Sunday, August 07, 2005

Iran: Holding, Not Folding

Click on the title for the complete AP article via the San Francisco Chronicle.

Iran's nuclear brinksmanship has paid off — so far. It gained two years to complete uranium enrichment facilities during unproductive negotiations with the European Union, which has not carried out threats to seek U.N. sanctions.

Meanwhile the clock keeps ticking. Tick, tock. Tick, tock.

It should be fairly apparent by now that Iran has no intention of negotiating in good faith. And, they have bought precious time by pretending to do so.

But until someone decides to bring it to the Security Council, it will continue to be a game in which Iran is holding the cards and bluffing, with minimal effort.

This needs to be Bolton's first order of business, and soon. How many more years are we willing to give them?

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Iran has declared that it will resume nuclear conversion at Esfahan within one or two days. Europe has requested an emergency meeting of the IAEA to pressure Iran not to resume nuclear fuel cycle work. Israel is pressuring Ukraine to demand from Iran the 12 nuclear-capable X-55 cruise missiles that were smuggled there four years ago.

All of this is happening as the talks with North Korea are drawing to a crucial, and so far unpredictable, end.

So is World War III imminent? Hardly.

Over reaction is exactly what these unlikely allies are fishing for. The coincidence of declared threats by both countries is a bit too convenient. By cranking the nuclear threat pressure simultaneously, both North Korea and Iran are hoping to walk away with the most handouts.

LA Sunset said...

Kira,

Thank you for visiting my blog. Your comments are welcome and here is my reply to these:

"So is World War III imminent? Hardly."

WWIII began in 1979, when the Iranians tookover the U.S Embassy. The average American didn't know that until 9-11-01. Some of them still don't.


"Over reaction is exactly what these unlikely allies are fishing for."

Going to the UN is hardly over-reacting, launching a nuke or any other offensive military action on the other hand, is. Especially given their record of late. I don't want to over-react either, but to under-react would be even more foolish.

"The coincidence of declared threats by both countries is a bit too convenient. By cranking the nuclear threat pressure simultaneously, both North Korea and Iran are hoping to walk away with the most handouts."

You are right about the handouts part. But even if they get the handouts they both want, what makes you so sure they won't continue to develop nukes, anyway?

_H_ said...

what i dont understand is the way that the US,UK,France,China,Russia,India,Pakistan and israel all are happy members of the nuclear club but Iran , Iraq , north korea are trying to get into the WMD club

arent they the same club ?

as for Bolton .. alas i feel he will get little support from the UN , the wrong man at the wrong time .. in my long history of UN watching i can never ever remember a countries new representive being met by "dimplomats" with a loud and hardy BOO !

LA Sunset said...

H,

Iran is a supporter of terrorism, why is the world would you want them to have nukes?

NK is a military dictatorship that threatens their neighbors on a regular basis, why would you want them to have nukes?

Those that have nukes now are not of the same ilk. Yet.

G_in_AL said...

H, the US, UK, France, and China (not sure yet about Pakistan or India) are all ruled by people that have a stake in the world. Iran is ruled by religous zealots that really dont care if they end up starting a nuclear war that destroys millions.

_H_ said...

'Iran is a supporter of terrorism'

erm so is the US , Israel , Pakistan and the UK ... we have nuclear weapons and support terrorists .. we even supplied Osama with stinger missiles to fight the russians

so iran is supposed to comply with UN instructions when the UN ignored israel and pakistan and india when they built the bomb .

stinks of double standards

you are circled by countries that can NUKE you but dont you Dare try to defend yourself

Why should Iran forgo the processing of nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes if it is written right into the treaty? Would Israel or Pakistan accept a similar proposal?

Of course, not. Both countries ignored the treaty altogether and built their own nuclear weapons behind the back of the international community. Only Iran has been singled out and punished for COMPLYING with the treaty.

how hypocritical

_H_ said...

oh and lasunett .. 'why is the world would you want them to have nukes'

i dont .. i just feel obliged to make a stand against double standards

only one country has ever used Nukes .. how often do you allow the atomic energy agency to inspect your weapons

never

Iran is no more a threat to us then saddam was (if you believed that then you will probably believe this) ...

it is a bullshit story .. iran is not the threat

i doubt you will remember but 'time' magazine did a survey , 706,842 people took part (wow thats alot)

the question

what country poses the greatest danger to world peace in 2003

the answer

north korea 6.7%
iraq 6.3%
USA 86.9%

dont tell me , they are all wrong :o)