Iran Here we go again with the Euros/UN

[Annie]

Yes folks, we are about to replay the Iraq problems:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040914/ap_on_re_mi_ea/nuclear_agency_3

U.S. and Europe Differ on Iran Strategy

2 hours, 15 minutes ago

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer

VIENNA, Austria - A U.S.-European rift surfaced Tuesday over how harshly to deal with Iran and its suspect nuclear program, with the Europeans ignoring American suggestions and circulating their own recommendations to other delegates at a key meeting of the U.N. atomic agency.

Diplomats at a board of governors meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency had suggested earlier that the United States and the European Union (news - web sites) were making progress in drafting common language for a resolution that would set a deadline for Iran to meet demands designed to dispel fears it was trying to make nuclear arms.

But the latest draft, obtained by The Associated Press and being circulated informally Tuesday for reaction from other delegations, was nearly exactly the one that France, Britain and Germany came up with Friday — a text that U.S. officials had said would be unacceptable.

The American suggestions also were made available to the AP. They demand Iran grant agency inspectors "complete, immediate and unrestricted access;" provide "full information" about past illegal nuclear activities; suspend "immediately and fully" uranium enrichment and related activities; and meet all agency demands to "resolve all outstanding issues" nurturing suspicions of a possible weapons program.

The IAEA meeting has become the main battleground between Iran and Washington, which wants to take Iran before the U.N. Security Council for alleged violations of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The Americans asked the draft include an Oct. 31 deadline. The EU text remained vaguer in demands and in a time frame, asking only that IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei submit a comprehensive report before November for evaluation by the board.

ElBaradei shrugged off the idea of a deadline.

"We cannot just say there is a magic date," for an end to his agency's Iran probe, he said. He also repeated that his investigation has not definitely established whether Iran is trying to make nuclear arms — as Washington asserts.

"We haven't seen any concrete proof that there is a weapons program," ElBaradei told reporters on the second day of the board meeting. "Can we say everything is peaceful? Obviously we are not at that stage."

Revelations of the rift were expected to prove embarrassing to the Americans. They had expressed confidence they would be able to win over the Europeans and had flown in a team close to U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton for the board meeting — effectively sidelining the Vienna-based U.S. mission that usually handles such conferences. Why, just to the Americans? Because the Europeans just want to play being important? We thought they meant what they were telling us?

The Americans "introduced amendments that were beyond what the market would bear," said one senior Western diplomat who tracks the IAEA. "The European draft is right now going to have support." Now that's the funniest thing I've seen in a long time, the "The European draft is right now going to have support." No shit Sherlock, it's an incestuous family. d'oh!

Bolton, the U.S. point-man on nuclear nonproliferation, is considered tough on Iran by most European delegations at the board meeting in the Austrian capital. The diplomat suggested the Washington team "doesn't perhaps have a good sense of what the Vienna audience can accept." Again the hubris and denial is of monumental proportions. Vienna is going to stop the US, how?

A diplomat representing one of the 25 EU countries said part of the problem was that the Americans came in with modifications after the European Union thought they were happy with the original draft written by France, Germany and Britain.

"We thought we had something with the Americans and they came in with further amendments," said the diplomat, who, like others, spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.

The diplomats acknowledged the draft was still far from any final version being prepared for formal introduction to the board and said it may well include some of the American suggestions.

But they said the tone of some of the U.S. demands — and delays in presenting them — meant that a final resolution on Iran would not come before close to the end of the week. They also held open the possibility that Europe and the United States might not be able to bridge their differences, a development that would be unprecedented since the U.N. watchdog started looking at Iran's nuclear dossier two years ago.

Indirectly exploiting the U.S.-European differences, Iran on Tuesday warned against attempts to force it to freeze uranium enrichment, with a senior envoy asserting his country had a right to what Washington claims is a key component of a secret nuclear weapons program.

"Nothing should be imposed against (Iran's) legitimate right" to enrich uranium, Hossein Mousavian, Iran's chief IAEA delegate told AP.

Mousavian suggested his country's ratification of an agreement with the IAEA that would commit it to giving agency inspectors fuller and faster access to nuclear sites and files could be jeopardized if the board agrees on a deadline on enrichment.

Iran has been acting as if the agreement were already in force but has held off ratification in parliament. Mousavian said lawmakers would be "very concerned" if the deadline were imposed.

Iran is not prohibited from enrichment under its obligations to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but Tehran has faced mounting international pressure to suspend the technology — which can be used both to make nuclear arms or generate electricity — as a gesture to dispel suspicions it is interested in making weapons.

