Not that I believe the United Nations (or any related organization) is actually good for anything other than reminding the rest of us that impotence does exist beyond Viagra users and cocaine addicts, but the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – an autonomous body which reports directly to the UN Security Council and General Assembly – actually did the right thing on Friday.

Not that it actually matters in the grand scheme of things.

Not that it will make a damn bit of difference.

This is the IAEA, after all.

But by a count of 25-3, the IAEA passed a resolution demanding that Iran cease construction of a recently discovered nuclear facility near Qom and put an end to its uranium enrichment program.

Both the United States and Israel applauded the vote.

And yes, you read that correctly … the IAEA demanded Iran cut it out.

Meanwhile, Iran’s response to the IAEA resolution – to go along with five other UN resolutions – was to announce to the world that it is expanding its uranium enrichment program with the construction of ten new plants.

So there!

This smart diplomacy angle is really paying dividends.

The censure from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), with rare backing from Russia and China, provoked anger in Iran where members of parliament demanded the withdrawal of co-operation with UN inspectors.

President Ahmadinejad announced last night that his Cabinet had ordered the building of ten new plants aimed at producing up to 300 tonnes of nuclear fuel a year, with construction to begin on five within two months.

He said that the Cabinet had also been studying plans to start enriching uranium to a higher level — high enough to be used in medical research but below that required for weapons.

Smart diplomacy seems to be cut from the same cloth as smart climate change science.

There really is nothing quite like having infirmity as the prevailing American foreign policy motif.

Indeed, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs released a statement about America’s patience wearing thin with Iran, and the promise of consequences if Iran doesn’t play nice, blah, blah, blah.

Still, I cannot help but wonder why is it that President Obama is willing to accept the notion that Iran is pursuing nuclear power for peaceful purposes, but is not willing to accept that Iran really does want to see Israel wiped off the face of the Earth.

No matter how  much we might desire it to be so, Iran and its nuclear ambitions are not going anywhere. The United Nations speaks of sanctions, The IAEA wants to inspect, Israel gets worried, Gibbs expresses White House concern. All of these things have occurred over the past few days. But they have also  taken place previously. Seems  to be  the same song, with a higher verse number, maybe#25. I read a comment by David Wilbank  that seems to be the best summation of the entire Iranian nuclear stand-off. Wilbank, the British Foreign Secretary, said that “instead of engaging with us Iran choose to provoke and dissemble.” At least, someone recognizes what is happening.

Meanwhile, the outgoing head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei say the their investigation of Iran’s nuclear facilities is at  a dead-end.  Interesting that as his term ends, he becomes  somewhat more blunt than had previously been the case.

What sparked this latest. Today, Iran announced that it plans to build 10 industrial strength uranium enrichment facilities. This latest was apparently ordered by Hugo Chavez’ buddy, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Now pay lose attention to the following two statements. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs  says that time is running out for Iran to address the concerns of the international community, that apparently includes their Russian friends. The newly announced uranium enrichment facilities are going to built inside mountains to enable them to withstand attack(read that from Israel as Netanyahu has hinted at) from  abroad.

So, the stalemate lurches along. So far, there has been an unwillingness to impose any type of sanctions.Just have to believe that at some point, the proverbial bullet must be bitten and a negotiated agreement will have to give  way to some type of imposed one. How  that would work would certainly be a sticky wicket indeed. But given Iran’s recent track record, methinks there will come a time that it must be done.

Today’s announcement by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of the now rapid construction of a further ten uranium enrichment plants with up to 500’000 centrifuges (the locations of five had been decided already) definitely proves that Iran is seeking a network of enrichment plants which has been hidden to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) so far and which completely contradicts claims that the Fordow site near Qom was the only site besides that at Natanz.

Despite new activities at its uranium mines, Iran’s many problems include, however, lack of uranium for enrichment. Since the proposed deal of outgoing IAEA Director General ElBaradei of swapping Iran’s low-enriched uranium (less than 4%) with some 20% enriched fuel from Russia and France for producing its urgently needed medical isotopes in its research reactor in Tehran seems to be dead, Iran may even see salvation in leaving the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which would be a true disaster.

See a technical analysis of the Fordow enrichment plant here.

In just two days after world powers united in condemnation of Iran’s nuclear activities in a rare show of international consensus on the threat posed by Tehran’s continued nuclear defiance, Iran’s Government today announced plans to build ten new uranium enrichment plants and said work would start within two months.

Iran had been caught covering up the existence of one more uranium enrichment site recently, so this is a new strategy for them to pursue, as it is the first time they have announced their nuclear plans to the world.

Western powers say Iran is trying to develop nuclear arms. Iran says its nuclear programme is peaceful.

Each site will be the size of the existing Natanz plant with the aim of producing between 250-300 tonnes of uranium a year.

China and Russia joined the United States, Britain, France and Germany in backing an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) resolution censuring Iran and ordering it to halt construction of a secret uranium enrichment plant near Qom.

China, which has shared Moscow’s reluctance to take a hard-line with Tehran, was reportedly persuaded to support the resolution after an emergency meeting with the US National Security Advisor in Beijing last week.

The answer from Tehran was to cut back on cooperation with the UN and any other world league,and prepare to arm itself against the world.

I wonder how long it will take Israel to answer this aggressive move by their hostile neighbor in their region, via the Monroe Doctrine,it is clear what the United States would do if Cuba suddenly ramped up with 12 Nuclear missile sites.

My question is…is it ever possible to win a nuclear war…and what do you think will happen next…

Follow more on this story by clicking on these trusted sources…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8385275.stm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6936798.ece

Nachdem SPON unlängst schon von einer iranischen Drohung des Abbruchs der “Zusammenarbeit” mit der IAEA berichtet hatte, wird jetzt nachgelegt:

Iran stellt Zusammenarbeit mit Atombehörde in Frage

Witze sind bei SPIEGEL-Lesern und -Schreibern eben besonders lustig, wenn man sie mehrmals hört.

Iran’s Parliament urged President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government to submit a plan on reducing its cooperation level with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).   Can you imagine less cooperation?

