UN 'losing patience' with Iran

UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei has said he is "losing patience" with Iran's lack of transparency about its controversial nuclear program.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier says Iran's decision to resume nuclear fuel research, which it announced overnight, marks a breach of its international commitments and "cannot remain without consequence".

Tehran's announcement that it would resume nuclear fuel research ends a two-year suspension and has sparked international concern about the nature of the program.

"I cannot continue to say at every board meeting that I still need more time. We have been doing that for three years.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/ 0,5478,17778500^1702,00.html

this is almost as bad as election campaign ads on tv, this flood of iran scare stories.

to do anything about it, except bomb the crap out of them, leaving them to wreak havoc in Iraq and Israel.

Studies from Viet Nam concluded that bombing served to strengthen the resolve and ability of the "bombees" to fight back.

peace

What exactly are the international commitments?

after story page and then copy and paste the URL in your address bar otherwise the link doesn't seem to work.

Thanks

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17778500%5E1702,00.html

Iran's "commitment" was to suspend nuclear fuel research 2 1/2 years ago, in separate deals with the IAEA and the EU-3. But that suspension was voluntary. Iran, as a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has the right to conduct such research as long as it is for peaceful purposes. Iran has invited the IAEA to supervise the reseearch to verify this.

So when AP and Reuters say 'in breach of intl commitments', what they don't say is that these commitments were voluntary on Iran's part. They did not legally have to do suspend research. They make it sound as though Iran has done something illegal. I think it's dishonest of them not to explain this.

What they also don't say in these Western reports is that Iran has invited the IAEA inspectors to remove the seals.

"We announced our readiness to start the work tomorrow (Monday). The IAEA should carry out part of the work and then research will be resumed.

"The IAEA inspectors are in Iran and they can take the necessary measures in this regard."

IAEA inspectors arrived in Tehran on Saturday to remove UN seals at some nuclear research and development sites.

"Research and development activities will be conducted under IAEA supervision, and there is nothing to be worried about," Asefi said.

http://www.mehrnews.ir/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=275826

And that this was being exaggerated.

...by neocon-friendly, er, 'journalists'.

Take the recent example, where he said that Iran MIGHT have a bomb IN A FEW YEARS if they process the right amount of material.

It became "Iran will have a bomb in a few months to a year" (or whatever the scare date was, I forget the exact phrase).

of slap at US policy in Iraq? El Baradei insisted that Iraq didn't have any nuclear program, an unpopular position at the time. I think Bush was even trying to get him removed from the IAEA. If El Baradei says Iran is a danger, I tend to believe him.

He just wants Iran to continue the voluntary suspension of R & D activities at least until his next report in March.

They're more annoyed w/Iran than afraid right now. Maybe I should've said "problem" instead of "danger."

Iran is doing everything within the law - that's the problem for BushCo.

Mind you, Saddam did everything within the law as well....

Basically, legal or illegal, Iran can be referred to the security council if the IAEA feels it's not being cooperative. This appears to be what El Baradei is suggesting will happen if Iran does not become more "transparent" in its dealings with the IAEA and the international community.

Have you got a link?

The UN Security Council can't admonish a member nation that hasn't broken any agreements or laws, as far as I know.

I don't know why El Baradei is saying what he is saying. I presume he is coming under heavy political pressure. If you read all this stuff carefully you notice that there is an almost constant background of 'discontent' with Iran, though no action ever comes of it. This is because there is no legal basis for action against Iran.

Iran is being 'transparent' with the IAEA - what isn't transparent is the reporting of this fact.

More info:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article337686.ece

I'll have to look into it a bit more. My guess is that they're going to go after them for violating the NPT by hiding various aspects of their operation.

tend to adopt that ploy.

However the the USuk, France etc are in breach of the NPT by not offering help to Iran in developing its civil nuclear programme and by not dismantling their own nuclear weapons systems.

This is what makes it difficult for them - if the law was actually applied they would be found wanting.

Russia and China are helping Iran develop these progs and are thus being villified for acting in accordance with the law, though they are both in breach of the disarmament part of the NPT.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/10/opinion/edberman.php

Ah, the days we live in.

I bet you are right on. Make a note of the publisher and author.

Iraq WMD, so sick, ugly ugly US need to get brains fix.

Iran actually has a nuclear program.

Fixed.