Stop the Madness

Olli Heinonen is alarmed that Iran has begun producing 20 percent enriched uranium at a new, deeply buried site, and calculates that Iranian scientists could further purify the material to the 90 percent enrichment needed for a bomb in about six months' time. This prediction, however, is based on unsubstantiated assumptions regarding Iranian intentions, and only serves to provide ammunition for hawks in Washington that would rush the United States into another destructive war in the Middle East.

If Tehran enriched uranium to 90 percent, it would be forced to break its four decade-long adherence to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- a momentous step that would likely prompt swift military action from the United States or Israel. Furthermore, Heinonen fails to mention that, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, "All nuclear material in the facility remains under the Agency's containment and surveillance." The IAEA considers 20 percent enriched uranium to be low-enriched uranium and "a fully adequate isotopic barrier" to weaponization.

Don't Miss

The Persian Incursion

This isn't the first time that hawks have raised the alarm about Iran's nuclear program, claiming that the sky is falling. Breathless, hypothetical timelines to an Iranian bomb have continued almost unabated since the time of the shah. For instance, in 1992, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said that Iran would have nuclear warheads by 1999. By casting the worst-case scenario as a realistic possibility, such timelines invite overly tough policies that may, in turn, actually provoke a hard-line Iranian response -- creating a self-fulfilling cycle of escalation.

In reality, however, Iran is not doing anything that violates its legal right to develop nuclear technology. Under the NPT, it is not illegal for a member state to have a nuclear weapons capability -- or a "nuclear option." If a nation has a fully developed civilian nuclear sector -- which the NPT actually encourages -- it, by default, already has a fairly solid nuclear weapons capability. For example, like Iran, Argentina, Brazil, and Japan also maintain a "nuclear option" -- they, too, could break out of the NPT and make a nuclear device in a few months, if not less. And like Iran, Argentina and Brazil also do not permit full "Additional Protocol" IAEA inspections.

The real legal red line, specified in the IAEA's "Comprehensive Safeguards Agreements," is the diversion of nuclear materials to a weapons program. However, multiple experts and official reports have affirmed over the years that they have no evidence that any such program exists.

For example Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate who spent more than a decade as the director of the IAEA, said that he had not "seen a shred of evidence" that Iran was pursuing the bomb. The latest IAEA report on Iran's nuclear program also backs up this assessment, stating that Iran's research program into nuclear weapons "was stopped rather abruptly pursuant to a ‘halt order' instruction issued in late 2003."

Even U.S. officials have conceded that they have no proof that Iran is actively pursuing a nuclear bomb. Following the release of the classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) in 2011, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper confirmed in a Senate hearing that he has a "high level of confidence" that Iran "has not made a decision as of this point to restart its nuclear weapons program." And earlier this month, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta weighed in: "Are they [Iranians] trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they're trying to develop a nuclear capability. And that's what concerns us."

There are many other explanations for Iran's uranium enrichment program other than that the country is embarking on a mad dash for nuclear weapons. The most objective reading of Iran's intention to stockpile more 20 percent enriched uranium than it needs for running its research reactor is that it may be preserving a "breakout" option to weaponize in the future, should it feel under threat. But the important point is that, under the NPT, there is nothing illegal about stockpiling low-enriched uranium. And whatever options and ambitions that Iranians leaders may hold in their heads, however worrying, cannot be illegal.

12NEXT

Save big when you subscribe to FP.

ANONMOOS

8:46 PM ET

January 19, 2012

Ahmadinajad incendiary rhetoric doesn't help

If the Iranians are not building up an enrichment capability for the purpose of nuking the Jews, then they should persuade Ahmadinajad to keep his yap firmly shut, because every time Ahmadinajad opens and closes his jaws and flaps his gums, he manages to convince yet more people that his cherished goal is nuking the Jews...

SPOOD

1:57 PM ET

January 20, 2012

Neither do the other actions

The military exercises, the missile tests, the deliberate announcing of increasing uranium enrichment levels, they are all designed to create a skeptical attitude towards Iran's actions without crossing the line to actual provocation.

Iran is playing coy with its nuclear ambitions for the SOLE purpose of sparking international tensions. If Iran was legitimately trying to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes, they would be making efforts to defuse tensions, not ramp them up.

