You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iran
Iran warns pressure to open nuclear facilities could backfire
2003-09-08
Iran's chief delegate to the U.N. atomic agency warned the United States and other nations ahead of a Monday meeting that nuclear tensions could be aggravated if they put too much pressure on Tehran to open its programs to inspectors.
"Don't make us do something stoopid..."
Ali Akbar Salehi said Iran still was open to negotiating the inspection issue with the International Atomic Energy Agency, but indicated the offer could be withdrawn if IAEA board meeting ''disrupted the whole process.'' The meeting likely will urge Iran to make its nuclear program accessible by agreeing to a protocol allowing tougher IAEA inspections without notice. Under strong international pressure, Iran last month offered to negotiate the IAEA protocol. Monday's meeting also will ask Tehran to explain agency findings that the Americans and others say point to the existence of a covert nuclear weapons program. ''We are sitting on a very thin edge,'' Salehi said. ''It could tilt one way or the other very easily.''
"We're trying to be reasonable, but every time you mention the world "nuclear" we start to loon out..."
Posted by:Fred Pruitt

#14  So the weapons market stays about the same regardless of how you work the supply side. You recommend going after the damand side like we're doing.

Why would pushing the issue backfire if nuclear weapons are against Islamic Law like the Iranians were sauying today? Obviously, they have no attention of endangering their standing with Allah so the inspections will be a breeze...
Posted by: Anonymous   2003-9-8 8:20:53 PM  

#13  Alaska Paul, If NK leaves the weapons market, do the Russians and Chineese step in or does the market starve?

Mr. Super Hose---The Russians have already been marketing purported countermeasures to some of our military offense and defense systems. They need the money. Pooty-Poot cannot be trusted. The Chicoms will do the same. We KNOW that they are liars and thieves. I do not see that we have too much leverage to control the above. So it is a race with drying up the money sources (Mainly Saudi and Iran) with possible military action against nuclear weapons related sites. Then you have Pakistan. They have ties with the Chicoms, and making deals with the Paks is like signing an agreement with someone with multiple personality disorder. This is the breeze-gale before the storm. I can feel it in my Strontium 90-infested bones.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2003-9-8 4:43:57 PM  

#12  Do notice that I said "the western world should" that would mean Europe and the Anglosphere agreeing to not purchase Iranian oil. If that happened there are few other nations with the ability to move oil to market so it doesn't matter who else breaks the boycott. It's wishful thinking to think the French would do anything in the wests best interests if it meant siding with the US without bribes, etc, but I can dream anyway.
Posted by: Yank   2003-9-8 4:32:48 PM  

#11  I don't know about you, but I'm increasingly losing interest in diplomacy with our so-called allies. Save the diplomacy for our real allies. The rest be damned.
Posted by: Tom   2003-9-8 2:46:29 PM  

#10  Oh come on, Zhang Fei, don't you read the news? All you need to do is blow up the pipelines!

An attack on pipelines wouldn't completely destroy Iran's ability to sell oil. Oil is also transportable via water routes and by truck. This is how Iraq evaded some of the sanctions. But attacking Iran isn't a military problem - it's a diplomatic one. Any kind of military action against Iran is going to have to surmount some pretty high diplomatic hurdles in order to get our so-called allies on board.

I think domestic public opinion-wise, though, Iran will be a cinch compared to Iraq. Between the hostage crisis and the Marine barracks bombing, the Iranians have a lot to answer for.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2003-9-8 2:13:25 PM  

#9  We can't do anything as the Iranians will get pissed. Blockading is useless, It's like a buffer zone. Hey, I've got an idea. Knock out the oilfields in Iran, sabotage their pipelines. Seize the Saudi oilfields and attack certain members of the elite. Just do it and deny it. Bring down Chavez in Venezuela. Just do it and deny it. Say something like "Our saddness over this matter is profound". Ya know, might work.
Posted by: Lucky   2003-9-8 2:02:03 PM  

#8  Or go the Iranian tanker war route and start sinking ships.
Posted by: Yank   2003-9-8 1:50:21 PM  

#7  Impossible to enforce except by blockade.

Oh come on, Zhang Fei, don't you read the news? All you need to do is blow up the pipelines!
Posted by: Tom   2003-9-8 12:52:22 PM  

#6  The western world should cut off sales of Iranian oil if they do not stop.

Impossible to enforce except by blockade. If Iran is willing to sell its oil at a slight discount, there will always be willing takers. China, for example, would probably be glad to strike what it would describe as a blow against American hegemony by buying Iranian oil. Note that the Chinese president Jiang Zemin's final lap before handing over the reins to his successor was to visit each and every one of the most oppressive oil-producing states in the Mideast, including Iran and Libya.

A leaky blockade is possible, given that Iraq now borders a number of the 'stans*, but it would take a lot to get our European allies to go along. For them, relations with Iran are all about the oil.

* Give the 'stans enough financial incentives (through the foreign aid budget) and they'll tighten the spigots. The embargo won't be perfect, but it will be enough to bring the mullahs to their knees.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2003-9-8 11:18:24 AM  

#5  Obviously the Iranians don't have enough oil to go around. The western world should cut off sales of Iranian oil if they do not stop.
Posted by: Yank   2003-9-8 10:52:27 AM  

#4  If NK leaves the weapons market, do the Russians and Chineese step in or does the market starve?

The Russians and Chinese are supplying weapons technology to our enemies. We sell neither ballistic nor cruise missiles to our allies (except for the UK). China and Russia do both. We don't transfer nuclear, biological or chemical weapons expertise to anyone. China and Russia do both. Some of this proliferation is pure commerce, and an attempt to defray huge fixed R&D and tooling costs, but some of it is a calculated strategy of arming America's enemies to keep American power in check.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2003-9-8 10:24:44 AM  

#3  Good point, Super Hose [still can't get used to the name, LOL]. We'll see who wins the prize for the most intransigent and stupid. If the NORKS are shut down, then the major supplier of bomb and missle components is gone. If Iran is shut down, then a major consumer is down. I would like to see Iran's capability degraded or shut down. They would then be on the downhill slide and money would start drying up for Hizbollah and co. This would take some heat off Israel.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2003-9-8 8:35:12 AM  

#2  Pressure is good. Shutting down NK first would close the spigot on missile technology proliferation.
Posted by: Super Hose   2003-9-8 7:55:56 AM  

#1  Hope everyone (meaning the US) keeps intense pressure on the Iranians. Like, what are they going to say, "We need enriched uranium er nuclear power because we are running out of oil and gas even though we are flaring off enough gas to light up the country. Might as well catch them up in their own lies, even if just for the spittle spectacle value.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2003-9-8 12:30:37 AM  

00:00