The move came after the IAEA voted to rebuke Iran over its construction of a second uranium enrichment plant.  IAEA passed a resolution demanding that Tehran immediately stop building its newly-revealed nuclear facility and freeze uranium enrichment. The IAEA resolution criticized Iran for defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment – the source of both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

In today’s statement, the Members of Parliament condemned the resolution as a politicized measure that shows the West’s double standards.  The IAEA is proving once again what a weak and non-valued department of the United Nations they really are.

Joe Biden tried to remind us that “this president will be tested” but few were listening.  Kennedy was tested by Russia because Khrushchev thought he was weak.   Joe knew that the world will see President Obama as weak and this is why Iran can flaunt it’s Nuclear Ambitions at both the United Nations and the Western World.  The building of a weapon is a sovereign countries right.  The building of a weapon you intend to use is an act of war.  Iran purpose is the destruction of Israel and western civilizations.  When will this administration get serious?  Probably after it’s to late.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Iran really doesn’t have much of a history of cooperating when it didn’t want to.  Of course, neither do we. 

From PressTV Iran via China’s CCTV News. 

And Iran’s response

___________________________________________________

One cannot help but get the feeling that no matter what the international community tries to do, it will only delay Iran getting their own nuclear device.  For Pete’s sake, they’re turning down offers from other countries willing to refine uranium for them, you would think that even if they had to pay for the service, that they would save a ton of money by not having to further develop and implement their own refining technology.

IAEA votes to censure Iran over nuclear cover-up

By Mark Heinrich

VIENNA (Reuters) – The U.N. nuclear watchdog voted Friday to rebuke Iran for building a uranium enrichment plant in secret but Tehran rejected the move as “intimidation” which would poison its negotiations with world powers.

The resolution was the first by the 35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) against Iran in almost four years, and a sign of spreading alarm over Tehran’s failure to dispel fears it has clandestine plans to build nuclear bombs.

It passed by a 25-3 margin with six abstentions, smoothed by rare backing from Russia and China, which have blocked global attempts to isolate Iran, a trade partner for both, in the past.

But it was far from clear whether the West could now coax Moscow and Beijing to join in biting sanctions against Iran, something they have long prevented at the U.N. Security Council.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry said Iran should “react with full seriousness to the signal contained in the resolution … and to ensure full cooperation with the agency.”

Moscow and Beijing’s support is seen as vital to the success of external pressure on Iran to rein in its nuclear activity and open it up to unfettered IAEA inspections and investigations.

The vote reflected exasperation with Iran’s retreat from an IAEA-brokered draft deal to provide it with fuel for a medical nuclear reactor if it agreed to part with its enriched uranium, which could be turned into bomb material if further refined.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said major powers would pursue harsher sanctions against Iran if it ignored the vote.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband “should send a very clear warning to Iran that it is not going to be able to divide the international community,” Miliband told Reuters in an interview at a Commonwealth summit in Trinidad and Tobago.

WHITE HOUSE SAYS TIME RUNNING OUT

The resolution urged Iran to clarify the original purpose of the Fordow enrichment site, hidden inside a mountain bunker, stop construction and confirm there are no more hidden sites.

Iran said those demands were beyond its legal obligations.

The United States said the IAEA vote showed an urgent need for Iran to address the growing “deficit of confidence” over its nuclear intentions. Time is running out, the White House said, and Iran would be responsible for the consequences.

The measure won blanket Western backing. Cuba, Malaysia and Venezuela, prominent in a developing nation bloc that includes Iran, voted “no,” while Afghanistan, Brazil, Egypt, Pakistan, South Africa and Turkey abstained. Azerbaijan missed the ballot.

Diplomats said the large number of abstentions indicated important developing states were souring on Iran over its nuclear defiance, particularly its hold-up of the fuel deal.

But, they said, the IAEA resolution could lead Iranian hardliners to seize on it as excuse to restrict inspections further and re-freeze talks, killing off the reactor fuel plan.

The Islamic Republic has counted on Non-Aligned Movement solidarity to help prevent a united front against it.

Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat given Iranian comments calling for the destruction of the Jewish state and has not ruled out military strikes against the sites. It said the IAEA resolution was of “great importance.”

Israel’s Foreign Ministry called for the international community to ensure the decision bore a “practical significance by setting a timetable to require the imposition of stiff sanctions against Iran in response to any violations.”

Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons, saying its atomic energy program is purely for peaceful purposes. But its record of clandestine nuclear work and curbs on IAEA inspections have stoked suspicions and a seven-year standoff with world powers.

Iranian Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh called the resolution a “hasty and undue” step devoid of legal basis.

IRAN SAYS WILL IGNORE RESOLUTION

“The great nation of Iran will never bow to pressure and intimidation vis-a-vis its inalienable right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy,” he said.

“We will not implement any word of it because this is a politically motivated gesture against the Iranian nation.”

He said Iran would continue to allow basic inspections at its nuclear sites but could stop making “voluntary gestures” of extra cooperation such as when it allowed widened surveillance at its rapidly expanding main enrichment complex at Natanz.

Soltanieh said the resolution would also ruin the atmosphere for further talks with the United States, France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China launched on October 1 in Geneva, where the reactor fuel plan was agreed in principle.

“Such gestures … are certainly destructive. They spoil the existing cooperative environment. But neither sanctions nor the threat of military attacks can interrupt our peaceful nuclear activities even for a second,” he said.

Iran admitted Fordow’s existence in September, at least two years into its construction, shocking IAEA inspectors. Western diplomats said Iran was forced to come clean after learning the site had been detected by their spy services.

Iran had assured the IAEA last year it was not hiding any nuclear-related activities despite rules that it be transparent.

Fordow’s emergence fanned suspicions there are more secret sites intended to produce atom bombs, since experts said the plant’s capacity was too small to feed a civilian nuclear power plant, but big enough to make weapons material.

Iran’s main, larger enrichment plant, at Natanz, was exposed by Iranian opposition exiles in 2002.

Iran has told the IAEA it developed the Fordow site in secret as a backup for other, known facilities, in case they were bombed by Israel.