If their intention was creating nuclear weapons, they would be much more serious about keeping their efforts as secret as possible. We would not be having this discussion. Iran is deliberately trying to create a conflict and provoke a response.

JOHNBOY4546

6:52 PM ET

"If Iran was legitimately trying to develop nuclear power"...

..."for peaceful purposes, they would be making efforts to defuse tensions, not ramp them up."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71544_Page2.html
Iran: "We are allergic to threats"

If you want to engage with the Iranians in a genuine "effort to defuse tensions" then I would suggest that constantly threatening them with attack while covertly assassinating their scientists is not exactly a sign of your good intentions.

Nor would I suggest that it's a good idea for an American President to send Brazil and Turkey over to Tehran to cut a deal, and then to immediately reject the deal that it cut, precisely because that volte-face is not exactly a convincing display of an "effort to defuse tensions".

LAURENHILL

8:28 PM ET

I agree, this guy sounds

I agree, this guy sounds really crazy... i really think i should switch to zen mode, because all he's gonna get is a very dirty war...

ROSSBRO

7:20 PM ET

January 21, 2012

Butt has his butt on his shoulders

This guy must be a politician the way he hides and denies the truth. If Ahmadindehead does attack in the Hormuz Strait, the USA needs to destroy every military target in Iran, and let the people do the rest of what is needed.

LOGICAL123

11:37 AM ET

January 22, 2012

Have you heard of freedom of speech?

So, you don't like what Ahmadinejad says. Then, why don't you stop listening to him. You are too ignorant to understand that he never says anything about Jews, he only talks about the Zionists of Israel. If you don't think there is a difference, then no rational discussion is possible with you. In fact, Iran is the home of the largest population of Jews in the Middle East after Israel. There are more than 20,000 Jews in Iran who live there without any problems. Also, he never threatened to "wipe out Israel." In contrast, Israel and the US constantly say, "All options are on the table," against Iran. So, you don't know what you are talking about.

11:47 AM ET

Iran is bluffing

"Allergy to threats" seems to work well for Iran. Seeing that the purpose of this whole situation is for Iran make threats and invite them in response.

Law of conservation of plausible deniablity. There is no shred of evidence Israel is doing the assassinations. Just like there is no evidence Iran is building nuclear weapons. It works both ways.

Just because you suspect, doesn't make it so. Frankly I don't believe either of them to be true.

Why would the President cut a deal out in the open when it is obvious the whole point of Iran's actions seems to be extortion in the same mode as Kim Jong Il a couple of years ago?
Iran is bluffing. They are taking their plays out of the North Korean handbook on nuclear blackmail. The same quasi military provocations, missile tests, public extolling of their uranium enrichment, harsh rhetoric towards nationally designated enemies.

Beardy-face is so unoriginal and public memories are so short. This whole thing will end one of two ways. Either the usual backroom payoff like North Korea (and Iran/Contra) or a cold war between Iran and the Arab states.

AREN HAICH

12:45 PM ET

For the willing; the solution to Iran's nuclear impasse is easy

FOR THE WILLING THE SOLUTION TO IRAN’S NUCLEAR IMPASSE IS SIMPLE:

1- US and Russia create an international bank for Low Enriched Uranium (LEU).

2- Iran is allowed to produce as much LEU as it desires on the condition that it sells its stock of LEU in excess of one ton to the LEU-bank.

3- Iran is guaranteed unlimited purchase of LEU fuel-rods for its nuclear power stations and research reactors.

The above formula should satisfy both the West and Iran:

Iran will continue its pursuit of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes unhindered; and at no point in time will have enough LEU to enrich further to build a bomb

12:51 PM ET

SIMPLE SOLUTION TO IRAN’S NUCLEAR IMPASSE

For the willing; the solution to Iran's nuclear impasse is easy:

12:54 PM ET

3:37 PM ET

Again, far too sensible

Plus it prevents the primary reason for Iran's actions, to start a short but unnecessary conflict.

4:43 PM ET

The problem is not Iran, it is the US and Israel

Iran would have no problem buying or selling enriched uranium. The problem is that the US does not want Iran even to enrich to 3.5% or 5%. Obama is just continuing like sheep the Bush policies. There is no end in sight to this farce because Obama has no ability to think or act independently. Whatever Netanyahu tell him he does. The US is the lackey of Israel on this issue.

