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
How Tehran outmaneuvered Washington
2003-12-07
By Erich Marquardt
From the beginning, Iran’s decision to comply with the IAEA latest stipulations on its nuclear research program was an attempt to politically outmaneuver Washington.
Anybody here have an illusions they were intending to cooperated?... Didn't think so.
Even more disturbing to Washington policymakers was how three EU countries also promised Tehran that if it complied with IAEA demands, the EU would be willing to assist Iran’s nuclear research program by giving it greater access to modern technology and supplies.
In many cases the conflict between money and principle is an illusion. In others, it's real, and the lack of conflict becomes the illusion...
Nikolai Shingaryov, spokesman of the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry, made a similar offer, telling Itar-Tass that the IAEA resolution on Iran "gives an opportunity to step up Russian-Iranian cooperation in nuclear power engineering".
I think we need some cliche here about the last infidel selling the Faithful™ the technology they use to destroy the second-to-last infidel...
Other regionally significant countries, such as Russia, are also unwilling to support a hardline US policy towards Iran. In contrast to US strategy, Russia is currently building a nuclear reactor in the city of Bushehr in southern Iran. Moscow also has provided massive supplies of military equipment to Tehran, such as MiG-29 fighter aircraft, Su-24 fighter bombers, T-72 tanks and Kilo class attack submarines.
I can't really wax indignant about that stuff. The Russers need the money, and the Medes and the Persians are dumb enough to buy that stuff after watching it perform against American equipment next door. And it does look good in parades...
Moscow is pursuing the prospect of building more nuclear reactors and facilities in Iran, a development that would help Russia earn much-needed financial capital.
The nukes are a potential problem, not the conventional junk...
Washington’s fear over Iran developing nuclear weapons is not contrived. Washington is attempting to preserve the current power balance in the Middle East and Central Asia. If Iran were to become a nuclear-armed state, it would greatly increase the Persian country’s foreign policy leverage. A nuclear-armed Iran, coupled with its already sizeable military, would greatly increase the country’s defensive capabilities and limit the ability of rival states to threaten Iran’s territorial and governmental integrity; moreover, it would also prove more difficult to check Iran’s regional ambitions.
The regional ambitions are more relevant than external threats. Except for us, there aren't any. Nobody's even mentioned the possibility of Pakland gobbling up Iranian Balochistan...
Indeed, this is why the leadership in Tehran has been so keen on furthering its nuclear research program. With an agreement designed by the EU now, the only legal way to prevent Iran from enriching uranium is for international observers to prove that the country is using the uranium for nuclear weapons. Finding proof to make a case against a country that may be secretly developing nuclear weapons has always proved difficult.
Has it ever worked yet?
A nuclear-armed Iran would threaten Washington’s ability to alter the power balance in the Middle East since it would limit Washington’s political and military leverage in the region. A nuclear-armed Iran would also subdue Israel’s power projection capabilities; presently Israel has a nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. Tehran has watched as Washington increased US influence in the entire region; first by establishing military bases in Afghanistan, and second by establishing them in Iraq. This explains why Tehran has been unwilling to compromise on the future of its nuclear research program. Shortly after agreeing to the EU’s provisions, Rowhani was quick to assert that Iran would remain sovereign over all aspects of its nuclear research program. Rowhani stated: "We believe that stopping enriching uranium is totally unacceptable and we think nobody agrees with [doing] that in Iran." Therefore, as long as the EU and other significant states that have influence in Tehran - such as Russia - are unwilling to unite with Washington’s desired hardline policy towards Iran, the leadership in Tehran may be able to outmaneuver Bush administration policymakers and come closer to their goal of acquiring nuclear weapons.
Posted by:Lucky

#11  flash: krytrons are a bomb component... very fast switches used when detonating the explosives in the primary.
Posted by: snellenr   2003-12-7 11:34:44 PM  

#10  I remember a nuclear detonator theft during the reagan era by israeli agents (krytron?)

its even money they have nukes.
Posted by: flash91   2003-12-7 10:54:57 PM  

#9  nothing happens (except the primary).

This is a definition of the term "nothing" that is new and confusing to me, unless they've stopped using atomic bombs as primaries.
Posted by: snellenr   2003-12-7 10:40:14 PM  

#8   Re Israeli bomb working.It may not matter whether or not the bomb actually works.What does count is whether or not the potential targets think the bomb might work.
Posted by: Stephen   2003-12-7 9:22:29 PM  

#7  Secondaries are not trivial beasts. The first two tests by the UK failed (geometry problems), and one US test had a far larger yield than intended (underestimated Li7 + n).

Essentially, you're assembling a device very close to a nuclear blast, and if you get it wrong, nothing happens (except the primary).

That said, I wouldn't discount the Israelis being able to do it right the first time they set off one they'd built.
Posted by: Dishman   2003-12-7 7:37:39 PM  

#6  Shipman

They could. Take a look at the number of scientific of scientific Nobel Prize or Field Medal winners who are Jews. Take a look at the number of them both in Project Manhattan or in the Soviet bomb (Sakharov).