The last IAEA board resolution against Iran was in February 2006, when governors referred Tehran’s dossier to the U.N. Security Council over its refusal to shelve enrichment.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/091127/world/international_us_nuclear_iaea_vote

Friday’s IAEA Board of Governors’ resolution, outgoing Director General (DG) Mohamed ElBaradei’s last working day at the Agency, is not intended to get Iran’s opaque nuclear program off with a slap on the wrist. It is much more serious for the country. The resolution of 25 of 35 member states voting for (and 3 against: Venezuela, Cuba and Malaysia) must be a clear signal to Iran. Nobel laureate ElBaradei, whose efforts in preventing another war in the Middle East while preserving professional integrity cannot be praised any more may actually be highly satisfied with the resolution. He might even acknowledge lack of trust and confidence on either side, but the vote clearly shows that Iran cannot interpret the NPT (with withdrawals of its additional protocols and modified Code 3.1 regulations at will) as it does.

Incoming DG Yukia Amani will face enormous problems with Iran right in the beginning of his term. The covert construction of the Fordow/Qom site for enriching uranium has been condemned in the resolution as illicit, and any speculation as to whether commencement of construction work has started before or after Iran’s withdrawal of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty’s (NPT) modified Code 3.1 which requires member states to indicate new sites even at the time of planning is no longer regarded important. As Juan Cole sees it, Iran’s opaque nuclear program might seek a “breakout capability” whenever their rulers consider it necessary despite the Supreme Leaders’ claims that an atomic bomb is incompatible with Islam.  

But who is presently ruling the country? There are signs of serious power struggles within the complex oligarchy with both the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s and a due to a legitimacy crisis stricken President Ahmadinejad’s decline in influence. The opposition represented by Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mir Hossein Mousavi (neither would be a trustworthy alternative to the present regime) and Mehdi Karroubi, not to talk about Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, has been silenced in recent weeks. Silenced by terror, in show trials, family threats, and on the streets. Even yesterday’s confiscation of 2003 Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi’s prize money may be an example.

Right now, the country can only be regarded a military dictatorship, or junta. The Revolutionary Guards, or pasdaran, have already taken control of Iran. Withdrawal from the NPT may only be the next logic step.

The United States under Barack Obama look like a ship of fools captained by the grand fool.  The only question is whether Iran made Americans look like fools, or whether Obama made Americans look like fools.

I submit that the latter is the case.  Because any fool knew what game Iran was playing.  And yet Obama – out of arrogance, ignorance, and naivete – utterly failed to understand.  And continues to fail to understand.

A full month ago Iran reneged on an apparent deal to provide its nuclear fuel to France to process it for them.  Even had Iran fulfilled the deal, it was based on a fools’ premise; that premise being that Iran had not secretly processed any other uranium.

Iran’s negotiators have toughened their stance on the nuclear programme, signalling that Tehran will refuse to go ahead with an agreement to hand over 75 per cent of its enriched uranium. . .

Iran has amassed at least 1.4 tons of low-enriched uranium inside its underground plant in Natanz. If this was further enriched to weapons-grade level – a lengthy process – it would be enough for one nuclear weapon.

But Iran agreed to export 75 per cent of this stockpile to Russia and then France, where it would have been converted into fuel rods for use in a civilian research reactor in Tehran. This would have been a significant step towards containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Before talks, however, Iranian officials signalled they would renege. “Iran wants to directly buy highly-enriched uranium without sending its own low-level uranium out of the country,” reported a state television channel.

What kind of people continue to negotiate with a country that has already said it would renege on whatever deal they subsequently make?  Does the word “fools” not seem in order here?

Three weeks ago we learned that Iran had secretly tested an advanced nuclear warhead design – a strange thing for a country that isn’t attempting to build nuclear weapons to do, one would think.

The UN’s nuclear watchdog has asked Iran to explain evidence suggesting that Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced nuclear warhead design, the Guardian has learned.

The very existence of the technology, known as a “two-point implosion” device, is officially secret in both the US and Britain, but according to previously unpublished documentation in a dossier compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian scientists may have tested high-explosive components of the design. The development was today described by nuclear experts as “breathtaking” and has added urgency to the effort to find a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis.

No harm, no foul.  And certainly no rush.  Remember, we’re fools.

Now the SAME IAEA which only a few weeks ago was saying, “Nothing to see here, folks,” is now saying that Iran has been systematically covering up what is very obviously a nuclear weapons program.

The outgoing head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Thursday his probe of Iran’s nuclear program is at “a dead end” and that trust in Tehran’s credibility is shrinking after its belated revelation that it was secretly building a nuclear facility.

Mohamed ElBaradei’s blunt criticism of the Islamic Republic — four days before he leaves office — was notable in representing a broad convergence with Washington’s opinion, which for years was critical of the IAEA chief for what it perceived as his softness on Iran.

Six years of constant stonewalling all made up for by issuing one pitiful statement before leaving office.  Good job, ElBaradeid, you dirtbag.

If Iran does not comply this time, you can bet a politely-worded letter will surely follow.

JERUSALEM, Israel November 24, 2009
John Bolton Was Right After All

(CBS)   Richard Grenell served as the spokesman for the last four U.S. Ambassadors to the United Nations: Zalmay Khalilzad, John Bolton, John Danforth and John Negroponte.
I certainly don’t expect the New York Times to admit that one of their greatest bogeymen turned out to be correct about Iran’s nuclear game-playing. However, the Times Editorial Board did once say “John Bolton is right.  Kofi Annan is wrong.”

Unfortunately it wasn’t about the Iran nuclear issue they were talking about – it was about his opposition to the UN’s ineffective Human Rights Council.

Nevertheless, someone needs to say it now. John Bolton was right.

When the Obama Administration proclaimed victory on October 1st by announcing that a break-through had been reached in Geneva and that Iran had committed to shipping 2,600 pounds of fuel to Russia, expert Iran watchers were appropriately cynical. Bolton cautioned, yet again, that the Iranians had used some of the same diplomatic nuances they had been using for years to successfully buy more time to continue enriching uranium and fake cooperation with the international community.