HASS

8:39 PM ET

This conflict is not really about nukes

Iran has already offered this and many other compromise offers (including operating its enrichment program as a joint venture with the US) but the US has consistently ignored or actively undermined any potential peaceful resolution to the nuclear issue because the US needs to keep the issue alive as a justification and pretext for regime-change in Iran, just as "WMDs in Iraq" were just an excuse.

10:24 AM ET

January 23, 2012

You let Anti-Israel rhetoric get in the way of common sense

Or you could take the less wingnutty, more based on actual facts take and consider the provocative actions and rhetoric of Iran which is creating healthy skepticism as to their nuclear intentions.

Even though Iran's actions are a smidge suspicious, they have not been any real evidence of an actual nuclear weapons program. Iran has been intentionally playing up the distrust other nations have for them.

Of course nobody in the region wants them to be enriching uranium! They openly support proxy forces which are destabilizing neighbors in their favor, they are conducting provocative missile tests and military exercises designed to cause mayhem to Arab states and they talk about wiping enemies off the map. Nothing about Iran's conduct makes them worthy of being trusted with such things.

Frankly if they were really developing such a program, they would be much more discreet. Iran is deliberately acting in a way to inflame hysteria. Countries which have successfully made nuclear weapons are notoriously tight lipped about all efforts in the field to avoid suspicion. Not Iran. They are announcing their enrichment efforts to the world press! Of course they are trying to garner a hostile response.

Get the anti-America/Anti-Israel nonsense out of your head for one minute and use your brain for something besides filling space between your ears.

Was there any discussion about Pakistan's nuclear program while it was in progress? How about China's? Israel's? Libya's? No.

Why was that?

Because they kept their programs secret, even their civilian nuclear ambitions were not discussed. A country which really wants nukes can hide their efforts underground until their big test before anyone is the wiser. IAEA has never prevented the proliferation of nuclear weapons nor can they.

REALITYHURTS

12:04 PM ET

Iran , Isreal and West ?????????

Iran is the "B-team" of the west .....

{{{{{a) Iranians will never harm Isreal , Millions of Jews live in Iran. Even the previous President of Isreal was an Iranian.}}}}}}}}}}

1) American invade Iraq , before that Iran has no influence in Iraq but now its different.

2) America came to Afghanistan and Iran again become a major player in afghanistan through "Northen Alliance" .

3)Isreal invade Lebnon , killed thousands of civilians but "Hisbollah" becomes powerful in other words Iran.

4) Libya "thing" happens ( by the west ) , ironically indirectly Iran is the beneficiary.

Every one knows in Gaza that when ever things gets better between Isreal and them ,
Hisbollah start firing rockets , but when Isreal start bombing Gaza than Hisbollah take no action.
The west and America ( crusaders ) will never fire even a rubber bullet on Iran .

10:38 PM ET

Lies and deceptions

(a).......Millions of Jews live in Iran ( Iranians didn't killed them ) , Even previous Presdent
of Isreal was Iranian.

DISIGNY

9:00 AM ET

January 24, 2012

Defensiveness

Anonmoos: You are overlooking the obvious. Iran has every reason to believe that the US and Israel will stop at nothing to attack them in some way. We have already assassinated one of their Presidents. Syria was attacked militarily because they were seen as "enemies" of the Neocons. Since the US in particular has established the principle in foreign relations that "being Strong" means having nuclear weapons such that no one will dare attack you, or even express the idea, it is quite predictable that smaller countries would perhaps want to create the impression that they MIGHT have nukes even if they don't. How predictable, and perfectly rational.

POPSIQQ

2:59 PM ET

You Speak Farsi?

Unless you speak farsi and are tied into Iranian government and media sources 24/7- including Achnmedinejad's web site, where he posts, in english, with some regularity, you have as much a clue what Achmedinejad is actaully saying as any of the rest of the sheeple who get their 'interpretations' from Fox News soundbites.

America stopped listening to Achmedinejad after he made a comment about Zionsts and Zionist government. There are few people, even in America to-day, who would disagree with him. However, his words were co-opted by the ignorant as an attack on Jews - an altogether different thing from the racist political sytem that rules Israel.