Last week, Iran confirmed an IAEA report that it planned to convert more than 40 tons of raw uranium into uranium hexafluoride, the feed stock for enrichment.

 

[onedomino]

Kathianne, just when you thought there could not be anything more annoying and unproductive than working with the EU and IAEA, we receive this mound of prattle from the Chinese government in the form of an "editorial" posted on the "China Daily" website:

"Rationality Needed to Solve Iran Nuclear Issue
Fang Zhou Updated: 2004-09-15 08:52
It seems that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is determined to free itself from US influence in solving the Iranian nuclear issue despite continuing diplomatic pressure from Washington for a tougher stance on Teheran.
Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the UN nuclear watchdog, said on Monday there is no deadline for it to end its investigations into Iran's programme, which Washington says is for the production of nuclear weapons. Teheran maintains it is for peaceful purposes.
"It's an open process and we will finish when I believe we are finished," ElBaradei said at a board of governors meeting of the IAEA in Vienna, although he did call on Iran to provide more information.
Elbaradei also said the world's nuclear body has gained some progress in Iran's nuclear probe with the co-operation of Teheran and other countries.
Britain, France and Germany warned Iran of possible "further steps" from the IAEA if it fails to respond to international concerns about its weapons-related nuclear programme by November, when the Vienna-based nuclear agency convenes its next board of governors meeting.
This ultimatum-issuing tone is not constructive.
The three European "big powers" have remained in contact with Iran since its uranium enrichment was released last year. The United States has recently lobbied to have Teheran hauled before the United Nations Security Council.
John R. Bolton, US Undersecretary of State, even threatened on Sunday that the United States will push for sanctions against Iran if Teheran does not renounce its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
The three European countries' November deadline for Teheran can drive the issue into an impasse rather than solve it.
The intransigence by Iran and the United States is reminiscent of the eve of the Iraq War, when the United States also set a deadline for former Iraq's Saddam Hussein regime to accept UN nuclear inspection teams to inspect its alleged weapons of mass destruction programme.
This ultimatum has since proved to be useless as the United States, its inspectors, and the IAEA have so far failed to find sound evidence for any such programme in Iraq.
The IAEA and other international organizations should be given their own space to operate independently when dealing with international issues."

Of course the assertion that "rationality is needed to solve [the] Iran nuclear issue" implies that the Iranians are rational; hardly a demonstrable contention.

The nauseating irony of the above "editorial" is that we have the Chinese to thank for the fact that the Iranians now have the ability to develop nuclear weapons. It was the Chinese who transferred nuclear technology to the Pakistanis, who in turn sold it to the Iranians. An adequate description of the hideous Chinese military establishment is almost beyond expression. They hated the Indians so much that they were willing to give Islamic sociopaths nuclear weapons. In future historical analysis of the 20th century, Chinese nuke transfer to the Pakistains will go down as one of the worst international crimes; the ramifications of which have yet to fully play out.

I bet the writer of the "editorial" above is not even aware that his government is the original source of the current Iranian nuke problem. I lived in Shanghai for two years and traveled extensively throughout China. I have worked with many Chinese who possess advanced degrees. It never ceased to amaze me how little they knew of recent history and current events.

 

[Annie]

Kathianne, just when you thought there could not be anything more annoying and unproductive than working with the EU and IAEA, we receive this mound of prattle from the Chinese government in the form of an "editorial" posted on the "China Daily" website:

"Rationality Needed to Solve Iran Nuclear Issue
Fang Zhou Updated: 2004-09-15 08:52
It seems that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is determined to free itself from US influence in solving the Iranian nuclear issue despite continuing diplomatic pressure from Washington for a tougher stance on Teheran.
Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the UN nuclear watchdog, said on Monday there is no deadline for it to end its investigations into Iran's programme, which Washington says is for the production of nuclear weapons. Teheran maintains it is for peaceful purposes.
"It's an open process and we will finish when I believe we are finished," ElBaradei said at a board of governors meeting of the IAEA in Vienna, although he did call on Iran to provide more information.
Elbaradei also said the world's nuclear body has gained some progress in Iran's nuclear probe with the co-operation of Teheran and other countries.
Britain, France and Germany warned Iran of possible "further steps" from the IAEA if it fails to respond to international concerns about its weapons-related nuclear programme by November, when the Vienna-based nuclear agency convenes its next board of governors meeting.
This ultimatum-issuing tone is not constructive.
The three European "big powers" have remained in contact with Iran since its uranium enrichment was released last year. The United States has recently lobbied to have Teheran hauled before the United Nations Security Council.
John R. Bolton, US Undersecretary of State, even threatened on Sunday that the United States will push for sanctions against Iran if Teheran does not renounce its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
The three European countries' November deadline for Teheran can drive the issue into an impasse rather than solve it.
The intransigence by Iran and the United States is reminiscent of the eve of the Iraq War, when the United States also set a deadline for former Iraq's Saddam Hussein regime to accept UN nuclear inspection teams to inspect its alleged weapons of mass destruction programme.
This ultimatum has since proved to be useless as the United States, its inspectors, and the IAEA have so far failed to find sound evidence for any such programme in Iraq.
The IAEA and other international organizations should be given their own space to operate independently when dealing with international issues."