In fact Israel has had dozens of American or Soviet tests for his bomb
Posted by: JFM   2003-12-7 7:02:05 PM  

#5   that could fly 8,000Km with a 1Mt nuclear warhead. Measure the distance from Tel Aviv to Moscow

An untested Fusion bomb? Are they that confident?
Posted by: Shipman   2003-12-7 5:23:17 PM  

#4  I thru the post up last night and went to bed to ponder the BCS. Thanks Fred for putting the post in the right place.

Before the Iraq campaign I saw an online poll asking who was the biggest threat at that Time. The usuall suspects. It was hard not to vote for Iran but I thought that Iraq was the first order of biz. GW read my mind and did the right thing.

Bush knows where the road leads but what gets me, like B, is Russia and the EU. How the shit hits the fan in Iran is perplexing to me. But hit the fan it must.

Anybody have a clue on how to take thse guys down? Or do we just play cold war (what Iran would like) If they do get that bomb and I've been saying that they will. Is that nuclear war? Man I hope not. Does the EU and Russia want that!?
Posted by: Lucky   2003-12-7 3:10:00 PM  

#3  What a load of rubbish! Thank God tomorrow's trash day. Until the United States decides to take out Iran's reactors, they can play their nasty little games. However, Harpoon, Tomahawk, and JDAM are still alive and well, and in the US corner. Add to that the Israelis, who have already said they will not tolerate Iran getting nuke weapons, or building the capability to manufacture them. I think "OSIRAK" aught to be a lesson for the entire Middle East.

Pakland is not within range of Israel - from either side. Until, and if, Pakland gets a missile capability to hit Tel Aviv, they'll be safe. The instant they acquire a delivery system capable of reaching the Med, they're toast. The Israelis do NOT play around.

Before I left the Air Force, the Israelis had developed a medium-range missile - the "Jerico" - that could reach Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt with a nuclear warhead. They were experimenting with a two-stage missile - nicknamed "Masada" (which should tell EVERYONE something) - that could fly 8,000Km with a 1Mt nuclear warhead. Measure the distance from Tel Aviv to Moscow, and tell me who should be nervous about supplying nuclear capability to Iran.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2003-12-7 12:54:22 PM  

#2  Oh Lucky...

Eric Marquardt (email: marquardt@yellowtimes.org) is a featured writer on IndyMedia.moronorg - and I LOVE his email addy.

This article is a classic feint. Slowly building his point of view with nice factual bits he finishes with dearly-held LLL flourishes and hopes to make his conclusion seem inescapable:

1) Washington's fear of a Nuke Iran is well-placed cuz it would limit our ability to control the power balance in the ME; and beneath the radar, negating the positives of an Iraq success... Oooooh, skeery.

2) A Nuke Iran would "check" Israel and its ability to project power in the region... talk about the LLL's wet dream...

3) The US is, again, alone in its position and the EU agreement + IAEA Report (and, by extension, the "weight" of the UN) puts us into a neat and tidy box, pulling Dubya's teeth... The beacons of legitimacy and morality are against us! What, again? Cowboys! Yadda3.

Anybody see the fundafuckingmental flaws here?

Being a terminal multilateralist, this slimer assumes that the EU-brokered joke plus the Elbarradai weasly whitewash IAEA report puts the stamp of "done deal" on the issue.

Uh, why?

Dubya has already made it clear that we will act pre-emptively if necessary and alone if necessary. The stakes are far too high today, given the lethality of the weapons the asshats seek to wait for the first punch or to be tied down by appeasers. And who thinks that Israel will sit still and let the Black Hats build the weapon they said they would immediately use to wipe Israel out?

Is he on drugs or something? Mebbe he got some of that high-grade horse over in Germany, his home, and has lost what mind he possessed. He certainly tossed integrity over the side some time ago.

If we DO sit on our hands and if we DO hold Israel back and if the Black Hats DO gain a deliverable nuke, then Dubya is a total traitorous jackass who has, in one stupid move, negated the efforts of years, billions of dollars expended, and hundreds of lost American lives trying to insure our safety and turn the ME around. Mr Marquardt would probably dance on some of those graves if it goes his way. I doubt it will. I think that the Black Hats will be shorn of their ability to threaten others with their insane religion and greed - and then toppled.

We'll see, soon enough. Meanwhile, Marquardt is grinding the NaziMedia Ax - filter everything through that fact. Pfeh.
Posted by: .com   2003-12-7 8:45:20 AM  

#1  Am I missing something? The wall came down and I thought the cold war games were over. But sometime it seems like the other side (after convincing some of our own players to switch jerseys) is still looking to tackle us in the first dark alley they can find.
Posted by: B   2003-12-7 4:36:22 AM  

00:00