Sadly the same level of ignorance continues to pervade US governmental circles. Despite a 'regime change' the same voices of strife and intolerance motivate America's non-relationship with Iran. Ask yourself what proof is there that Iran has done any of the 'hostile acts' laid at it's doorstep. The response is: " Lots; but you're too stupid to understand it. So you're not going to see it, either.*"

* Either: Like the 'proof' the Taliban knew about 9/11 or encouraged Bin Laden or wouldn't surrender him. That Saddam conspired with AQ, or had WMDs. Or that Iran won't negotiate its atomic energy policy.

3:06 PM ET

Just like in the other cakewalks?

Just as was 'planned' for Afghanistan and Iraq, the people were 'supposed to' rise and throw flowers and share cake and throw off the yoke of the tyrants. Instead they rose and started to shoot at the liberatards who had destroyed their countries and abused their people. America will be living with the effects of Iraq and Afghanistan for another generation or two.

Which makes it understandable that those whose mentality deals with debt by borrowing more, might see another little intergenerational struggle as an investment for the grandkids. Hopefully the grandkids won't have to go there to 'serve' as well, but that would only serve to make a generation of 'proud' American grandparents.

JOHNX

6:14 AM ET

January 26, 2012

Ahmadinajad does not have rhetorics

He makes more anger and fears than any other guy in this region. If Iran enriches uranium only for research and they do not want to make a bomb they should persuade the world with let this guy shut up. Sony HX9v He just aggravate the issue.

DILBERT

10:50 AM ET

Yes, but

the underground bunkers in Qom didn't exist (i.e. were not declared) until the west forced Iran to admit that they do exist. So, if they are really just doing this all for the sake of research, why hide it? And how many other secret sites exist that the west haven't discovered yet?

All Rummy used to say, "there are known unknowns, and unknown unknowns", and that's what we really have to worry about here.

6:39 PM ET

"the underground bunkers in Qom didn't exist"...

...."until the west forced Iran to admit that they do exist."

Post-hoc nonsense.

Iran was "forced" to admit that Qom existed because its obligations under the NPT said that it had to inform the IAEA *at* *that* *time* that Qoms existed. Which they did.

Having made that announcement then "the West" said: Oh, what, Qoms? Yeah, we knew about Qoms, we just didn't tell anyone.

And when pressed about *why* they didn't tell anyone we got this nonsense: Oh, well, we were just about to tell the IAEA, but the Iranians beat us to it.

Honestly, Dilbert, and you believe that?
On what grounds, exactly?

9:27 AM ET

Well we can believe you

or we can believe the US state department who just said EXACTLY what I wrote

http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2012/01/20120110173007su0.6872479.html#axzz1k6QP1GR3

6:46 AM ET

"or we can believe the US state department "

And the statement from the State Department was this:
"Iran only declared the Qom facility to the IAEA after it was discovered by the international community following three years of covert construction."

Would'a
Coulda'
Shoulda'

Only they didn't.

And the reason why they didn't say anything was that they had only just discovered that construction site.

This being, of course, a construction site where the Iranians SCOOPED OFF THE TOP OF A MOUNTAIN, built a massive hall, and then PUT THE TOP OF THAT MOUNTAIN BACK ON.

And La Clinton expects us to believe that "the west" didn't see any of that construction - a massive engineering project by anyone's measure - until just before the announcement was made.

DILBERT, baby, you can believe that if you want.

But I have to ask the question: why, exactly, do you believe such nonsense?

11:30 AM ET

Iran had no obligation to declare Qom early

People are talking nonsense here. Nobody seems to know anything about the NPT bylaws. Iran has no obligation to go beyond these bylaws which say that Iran has to declare a facility 6 months before fissile material is planned to be introduced there. Iran actually declared it 18 months in advance. So, whether they announced it themselves or someone else discovered it is totally irrelevant. This subject is simply moot. So, why don't people stop talking about this nonsensical issue.

8:35 PM ET

Iran was not "hiding" Fordow

Rubbish. Iran is only required to declare a nuclear facility 180-days prior to the introduction of nuclear material into it. The US often "beats them to the punch" and then claims that the site MUST have been intended to be secret because Iran had not already formally declared it. That of course is not the case. In the case of Fordow, Iran actually declared it BEFORE the US exposed it.