Of course the assertion that "rationality is needed to solve [the] Iran nuclear issue" implies that the Iranians are rational; hardly a demonstrable contention.

The nauseating irony of the above "editorial" is that we have the Chinese to thank for the fact that the Iranians now have the ability to develop nuclear weapons. It was the Chinese who transferred nuclear technology to the Pakistanis, who in turn sold it to the Iranians. An adequate description of the hideous Chinese military establishment is almost beyond expression. They hated the Indians so much that they were willing to give Islamic sociopaths nuclear weapons. In future historical analysis of the 20th century, Chinese nuke transfer to the Pakistains will go down as one of the worst international crimes; the ramifications of which have yet to fully play out.

I bet the writer of the "editorial" above is not even aware that his government is the original source of the current Iranian nuke problem. I lived in Shanghai for two years and traveled extensively throughout China. I have worked with many Chinese who possess advanced degrees. It never ceased to amaze me how little they knew of recent history and current events.

I think this is the link to your article: http://news.google.com/news?q=Ratio...sue&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&as_qdr=all&tab=wn

It's very important to add a link, especially when quoting a published article.

I have to agree with your analysis onedomino, the UN has lost credibility steadily for at least the past 25 years. Wasn't that long ago that Syria chaired the human rights committee. Libya, before their 'change' of heart also was granted that honor.

The Europeans are different than the UN, really. It will be interesting to see what happens if the WOT hits them at an unacceptable level. Too many lose site of the fact that the US had been hit repeatedly since the mid-late 70's, but the various administrations obviously decided that it was an acceptable level. 9/11 is what it took to get us moving. Wonder what their threshold would be?

 

[NATO AIR]

I fully agree about the Chinese. They're still helping the North Koreans as well. The ironic part is that all this Chinese assistance to rogue nations has brought three countries to the threshold of creating and maintaining nuclear arms (south korea, japan and india, which has already past this mark and is now improving its arsenal)

all three of these nations have in more than one way aided the US in checking the influence of China and countering its aggression. And they will continue to......

 

[Annie]

I fully agree about the Chinese. They're still helping the North Koreans as well. The ironic part is that all this Chinese assistance to rogue nations has brought three countries to the threshold of creating and maintaining nuclear arms (south korea, japan and india, which has already past this mark and is now improving its arsenal)

all three of these nations have in more than one way aided the US in checking the influence of China and countering its aggression. And they will continue to......

I agree with what you posted above. At the same time, other than India, the others lack the size/population to offset China. China is also on the upside, I mean where do you go from bottom, economically. So far, they've been able to use some capitalism motives to help raise their productivity, while still excercising the rigid controls necessary to maintain communism. (Funny thing, communism has the same limitations on it's citizens and rulers that slavery did on owners and slaves.)

It would be a good idea if Australia was in that Pacific group too, don't you think? I know they are not Asia, but they are Pacific, modern, and educated.

 

[NATO AIR]

i kept australia off because they are more concerned with terrorism than anything else. as their cooperation with indonesia increases, their once rival is now their ally, as other nations in SE Asia (Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia) start to welcome Australia into the fold. So Austrailia feels less concerned with China than South Korea, Japan and India. They are still strongly our ally, and growing closer ties with the three above nations.

Japan has a top notch military, as do the South Koreans, the Chinese should never underestimate these two nation's ability to defend themselves.

Another interesting note is that the Chinese have serious issues that are going to end up hindering their self-proclaimed "ascension". They have SERIOUS labor, land and development issues that will impact hundreds of millions of people within their borders and regionally as well, and it will take incredible leadership and vision on their part to make the right calls to prevent disaster. I do agree they're on the upswing, but nearly everyone else is, and China's concerns dwarf these other nations' problems.

And how much longer will educated, skilled Chinese accept "slave" labor laws and protections?

