by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright May 3, 2005
All Rights Reserved.

ipping his hand, Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi addressed the U.N. conference on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, insisting that Iran is “eager” to assure only peaceful purposes of its atomic power industry. When Kharrazi talks about “peaceful purposes” he's not referring to only generating electricity. Pakistan's notorious bomb-maker Abdul Qadeer Khan has already supplied Tehran the plans and technology to enrich uranium needed to build A-bombs. While Iran finds itself under the nuclear heat lamp, it wasn't long ago that Tehran insisted it would not retreat from joining the “nuclear club.” Like A.Q. Khan, Iran's Ayatollah Khameini believes that nuclear deterrence gives pause to its enemies. His peaceful use of nuclear power involves threatening potential enemies with “Mutual Assured Destruction,” the nuclear doctrine causing India and Pakistan to make peace.

      President George W. Bush wants to ban technology leading to weapons grade uranium to all countries currently unable to complete the nuclear fuel cycle. Tehran's plan use enriched uranium to generate electricity flies in the face of Iran's official policy. “Iran has a high technical capacity and has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club. This is an irreversible path,” said Kharrazi last year, generating global outrage, especially by Mohamed ElBaradei's Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency. “We won't accept any new obligations,” including signing onto the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” a treaty that bans Iran from building atomic weapons. When Kharrazi talks about using nuclear power for peaceful purposes, he's not talking about electricity. He's talking about nuclear missiles as “peacekeepers.”

      Since Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's Feb 5, 2003 presentation to the U.N. Security Council accusing Saddam Hussein of stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, the international community remains skeptical of U.S. intelligence. Washington is hard-pressed to convince the IAEA and European Union that Tehran presents a growing nuclear threat. Iran insists that it only has peaceful plans for enriching uranium. Yet Kharrazzi has made it clear that Iran has no intention of backing down from completing the nuclear fuel cycle. “It is unacceptable that some intend to limit the access to nuclear technology to an exclusive club of technologically advanced states under the pretext of nonproliferation,” said Kharrazi, ignoring calls to abandon its enrichment program. In Tehran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Iran would resume some “nuclear activities,” pending multilateral talks.

      Calling the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treating outdated, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan strongly encouraged revisions to prevent rogue nations from developing atomic weapons. Hounded by the oil-for-food scandal, the savvy Annan seized the moment to score points with the White House. With calls for his ouster, Annan needs all the help he can get to divert attention away from his own scandal. “The treaty is facing the most serious challenge in its history,” said assistant secretary of state Stephen G. Rademaker, calling on Iran to dismantle it enrichment equipment. When the IAEA found trace amounts of enriched uranium near Iran's Arak reactor, they were locked out all nuclear sites. Though Tehran signed onto the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, they feel no obligation to stop enriching uranium for “peaceful purposes,” calling the White House hypocrites for rejecting the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

      Under terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, nuclear powers—like the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China—agree to reduce nuclear stockpiles, especially Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. Israel, Pakistan and India have never signed the treaty. Tehran feels no obligation to stop enriching uranium because major nuclear powers made no effort to reduce existing arsenals. “We are greatly disappointed” by “unsatisfactory progress” by the big powers, said New Zealand's Marian Hobbs, highlighting breaches by major atomic states. Under terms of the treaty, Tehran stands on firm ground arguing that enrichment “for peaceful purposes” doesn't violate the current treaty. It's problematic allowing rogue states to enrich uranium when they can't be trusted. IAEA's ElBaradei proposes placing nuclear fuel production under multinational control.

      Tehran has made it clear that it plans to complete the nuclear fuel cycle, enriching uranium for whatever purposes. When Kharrazi talks about joining the “nuclear club,” he's not talking about generating electricity. With it vast mineral wealth, there's no shortage of oil to drive turbines for electrical power. Tehran doesn't want to allow A.Q. Khan's A-bomb plans to continue collecting dust. Kofi Annan is right calling the Nuclear Nonproliferation obsolete. Article IV gives non-weapons states the right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology, including enriching uranium for nuclear power plants. In the age of suicide bombings and global terror, allowing Tehran to enrich uranium opens the door for blackmail and nuclear terrorism. With or without the U.N., the U.S. must find a way to stop rogue states from making nuclear bombs and supplying terrorists.

About The Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.