Usually, the Europeans were the first to take the bait but this time the Obama Administration got hooked first. Bolton, however, was the first to stand up and call the Iranian pronouncement a sham – and he did it within hours of the announcement.

But as Obama officials were rushing to pat themselves on the back and the New York Times was proclaiming atop the paper “Iran Agrees to Send Enriched Uranium to Russia,” Iranian officials were telling reporters that they had not committed to anything. The Iranians called it “an agreement in principle” – code words for “we’d like to but…”

The Times’ reporter in Geneva, however, was taking what the Obama officials were saying and running wildly with the incredible news. Surprisingly, or maybe not, the Times had either not checked with Iranian officials or ignored their warnings in favor of the Obama Administration’s good news. Roughly a month later, the Iranian official statements confirmed the fact that the Obama Administration had been duped. The Times subsequently inched its way back to reality through multiple follow-up stories that increasingly showed skepticism in the Victory claims culminating with October 30th’s headline “Tehran Rejects Nuclear Accord.”

Today, while the Iranians reprocess more fuel, the Obama team continues to compromise and offer even more incentives to them. No wonder Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is waiting – the deal keeps getting sweeter. President Obama has offered the Iranians more time, more sites to place their illegal fuel, more personal correspondence with the Ayatollah, more excuses as to what happened to the original deal they announced and no Chinese and Russian arm-twisting. The Obama team also keeps claiming that if Iran ships 2600 pounds of fuel out to Russia for re-processing then Iran will be unable to pose a nuclear threat for at least a year.

This often told claim is a dangerous calculation based on an assumption that Iran doesn’t have more hidden fuel (we just found out about another reprocessing plant in September) and can’t quickly convert what would remain if the plan had been accepted. Additionally, the low enriched uranium in question was produced in violation of UN Security Council resolutions so any deal to help Iran convert illegal fuel undermines Security Council credibility. The naivety of President Obama could be chalked up to hope and inexperience in foreign policy matters if it wasn’t routinely and consistently happening.

Bolton should know. No American Ambassador has produced more Security Council Resolutions on the issue of Iran than John Bolton. Bolton was able to produce three UN Security Council resolutions on Iran, two with the increasing pressure of sanctions. The deadlines in the resolutions that Bolton insisted upon were kept mainly because he held his counterparts to their word.

When Iran tried to manipulate the process by asking for more time, more talks or giving empty and last minute commitments, Bolton enforced the deadlines. Bolton was incredibly patient and willing to have round the clock negotiations but in the end forced a vote of the Security Council to the dismay of the Europeans and the consternation of Russian and China. It’s true that John Bolton would not win the most popular Ambassador award at the UN but being popular shouldn’t be the priority.

I hope that the Obama team can now see that being popular at the UN doesn’t get us support from the Europeans on sanctions resolutions or an affirmative vote from Russia and China. If it did, President Obama would have passed another Security Council Resolution on Iran, North Korea and Sudan by now. Obama is so popular in foreign countries that one begins to wonder who is happier. But being popular only means you aren’t asking Countries to do anything different.

This month, the world is seeing the pressure turned down on Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. France’s Foreign Minister has signaled their refusal to block shipments of refined fuel to Iran, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov called sanctions “counterproductive when there are talks underway” and China needs Iran’s oil so badly that it not only is refusing to consider further sanctions but is cutting new energy deals with Iran.

Where is the Obama Administration’s pressure on Iran to stop enriching uranium? Sadly, the Americans are getting hoodwinked by Iran and Europe is happy that they don’t have to vote for more sanctions or enforce the ones that are in place now. While the President gives up our missile shield to Russia, relaxes financial restrictions on Cuba, allows North Korea to violate their signed agreements and breaks campaign promises on a Sudan no-fly zone, the world applauds the most popular American President in history.

And here at home, Fareed Zakaria continues to call for more American compromises and more talk while characterizing Conservatives as unwilling to talk. It isn’t that Conservatives think speaking to Russia about Iran is bad, a claim Fareed Zakaria erroneously tries to tag Conservatives with, it’s that giving something without getting something in return is foolish and naïve. Zakaria and the other elites blinded by Obama’s global reset button want America to compromise and negotiate but fail to expect the same from the other side. Zakaria is that typical internationalist that views diplomatic success as merely sitting down to talk. Talking is the goal for them.

And if America needs to compromise in order to ensure that there are more talks, well, then so be it. Talking is success, right?

What I find almost as laughable as Obama’s never-failing ignorance and naivete is his weakness.

There’s that whole, “Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me” thing.  How many times does Obama have to be fooled?

How did Obama get China to sign on to the meaningless IAEA censure that doesn’t offer any sort of call to actual action at all?

The Sniveller-in-Chief says that – unlike gutless ObamAmerica – Israel will actually do something if Iran continues its nuclear program.  Get a load of the headline:

‘US warned China that Israel could bomb Iran’
By JPOST.COM STAFF AND AP

Two senior officials from the White House, Dennis Ross and Jeffrey Bader, made a trip to China on a “special mission” to garner support in Beijing over the Iranian nuclear program, according to a Thursday report in The Washington Post. The officials visited China two weeks before US President Barack Obama arrived in Beijing.

The officials reportedly carried the message that if China would not support the US on the issue, Israel would be likely to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. The paper quoted the officials as saying that Israel saw the issue as “an existential issue,” and that “countries that have an existential issue don’t listen to other countries.”

They stressed that were Israel to bomb Iran, the consequences for the region would be severe.

Here is Obama, leader of the free world, telling communist Iran that they’d better do what he says or big tough Israel will fight.

Just gag me.

At least Obama understands something, though.  Obama himself is a gargantuan fool and a pathetic weakling, but he does at least have a clue that genuinely strong and courageous people won’t just sit idly by and allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.  And Obama thought he’d better warn China.  Because that’s just the sort of stand-up guy he is [HURL!].

I have one thing to differ with Richard Grenell over: the story isn’t that John Bolton is right.  The story is that Barack Obama is as wrong as he has always been.

