a plant on Russian soil, which received a lukewarm response from Tehran but was possibly useful in stringing out the saga and avoiding a referral to the UN Security Council.
Not to be outdone, the EU 3 are now ponder reopening talks with Tehran, while an emboldened Iranian regime has passed a law banning all foreign inspections of nuclear facilities - effectively sidelining the IAEA. But ElBaradei, now with his Nobel Peace Prize, thinks that the important thing is that we continue talking to settle ‘grievances’.
There are many regimes around the world in which this activity would be alarming, but it is especially so in the case of Iran. This is a country that funds and trains terrorists, whose current president has denied the historical reality of the Holocaust and has openly talked of wiping Israel off the map, and where a past president has mused that only one bomb would be necessary to destroy Israel. This is the regime that announced itself to the world by taking 63 Americans hostage in 1979, with over 50 of them being held for well over a year. Incidentally, the current president Ahmedinejad is widely believed to have been a ringleader in the hostage taking and interrogations.