 

[Annie]

i kept australia off because they are more concerned with terrorism than anything else. as their cooperation with indonesia increases, their once rival is now their ally, as other nations in SE Asia (Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia) start to welcome Australia into the fold. So Austrailia feels less concerned with China than South Korea, Japan and India. They are still strongly our ally, and growing closer ties with the three above nations.

Japan has a top notch military, as do the South Koreans, the Chinese should never underestimate these two nation's ability to defend themselves.

Another interesting note is that the Chinese have serious issues that are going to end up hindering their self-proclaimed "ascension". They have SERIOUS labor, land and development issues that will impact hundreds of millions of people within their borders and regionally as well, and it will take incredible leadership and vision on their part to make the right calls to prevent disaster. I do agree they're on the upswing, but nearly everyone else is, and China's concerns dwarf these other nations' problems.

And how much longer will educated, skilled Chinese accept "slave" labor laws and protections?

I am aware that SK is probably the most armed area on earth and Japan is close by. No doubt they can both defend themselves, but NOT contain China-which will become more and more necessary in the years ahead-unless there is some change that I cannot forsee. (Not only fighting communism, but the nature of Chinese culture. Heh, perhaps I argue myself out of this, China's culture really doesn't lend itself to expansion, but communism does. hmmm). India could certainly act as a counterweight, but so many internal problems, not to mention the Pakistan problem, always present.

 

[NATO AIR]

that is true kathianne... forgive me for looking at the situation through military eyes only. chinese economic power will be formidable, as well as their political/diplomatic power.

 

[onedomino]

Communism is dying in China. The "Communist Party" still runs the show, but during the past ten years most of its economic programs have been capitalist in nature. That is one of the reasons that the Chinese economy is booming. Some of the most ardent capitalists I have ever met live in Shanghai. While communism is fading in China, authoritarianism is not. There is almost zero democracy at any political level. All forms of media are strictly controlled. The New York Times, Time Magazine, and CNN, are forbidden. Their websites are also blocked. Google is blocked. There are about 200 million Chinese that live in the cities and gain the advantages of the new economy. China's overwhelming problem is what to do with the 1.1 billion people living in rural regions. What is going to happen when these people figure out what they have been missing in the cities? Once I asked my Shanghai friend Litao to do a thought experiment with me. "Litao, what would happen if we could flip a switch and tomorrow China would be a democracy?" "It would explode." He said.

 

[Annie]

Communism is dying in China. The "Communist Party" still runs the show, but during the past ten years most of its economic programs have been capitalist in nature. That is one of the reasons that the Chinese economy is booming. Some of the most ardent capitalists I have ever met live in Shanghai. While communism is fading in China, authoritarianism is not. There is almost zero democracy at any political level. All forms of media are strictly controlled. The New York Times, Time Magazine, and CNN, are forbidden. Their websites are also blocked. Google is blocked. There are about 200 million Chinese that live in the cities and gain the advantages of the new economy. China's overwhelming problem is what to do with the 1.1 billion people living in rural regions. What is going to happen when these people figure out what they have been missing in the cities? Once I asked my Shanghai friend Litao to do a thought experiment with me. "Litao, what would happen if we could flip a switch and tomorrow China would be a democracy?" "It would explode." He said.

Pretty much same take as NATO and I. I disagree about the communist fade, with the possible exception of some in the university, though I've heard zero about that for quite awhile. You say you've traveled there a lot, so I will certainly keep that in mind.

 

[onedomino]

Getting sidetracked on China...

Why doesn't the Chinese military just throw itself at Taiwan and overwhelm it? Sure it would take heavy losses, but no one could get the forces in place quick enough to stop the PRC from capturing the island. Everyone knows the US will not use nuclear weapons to save Taiwan. One important reason that the Chinese do not move against Taiwan is that it would result in the loss of their best customer.

China has at least a $50 billion annual positive trade balance with the US. This statistic is approximate; different groups claim different numbers. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese jobs depend on exports to the US. Herein lies the best chance to "contain" the Chinese. We must make the Chinese economic disruption that would result from conflict with America too painful to bear.

The integration of the US and Chinese economies is deeper than many people realize. This, by the way, is quite upsetting to the Europeans. The sweaters at Target are from Chengdu and the Boeings on the tarmac at Beijing International Airport are from Seattle. The bilateral trade volume between the US and China during 2004 will be more than $120 billion. This number will swiftly rise in the coming years. Many of the high quality jobs available in China are provided by companies owned by US corporations and individuals. The value of Chinese currency does not float, it is pegged to the US dollar. Any disruption of its relationship with the US would cause very serious economic problems in China.