Iran will have nuclear weapons soon.  And Obama will ensure that outcome – every bit as much as Neville Chamberlain ensured that Adolf Hitler would invade Czechoslovakia followed by Poland.

RT interviews German journalist Jurgen Elsaesser, author of the book “Iran: facts against Western propaganda”. He thinks Tehran has every right to produce nuclear energy. And fears that “extremist Israeli government could provoke war with Iran at any time”.

Seems Germany also does not have freedom of the press either.

Israeli Lobby is a problem even in Britian

Are we all going to sit Idily by and allow this to happen in Iran.

Pictures included. This is what the US has in mind for Iran,  with Israel pushing for war all the way. Be sure to check it out. These are the things the US does not want you to know. The horror of war is real.

Iran has done nothing wrong.  The comply with International Laws.

The US and Israel do not.

Both countries have committed War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.

Iraq: I Should have called the link below ” Iraq a Picture is worth a Thousand words”.

Doctors report “unprecedented” rise in deformities, cancers in Iraq

The propeganda machine is hard at  work. The media is spewing out the same type of things used against Iraq. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction but they do have a lot of oil as does Iran.

Gaza (4): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 1) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Israel is a terrorist state. They cannot be trusted.

Why do people around the world believe anything the US or Israel says?

Both have a long history of lieing.

Why is everyone so gullible?

Why do we tolerate it?

In an all-time low in Indian-Iranian relations, Bharat (aka India) has come out in the open and voted against Iran. The last Bharati vote against Iran came with a heavy price—energy starved Delhi lost the multi-million Dollar CNG gas deal and Tehran signed the gas pipeline deal with Pakistan. Iranian diplomats were in Delhi last week and tried to convince Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Sonia’s government not to kowtow to US pressure and vote against Iran. However the Israeli pressure on Bharat and diktats from America’s wishes forced Bharat to abandon the remnants of any relationship with Tehran.

The IAEA decision was supported by 25 of the 35 countries on the Board of Governors, diplomats said.
 
Only Cuba, Malaysia and Venezuela voted against it and the rest abstained or were absent. Iran is not a board member.
 
By initiating this first IAEA decision on Iran since 2006, the five permanent Security Council members and Germany reinforced their position that they are ready to consider new sanctions if Tehran does not come around in the nuclear stand-off.
 
Iran claims it was within its rights to inform the IAEA only in September, at least two years after starting construction. But IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei has said Tehran was obliged to give notice as soon as it decided to build the facility in Fordu, near the city of Qom. Hindustan Times
 

The lines are now drawn. Bharat and Israel vs. Iran. This may have long term consequences for the politics of Asia. Tehran has indicated that it will retaliate against Bharat. In what way remains to be seen. The obvious target would be to end Bharati involvement in Chahbahar port and disallowance of transit facilities to Bharat for access to Central Asia. 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videoshow/5276230.cms

VIENNA: The UN nuclear agency’s board censured Iran on Friday, with 25 nations including India backing a resolution that demands Tehran immediately halt construction of its newly revealed nuclear facility and heed UN Security Council resolutions calling on it to stop uranium enrichment

Iran remained defiant, with its chief representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency declaring that his country would resist “pressure, resolutions, sanction(s) and threat of military attack.”

The resolution – and the resulting vote of the IAEA’s 35-nation decision-making board – were significant on several counts.
The resolution was endorsed by six world powers – the US, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany – reflecting a rare measure of unity on Iran. Moscow and Beijing have acted as a traditional drag on efforts to punish Iran for its nuclear defiance, either preventing new Security Council sanctions or watering down their potency.

They did not formally endorse the last IAEA resolution in 2006, which referred Iran to the Security Council, starting the process that has resulted in three sets of sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Their backing for the document at the Vienna meeting thus reflected broad international disenchantment with Tehran.
It also appeared to signal possible support for any new Western push for a fourth set of UN sanctions, should Tehran continue shunning international overtures meant to reach agreements that reduce concerns about its nuclear ambitions.
Strong backing for the resolution at the meeting was also notable. Only three nations – Cuba, Venezuela and Malaysia – voted against the document, with five abstentions and one member absent.

That meant even most non-aligned IAEA board members abandoned Tehran, despite their traditional backing of the Islamic Republic. Iran argues that attacks on its nuclear program are an assault on the rights of developing nations to create their own peaceful nuclear energy network. The United States and other nations believe Iran’s nuclear program has the goal of creating nuclear weapons.

The IAEA resolution criticized Iran for defying a UN Security Council ban on uranium enrichment – the source of both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

It also censured Iran for secretly building a uranium enrichment facility and demanded that it immediately suspend further construction. It noted that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei cannot confirm that Tehran’s nuclear program is exclusively geared toward peaceful uses, and expressed “serious concern” that Iranian stonewalling of an IAEA probe means “the possibility of military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program” cannot be excluded.
Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran’s chief delegate to the IAEA, shrugged off the vote.

“Neither resolutions of the board of governors nor those of the United Nations Security Council … neither sanctions nor the treat of military attacks, can interrupt peaceful nuclear activities in Iran, even a second,” he told the closed meeting, in remarks made available to reporters

Why ‘Chinusa’, Chipak will rule the world & Chindia failed–An Indian perspective.  In a rapidly changing world, Delhi is getting increasingly isolated. Delhi itself is under pressure becuase of the 123 Nuclear deal. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had high hopes of the nuclear deal being ratified in Washington. No such luck. President Obama refused to “finalize” the deal. PM Singhs US trip abject Failure: Nuke deal not finalized. India jilted  The Indo-US romance is on the rocky road of difficulties. The pageant & the thud of the jilt–that ended the romance: New rocky road in Indo-US relations.   It is now increasingly obvious that Bharat has fallen to the 3rd tier of regional powers behind Japan, Korea and China. Why ‘Chinusa’, Chipak will rule the world & Chindia failed–An Indian perspective The future will increasingly be Chinese and Beijing has surrounded Delhi with allies in Pakistan, Nepal, Lanka, and Burma. Iran will increasingly move towards the Russian-Chinese camps.