Read more:
http://original.antiwar.com/porter/2012/01/11/clinton-revives-dubious-charge-of-covert-iranian-nuclear-site/

TIMING

12:29 AM ET

I will expect mr butts mea culpa here on FP after they test

is that a deal mr. butt? you listening FP? Is that a deal? when iran test a nuke, you have mr. butt come on here to pen his mea culpa. I dont want his spin at that point, just a simple, I was wrong.

11:46 AM ET

When will you offer a mea culpa

I am sure YOUSAF BUTT will offer his mea culpa. The question is when will you offer yours when you are proven to be wrong? The problem is that you can never be proven wrong because you are chasing a phantom goal. There is no possible way to prove a negative. Please tell us under what conditions will just shut up making claims about Iran.

Iran is already the most inspected country in the world as far as its nuclear program is concerned. It is simply impossible for Iran to "prove" that it is not doing something. No matter what Iran offers, someone will say, "Yes, but you may be hiding something in your bedroom." This endless madness must stop. It is pointless and stupid. I have one question for these doubting Thomases: Who is inspecting the US and Israeli nuclear facilities? Obama plans to spend $85B to upgrade the US nuclear arsenal. And, people have the audacity to complain that Iran is developing uranium plates for making nuclear medicine for cancer patients?

8:36 PM ET

Heard that one before.

"We can't wait for proof in the form of a mushroom cloud" - Sec of State Rice, justifying the illegal invasion of Iraq absent proof of WMDs.

PADURAR1978

5:14 AM ET

Eventually it will go to war.

Eventually it will go to war. Important is that the powers not take the wrong decision for a nuclear war would destroy the world. I hope not to happen.

10:28 AM ET

johno you racist...israel has responsibly had nukes for 50 yrs

given the neighbourhood they live in, israel's handling of its nukes has been a shining example of how to be a responsible nation!

if israel didnt have them, and that arabs had them, you can be 100% sure the middle east would have seen a nuclear flash over israel a long time ago.

only israel in the ME is a sane, free, democratic country that allows all people to vote, to serve in govt, to be elected, to become lawyers, dotcors, etc..etc.... it has an indepedant judiciary, a wonderful supreme court, rule of law where all people can be heard by the courts, muslims are 20% of the population and treated more humanely than any other arab country treats its own muslims...

MJKT

3:28 PM ET

Well, exept for...

Except for the millions of people they keep in occupied ghettos for decades who aren't allowed their own nation and at the same time aren't allowed an independent judiciary, a wonderful supreme court, rule of law where all people can be heard in courts, and aren't allowed representation in the government that ultimately controls their destiny.

If Israel wants to be able to continue to call itself a free, democratic country instead of an Apartheid state, it needs to do one of two things:

1) Let the Palestinians have their own, contiguous (with some sort of raised road way perhaps between Gaza and the West Bank) state.
2) Formally annex the West Bank and Gaza and give all equal, Israeli citizenship and rights.

Anything else is just solidifying into an Apartheid state. This is not giving the Palestinians a free pass. They have and continue to do some horrible things. This is also just not letting people get by with saying Israel is such a free, democratic paradise of innocent souls either; with the continued building of the settlements they've proven peace is not their main concern either.

3:59 PM ET

mjkt

I remind you; the PLO, you know, the terrorist LIBERATION group was formed in 1964...thats right, 3 full yrs PRIOR to there being ANY so called occupation. Its just never been about the settlements.

having said that, they do need to be negotiated. I would say that while israel can and is tough on the pals, the pals have never once agreed to accept israel as a legitimate sovereign state and will never recognize them as a jewish state. If the pals want their own state so bad, they will have to sit down to talks, which they have not done thus far. Israel made peace with jordan, they made peace with egypt, they gave back gaza and they gave back south lebanon...so far, only 1 of 4 of those seems to be working out.....

nuff said....

oh, by the way, here's a good read...

http://www.haaretz.com/palestinian-father-locks-daughter-in-bathroom-for-9-years-1.408508

ELIHU

7:02 PM ET

cancel-wrong recipient. My

cancel-wrong recipient. My error!

3:18 PM ET

Masdaa complex?

Israel's nukes aren't designed for a first-strike take out. They're meant to be the alternative to military defeat.

'Never Again' is a popular slogan in Israel. Coloured by the effect of not fighting back and the German genocide and tied into the 'myth' of Masada, where every boot in the IDF is sworn-in, the notion of suicide rather than surrender looms large. How much larger if you could take most of the latter-day 'Romans' with you? That's what Israel's sterling perfomance is really all about; it's a Doomsday device.