Communism is fading in China. There are thousands of examples, but here's just one: under communist economic policy, road and bridge construction in the Beijing area was performed by just one state owned company. It unproductively employed 11,000 people. It was called "Beijing Road & Bridge." In 2003, guaranteed construction contracts for the state owned company were abolished. Now road and bridge construction in the Beijing area is productively performed by privately owned local and foreign companies. The machinery used to build the roads and bridges is sold to these companies by privately owned Chinese distributors. They operate their businesses to earn profits. The construction industry around Beijing is one example where the "Communist Party" has introduced capitalism into Chinese economics. This revolutionary capitalist policy is why the Chinese economy is growing at more than seven percent per year. Individuals in China are now permitted to own private property. My Shanghai friend Litao owns his house. If he wants, he can sell his house and try to earn a profit. Such would not have been possible ten years ago. The Communist Party in China is an authoritarian nightmare, but it no longer is very communist. Political authority in China still resides with the people who have the most guns. The People's Liberation Army still backs the Communist Party.

Communism is not completely gone in China, particularly in the rural agricultural areas. But it is fading.

 

[NATO AIR]

i see serious growing pains for china... and the stability of the world with concern to security and economic factors will hinge on the good, average or poor leaders China has over the next few decades.

 

[onedomino]

You are right, NATO. The road ahead will be very difficult for the Chinese. Their decision to pursue political and economic reform along different timelines may come to haunt them in the future. Power in China is split. The President, Hu Jintao, controls the Communist Party and the economy, but the former President, Jiang Zemin, still controls the military. In China, the real power resides with the guns.

Not well known in the West is that the Chinese also have serious ethnic problems; especially with the Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang province. Little reported are terrorist murders of police and Han Chinese government administrators committed by Uighurs in Xinjiang. Militant Uighurs hope to form their own state called East Turkestan. Actually, the place was an independent country for a short time after WW2 until, like Tibet, it was invaded and annexed by Mao. Due to authoritarian suppression of the media, very little news filters out of Xinjiang.

Some Uighurs fought with the Taliban against US forces in Afghanistan.

I should stop talking about China in this Iran thread.

 

[NATO AIR]

well we can add that iran funds and probably trains a lot of those terrorists terrorizing china, and if not iran directly, pakistan's ISI for sure.

 

[Annie]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...6/ap_on_re_as/nuclear_agency&cid=516&ncid=716

U.S., Europe Tentatively OK Iran Censure

26 minutes ago

By ANDREA DUDIKOVA, Associated Press Writer

VIENNA, Austria - U.S. and European negotiators tentatively agreed Thursday to censure Iran for reneging on a freeze on uranium enrichment and moved closer to setting a deadline on Tehran to dispel suspicions it is trying to make nuclear arms.

The latest version of a draft resolution being prepared for a board of governors meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency and made available to The Associated Press showed the two sides sharing "serious concerns" on enrichment but still negotiating a list of demands to make of Iran.

"We are making progress" on the draft being circulated among the 35 board members, said a diplomat from a European Union (news - web sites) country.

 

[NATO AIR]

Iraninan mullahs: "Oh no, the europeans are coming! Now we have to act like we're friends. We much prefer the Great Satan, the mutual hatred is very refreshing compared to fake friendship."

i'm sure the mullahs are quaking in their boots about the EU taking a stand.

 

[onedomino]

Iraninan mullahs: "Oh no, the europeans are coming! Now we have to act like we're friends. We much prefer the Great Satan, the mutual hatred is very refreshing compared to fake friendship."

i'm sure the mullahs are quaking in their boots about the EU taking a stand.

Good point NATO. What's the EU going to do to enforce nuclear non-proliferation in Iran? Use harsh language? The EU could not even deal with Milosevic. In the end, it will be up to us.

 

[NATO AIR]

Yep.

scary thing is them playing nuclear chicken with israel. we can't let that happen.

 

[Annie]

Yep.

scary thing is them playing nuclear chicken with israel. we can't let that happen.

Well you know they will try. I swear they would gladly let the Muslims destroy Israel, if they didn't think we'd step in. The Euros are convinced that with Israel destroyed, peace will blossum in the Middle East!

 

[NATO AIR]

ha, yea right! everyone will start fighting along ethnic and denominational lines... sunni vs. shia, persian vs. arab

you know the kind of ports we have lined up for next year (sydney, shanghai, the Phillipines, Hong Kong, Melbourne) and we're going to miss out on all these great places because we're going to get sent to put a stop to this crap... damn i hate nuclear material smugglers and wacko mullahs!