”In a nutshell, Singh got a nice state ceremony, China got respect as an equal and Pakistan has got billions of dollars of additional US aid,” said Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi. ”India will have to be satisfied with the sumptuous dinner.”

While we [India] were deluding ourselves with Chindia (that China and India will call the shots in the future) and hetting paranoid about Chi-Pak (China and Pakistan are encircling India from two sides), US and China forged a new relationship. And the basis of this relationship is: that they will have their spheres of influence – east, south east and south Asia and Africa for China; and Europe and Latin America for the US. So, it was not just a coincidence that Obama gave China the role of monitor in South Asia. Shobhan Saxena Times of India

Strategically India and the US are growing apart–Great Delhi supporter and Indophile–Stephen Cohen  

Why ‘Chinusa’, Chipak will rule the world & Chindia failed–An Indian prespective

Singh failed in the main objective of his visit – to ”operationalise” the nuclear deal concluded in the Bush era. While Obama pledged to ”fully implement” the agreement, potentially crucial details of nuclear technology transfers to India have not been finalised. Matt Wade Herald Correspondent SMH Australia

Obama rebuffs PM Singh–eulogizes Pakistan as important ally

So, what’s in store for India? The only option available to India is junior partnership with both US and China. We can only have a buyer-seller ties with them. They sell and we buy. They sell their nuclear reactors and fighter jets and bankrupt companies to us and we save their economy with our hard cash. It’s the same situation with China. Shobhan Saxena Times of India

Obama rebuffs PM Singh–eulogizes Pakistan as important ally

“It seemed to suggest that India had simply fallen between two stools – Pakistan and China were urgent priorities for different reasons,” Editorial in the Indian Express newspaper Monday, November 23rd, 2009.

We may aspire to a seat at the high table of world power but China is already sitting at the head of the table along with the United States,”…”It has enough IOUs in its pocket to stop anyone from pushing it around. We also are a billion-strong nation, a democracy to boot and growing economically at a still impressive rate given the global conditions. But, realistically speaking, we are a second or perhaps third tier force in the eyes of the United States.” Journalist Gautam Adhikari in the Times of India Monday.

From Reuters:

The International Atomic Energy Agency’s board of governors voted 25-3 to censure Iran in a motion that gained rare backing from Russia and China, which have in the past blocked attempts to isolate Iran, a trade partner for both.

The U.S. envoy to the IAEA, Ambassador Glynn Davies, said in Vienna on Friday that international patience with Iran was running out and that “round after round” of fruitless talks could not continue.

Speaking to reporters in Washington later, the U.S. official said the vote showed “unity of purpose” among major international powers on Iran, and repeated that time was growing short for Tehran to come clean about a nuclear program that Western governments fear is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge.”

The Washington Post reported Thursday on US efforts to secure China’s backing for the IAEA resolution:

Two weeks before President Obama visited China, two senior White House officials traveled to Beijing on a “special mission” to try to persuade China to pressure Iran to give up its alleged nuclear weapons program.

If Beijing did not help the United States on this issue, the consequences could be severe, the visitors, Dennis Ross and Jeffrey Bader, both senior officials in the National Security Council, informed the Chinese.

The Chinese were told that Israel regards Iran’s nuclear program as an “existential issue and that countries that have an existential issue don’t listen to other countries,” according to a senior administration official. The implication was clear: Israel could bomb Iran, leading to a crisis in the Persian Gulf region and almost inevitably problems over the very oil China needs to fuel its economic juggernaut, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Earlier this week, the White House got its answer. China informed the United States that it would support a toughly worded, U.S.-backed statement criticizing the Islamic republic for flouting U.N. resolutions by constructing a secret uranium-enrichment plant.

Andal Ampatuan Jr., the mayor of Datu Unsay, a town in Maguindanao province in the Philippines, has been charged in the murders of 57 people who were on their way to file election papers for Ismael Mangudadatu, political rival of Ampatuan’s father who is governor of the province, Voice of America. Some of the suspects who carried out the attacks have turned themselves in and others are being sought by authorities. More than 20 journalists were also killed in the attack. New reports have surfaced that the women who were killed in the massacre were shot in the genitals and may have been raped, New York Times. Ismael Mangudadatu, whose wife was killed in the attack, has since filed the papers for his candidacy, Associated Press.

Financial markets around the world have fallen after news that Dubai World, a government run financial operation in Dubai,  needs to restructure its debt and will not be able to make payments as scheduled, New York Times. Explainer: What is Dubai World?, CNN.

Police in southern Florida are searching for Paul Michael Merhige, the man who allegedly fatally shot four of his family members yesterday,  CNN.

The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) passed a resolution condemning Iran’s construction of a secret nuclear facility for uranium enrichment. The resolution was backed by Iranian allies Russia and China. Iran is not thought to currently have the ability to produce a nuclear weapon and says that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, but most world governments suspect that Iran is seeking nuclear capability, BBC News. Q & A on Iran’s nuclear programs, BBC News.

Hey Ayatollahs, leave those kids alone
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo_RUZ6heUc

Banknoten des Protests
http://payvand.com/blog/blog/2009/11/16/exhibit-iranian-banknotes-uprising/

Chavez empfängt Ahmadi-Nedjad mit Nationalhymne des Schahs
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xb9nej_ahmadinejad-arrived-in-carracas-wi_news

Poster zum 16. Azar (7. November)

Politik und Wirtschaft

Atomkrise I: IAEA verurteilt Islamische Republik
http://www.rferl.org/content/IAEA_Passes_Resolution_Censuring_Iran/1889306.html

Atomkrise II: China unterstützt Resolution gegen Islamische Republik
http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=9924

Atomkrise III: El Baradei spricht von Sackgasse
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/26/iaea-chief-iran-investiga_n_371563.html

Atomkrise IV: US-Abgesandter sagt, Geduld mit Iran sei am Ende
http://www.reuters.com/article/hotStocksNews/idUSGEE5AQ14A20091127

Atomkraftwerk von Bushehr in russischer Hand (2500 von 3000 Angestellten sind Russen)
http://khabaronline.ir/news-26815.aspx