Had the Arabs developed and used an atomic device, I would have expected they'd get the same treatment as any other rogue under the 'umbrella' of the worlds' competent atomic powers - a damn good nuking themselves. I'd like to think Israel would get the same treament under similar circumstances - but I think there are special rules and circumstances at work there. Jehovah got disillusioned by Sodom and Gomorrah.

ZHANGIR

11:33 AM ET

To YOUSAF BUTT

"If Tehran enriched uranium to 90 percent, it would be forced to break its four decade-long adherence to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- a momentous step that would likely prompt swift military action from the United States or Israel"

Surely in 2003 North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. No military reaction followed.
Arguably, a treaty is mostly just a piece of paper, once you have nuclear weapons as deterrence.

TTAERUM

1:27 PM ET

the problems of theocracies...

The problem Iran has is it doesn't know what it would do if it acquired the capabilities to build a nuke. It is the problem inherent in all theocracies - one doesn't know the "will of god" until they know the "will of god".

Beyond that, they are playing a dangerous ame of politics, much like Hussein did - although Hussein was a very dangerous man who actually used WMDs in his war with Iran.

So, if by chance Iran did get the capacity to build nukes (not quite a crime as was pointed out), and if Iran believed they could get away with building a nuke, they might interpret "opportunity" as the "will of god".

As it is, Ahmadinejad (and other Iranians) are quite convinced that the U.S. and Israel (the Great Satans) are at war with them. As such it's doubtful that the rescues will have any impact on their perception of the United States. A person has to wonder though, if a U.S. submarine on an ops mission will be the next savior of their stranded sailors.

DELTA22

2:40 PM ET

Argentina and Brazil may not be subjected to more thorough IAEA inspections, but then again they haven't been threatening their neighbors with destruction or supporting asymmetrical warfare against them. Iran is simply the sort of country that you should not trust with nuclear technology. You said it yourself, the NPT lacks teeth, and it may very well be that it is not sufficient to address our international security concerns. If Iran is going to endanger the international community by exploiting legal loopholes, then maybe it's time to bend the law.

4:48 PM ET

Whom has Iran threatened?

Iran has threatened no one, while Israel and the US constantly threaten Iran with the stupid threat, "All options are on the table." If you still believe that Iran threatened ot "wipe out Israel," then you are not qualified to talk about Iran.

8:44 PM ET

Iran is the threatened party

It is IRAN that has been threatened constantly - including when the Israelis compare Iran to the "Amalek" -- the biblical people whom God supposedly ordered to be massacred by the ancient Jews -- men, women, children, prisoners and even their farm animals and pets.
When a theocratic outlaw aggressive expansionist racist apartheid country like Israel endorses a genocide on a biblical scale against Iran, then you have no leg to stand on.

Not to mention that the US has explicitly threatened Iran with a nuclear first strike too, on top of the fact that Iran is the REAL, ACTUAL victim of WMDs thanks to US supported chemical weapons use against Iran by US-backed Saddam

TARQUINIS

4:37 PM ET

Two thing of Relevance:

One: the author is correct in that Iran is fully within their legal rights to develop nuclear technology for civilian power and medical isotope utilization.

Article IV, Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty:
1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.
2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the
world.

Point two: for the umpteenth time, Ahmadinejad is entirely and purposefully misquoted in that Israel should be wiped off the map.

What he said in accurate translation was this: ""The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". The point being that it is an unjust and Apartheid régime. Like Apartheid South Africa or the communist Soviet Union.

And further to this point:

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, October 2, 2011:

“The Islamic Republic’s proposal to help resolve the Palestinian issue and heal this old wound is a clear and logical initiative based on political concepts accepted by world public opinion, which has already been presented in detail."

"We do not suggest launching a classic war by the armies of Muslim countries, or throwing immigrant Jews into the sea, or mediation by the UN and other international organizations. We propose holding a referendum with the participation of the Palestinian nation. The Palestinian nation, like any other nation, has the right to determine their own destiny and elect the governing system of the country.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

11:54 AM ET

War on Iran is wrong, and also a Catastrophe

To all posters that really have little knowledge of what is going on in Iran, and are not just Zionists pumping for a THIRD and even more catastrophic war, a few comments.