Rückgang der Erdöleinnahmen um 45 Prozent / 28 Milliarden Dollar mehr für Importe
http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=9918

Khatami: Wir sind stolz, die Freiheit und freie Wahlen zu verteidigen (ha, ha!)
http://www.irannewsdigest.com/2009/11/26/khatamiwe-are-proud-of-defending-freedom-and-free-elections/

Geheimdienstminister warnt vor Feinden im Machtzentrum
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2009/11/oh-what-a-mess.html

Kurzbericht über den berüchtigten Haghani-Zirkel (Hojjatieh)
http://droi.wordpress.com/the-haghani-circle/

Politkommissare in den Schulen (Honecker, ick hör dir trapsen)
http://www.mowjcamp.org/article/id/67718

Menschenrechte

Schwulen iranischen Jugendlichen droht Hinrichtung
http://iranbbb.org/56113.htm

USA verurteilt Spionagevorwürfe gegen Kian Tajbakhsh
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091126/pl_afp/usiranunrestscholarwhouse

Internationale Menschenrechtsorganisationen fordern Untersuchung von Doktor Pourandarjanis angeblichem Selbstmord
http://www.zamaaneh.com/enzam/2009/11/human-rights-group-demand.html

Islamische Republik züchtigt ihre Bürger
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/opinion/26thur2.html?_r=1

Kurdischer Autor Abbas Jalilian zu 15 Monaten Haft verurteilt
http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=9928

Rachsucht der Islamischen Republik entspricht der Adolf Hitlers Reich
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6934070.ece

Keine Taxis für die Bassidji
http://www.ina-newsagency.com/News-Details.aspx?newsId=29061&back=1

VIENA – O Conselho da Agência Internacional de Energia Atômica (AIEA) condenou nesta sexta-feira, 27, o Irã, pela primeira vez desde 2006, por seu polêmico programa nuclear e sua falta de cooperação na investigação internacional de suas atividades atômicas. O Brasil, que recebeu o presidente Mahmoud Ahmadinejad nesta semana, se absteve de votar. É a primeira vez desde fevereiro de 2006 que a AIEA aprova uma resolução contra o Irã.

Do grupo de 35 países da atual Junta de Governadores da AIEA, 25 concordaram com a resolução, segundo diplomatas. Três países votaram contra o texto: Venezuela, Malásia e Cuba. Além do Brasil, Afeganistão, Egito, Paquistão, África do Sul e Turquia se abstiveram. Um país, o Azerbaijão, não estava representado.

Ao receber Ahmadinejad no País, o presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva defendeu o direito iraniano de desenvolver energia nuclear para fins pacíficos. Grã-Bretanha, França, Alemanha, Rússia, China e Estados Unidos impulsionaram a nova resolução contra o Irã na AIEA por suas atividades nucleares. O documento pede a paralisação das obras de uma planta de enriquecimento de urânio, mantida em segredo até recentemente.

Países como EUA e Israel temem que Teerã tenha um programa secreto para produzir armas nucleares, mas o governo iraniano garante ter apenas fins pacíficos, como a produção de energia. O Irã já foi alvo de três rodadas de sanções no Conselho de Segurança da ONU, por se recusar a interromper seu programa nuclear.

A resolução aprovada expressa a “séria preocupação” de que Teerã continua “desafiando as exigências” da comunidade internacional, que pede entre outros assuntos uma suspensão completa do enriquecimento de urânio no Irã. O texto, elaborado pela Alemanha em coordenação com as cinco potências do Conselho de Segurança, vinha sendo redigido enquanto a AIEA esperava uma resposta iraniana para sua proposta de transferir a maior parte do urânio enriquecido no Irã ao exterior. No marco desta medida de criação de confiança, França e Rússia se comprometeram a transformar esse material em combustível nuclear para um reator científico em Teerã.

A resolução aprovada critica a construção sem aviso prévio de uma nova fábrica de enriquecimento de urânio na cidade de Qom, a sudoeste de Teerã. O fato de que o Irã não tenha informado a tempo à AIEA da existência dessa instalação “não contribui para a criação de confiança”, diz o documento. A fábrica de Qom “reduz o nível de confiança sobre a ausência de outras instalações” e cria dúvidas sobre se “existem outras instalações nucleares no Irã que não foram declaradas”, adverte a resolução.

O Irã reconheceu em setembro passado que está construindo em Qom uma segunda planta de enriquecimento de urânio, muito menor que o centro de Natanz, o que causou inquietação na comunidade internacional. O mal-estar aconteceu porque muitos especialistas consideram que o tamanho da instalação, que entrará em funcionamento em 2011, não é compatível com um programa nuclear civil.
agência estado

Rizzolo: Todos sabem que o governo do Irã não é de confiança. Num momento em que o mundo condena a forma pela qual o Irã trata e informa suas atividades na área nuclear, o Brasil se coloca como quase um cúmplice em não rechaçar a postura estranha do Irã que sonega informações, se colocando perante o mundo como um rebelde na área atômica, desconsiderando as posições da ONU sobre o caso.

Já o embaixador norte-americano Glyn Davies, enviado de Washington à Agência Internacional de Energia Atômica (AIEA), afirmou que “a paciência dos Estados Unidos com o programa nuclear iraniano “está se esgotando”. O comentário foi feito depois de a AIEA ter aprovado hoje, em Viena, uma moção de censura contra o Irã por causa de seu programa nuclear. Davies ressalvou, no entanto, que a resolução aprovada hoje “não tem caráter punitivo”. O embaixador disse esperar que a moção dê “novo ímpeto ao caminho da diplomacia”.

“Outgoing ElBaradei toughens language, urges Iran to accept nuclear deal”
November 25-27, 2009
     Analysts point out that IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei has toughened his language on Iran and may have “lost [his] patience” as he reaches the end of his term (Agence France-Presse). At his final IAEA meeting as Director General, ElBaradei declared that discussions with Iran on “outstanding issues” had reached a “dead end” and criticized Iran’s delayed declaration of the Fordow (Qom) facility. ElBaradei also expressed disappointment over Iran’s negative response to the uranium export deal [previously covered here], calling the deal a “unique opportunity” that “should be seized” (IAEA).
     In an interview, ElBaradei states that the West is unlikely to accept Iran’s demand for a simultaneous nuclear fuel swap but argues against sanctions and pressure. ElBaradei calls resolutions censuring Iran, such as the most recent P5+1-sponsored resolution passed by the IAEA Board of Governors [see the resolution here], “expressions of frustration” that will likely invite defiance rather than cooperation. On the Fordow site, ElBaradei suggests that the small size of the facility indicates it may be part of a network of covert sites (Reuters).
     Prior to the resolution’s passing, Iran’s IAEA ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh declared that the resolution would reduce Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA “to the minimum we are legally obliged” (Agence France-Presse (2)).
Agence France-Presse | IAEA | Reuters | Agence France-Presse (2)

The outgoing head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Thursday his probe of Iran’s nuclear program is at “a dead end” and that trust in Tehran’s credibility is shrinking after its belated revelation that it was secretly building a nuclear facility.

Mohamed ElBaradei’s blunt criticism of the Islamic Republic — four days before he leaves office — was notable in representing a broad convergence with Washington’s opinion, which for years was critical of the IAEA chief for what it perceived as his softness on Iran.

Iran also came in for censure from another quarter at the opening session of the IAEA’s 35-nation board, with the introduction of a resolution taking Tehran to task on a broad range of issues linked to international concerns that it may be seeking to make nuclear weapons. Significantly, diplomats at the meeting said the resolution was endorsed not only by Western powers — the U.S., Britain, France and Germany — but also by Russia and China.

Outgoing Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei waits for the start of the IAEA’s 35-nation board meeting at Vienna’s International Center, in Vienna, on Thursday, Nov. 26, 2009

For strategic and economic reasons, Moscow and Beijing have sided with Tehran in the past. They have prevented several Western attempts to slap new U.N. sanctions on Iran for its nuclear defiance or succeeded in watering down their severity.

They did not formally endorse the last IAEA resolution critical of Iran in 2006. Their backing for the document at the Vienna meeting Thursday thus reflected broad international disenchantment with Tehran.

It also appeared to signal possible support for any new Western push for a fourth set of Security Council sanctions, should Tehran continue shunning international overtures meant to reach agreements that reduce concerns about its nuclear ambitions.

In Tehran, state TV quoted Iran’s envoy to the U.N. agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, as saying, “The Western countries should not spoil the positive atmosphere. They should allow cooperation between Iran and the agency to continue its positive trend.”

The IAEA resolution criticized Iran for defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment — the source of both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

It also censured it for secretly building a uranium enrichment facility; noted that ElBaradei cannot confirm that Tehran’s nuclear program is exclusively geared toward peaceful uses, and expressed “serious concern” that Iranian stonewalling of an IAEA probe means “the possibility of military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program” cannot be excluded.

Western diplomats said they expected about two-thirds of the board to support the resolution in a vote, likely Friday.

While the board cannot enforce any of its resolutions, they do get referred to the Security Council, giving any later move to impose new U.N. sanctions on Iran additional weight.

In his comments, ElBaradei touched on the same criticisms expressed in the resolution.

“There has been no movement on remaining issues of concern which need to be clarified for the agency to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program,” he told the board session. “We have effectively reached a dead end, unless Iran engages fully with us.”

“Issues of concern” is the IAEA term for indications that Tehran has experimented with nuclear weapons programs, including missile-delivery systems and tests of explosives that could serve as nuclear-bomb detonators.

ElBaradei has emphasized the need for talks instead of threats in engaging Iran. He has criticized the U.S. for invading Iraq on the pretext that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear weapons program, which has never been proven. That — and perceived softness on the Iran issue — has drawn criticism from the U.S. and its allies that he was overstepping his mandate.

But ElBaradei’s comments Thursday left little doubt that he was most unhappy with Tehran.

“I am disappointed that Iran has not so far agreed” to a proposal involving removal of most of Iran’s enriched stockpile, ElBaradei told the meeting.

The plan approved by the six world powers negotiating with Iran over the past few months would commit Tehran to ship out 70 percent of its enriched uranium for processing into fuel rods for its research reactor in Tehran. That would help allay international fears by removing most of the material that Iran could use to make a nuclear weapon.

It would take more than a year for Tehran to replace the enriched material, meaning it would not be able to make a weapon for at least that long.

Iran says it is enriching only to power a future network of nuclear reactors. But enrichment can also produce fissile warhead material. Iran continues enriching, despite three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions meant to make it freeze that activity and has built an enriched stockpile that could arm two nuclear warheads.

Initially, Tehran appeared to favor the plan. But in recent weeks it has offered modifications that have one thing in common — its refusal to ship out most of its enriched stockpile. That effectively kills the plan, with the West refusing to accept anything else than an Iranian commitment to export the material.

In another reflection of a tougher Russian line, Moscow on Thursday urged Tehran to accept the uranium proposal and abide by other agreements reached at a meeting with six world powers last month. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Iran’s ambassador to Moscow that such cooperation would “significantly move forward the process of restoring the international community’s trust in the exclusively peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program,” the ministry said.

Impatience with Iran has been fueled by Tehran’s September revelation that it had secretly been building a new enrichment facility. In a possible pre-emptive move, Iran notified the IAEA in a confidential letter only days before the leaders of the U.S., Britain and France went public with the project.

Iran says it did not violate IAEA statutes by waiting with its notification. But ElBaradei has said Tehran was “outside the law” in not telling his agency about the facility much earlier. On Thursday, he said that Iran’s late reporting on the facility reduced “confidence in the absence of other nuclear facilities under construction in Iran which have not been declared to the agency.”

Ruediger Luedeking, Germany’s chief IAEA representative, called the questions about the facility “a major issue which again gives rise to serious questions and concerns regarding the nature of Iran’s nuclear program.”

A perusal of IAEA records shows that Tehran’s chief envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, told the agency’s board last year that his country “has repeatedly declared that there is no undeclared nuclear material and activity in Iran” — at the time when construction of the secret nuclear facility was in full force.

Bookmark & Share