My wife is Iranian and an American citizen. I have had two extended trips to Iran in recent years, and have been all around the country. As an obvious American, I was received everywhere with courtesy, respect, and civility. Iran is changing very fast. It has a large and growing, educated and westernized economic class, more women than men have advanced university degrees as architects, educators, attorneys, and they drive and vote. Iran has a major underground of artists, intellectuals and literati (what we would call liberals), young people clued into all the latest western fashions and music. ALL are sick and tired of the present theocratic Mullah dominated state.

If they are attacked, it is true that they can easily close the Straights of Hormuz via small ship actions, mining, and missile strikes. They do not need to defeat or sink the American navy to do this.

Insurance rates on tanker traffic would do the job very nicely. 30% of all the world's petroleum transits this narrow passage. A new war with petroleum price spikes to who knows what, would collapse the fragile American economy, not to mention the whole world economy, like a house of cards. China would NOT be pleased.

Regarding the most recent IAEA report, I have taken reasonable efforts to look at it. It does NOT maintain that Iran has diverted any enriched uranium from its constant 24/7 inspection, NOR does it maintain that any material has been enriched beyond the 20% level necessary for medical imaging isotopes. Most posters may know that enrichment to over 95% is necessary for weaponization purposes. The radiological signature of such enrichment is actually quite easy to detect, if it occurs.

The IAEA report DOES mount political attacks that Iran may have the capability to do something in the future that to date, they have not done. "Might" "could" and "maybe" are not reasons for another disastrous preventive war.

Recently, we have seen the splitting of the conservative factions that to date have formed the backbone of the IRI. The current elected president (Ahmadinejad) is in increasing and active conflict with the Guardian Council, being the core of the Mullah leadership of the state. Even elements of the Revolutionary Guards have grown greatly disillusioned with the thuggish clampdown on protesters.

My father in law says, leave them alone. Do not provoke a new war that would result in vast chaos worldwide, geopolitical, economic, and military.

I hope no one takes this as an apology for the regime. If we had not overthrown the Iranian democracy in 1953 via the CIA’s Operation Ajax, which put the hated Shah back on the throne for several decades (he had been expelled at that time), none of this would have happened.

Let us not compound historic mistakes by making a far greater one now.

5:15 PM ET

Iran wants a reasonable way out

We must not forget that in 2003 Iran agreed not only to suspend enrichment but would have been satisfied with a long term solution allowing it to produce LEU on experimental basis and only on a handful of centrifuge cascades.
I am quite optimistic that my solution would appeal to the Iranian government.
Your notion of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons is noble but hardly practical with a powerful Israel backed by the US who are used to dictating having it their way in the region.

FILOZOF

5:39 PM ET

No Iranian nuclear weapon

No Iranian nuclear weapon
If you had the gun. Israel used to throw bombs. nedir

SUPAH

9:54 PM ET

Just

Just because they haven't violated International Law with their Nuclear program, doesn't mean they aren't planning or intending on doing something. Safety when it comes to Nuclear programs can not be taken lightly. Jailbreak iPhone iOS 5.0.1

7:41 AM ET

Let's shoot everyone who looks suspicious

Just: By your argument we should shoot anyone who looks suspicious since we don't know what evil deeds they may attempt in the future. Your argument is preposterous. Iran hasn't attacked another country for 300 years and has not broken any NPT rules. Yet, it is to be punished. But, the US and Israel who have nuclear bombs and have started numerous wars get a bye. Unbelievable!

AREN HAICH: I don't think your proposal is realistic. Iran is not going to settle for some "experimental" enrichment projects. Why should they? They want to be among the top countries technologically. The genie is out of the bottle. The West has to agree that Iran has every right to enrich uranium and lift all sanctions. Iran could possibly agree to limit enrichment to 5% and accept additional inspections. But, that is all.

LEVANTEN

10:31 AM ET

double standard

Israel has nukes, it is already wiping out a country from the map, frequently attacking civilian targets, even killed UN personnel, does not care about international law, nor any convention....but Iran is a potentially dangerous country, and it has the potential to develop potential nuclear weapons which would potentially kill someone.
And if someone criticizes Israeli actions, he/she is labeled as anti-semitic or racist. ABSURD

12:48 PM ET

Its amazing what contortions you have to make here

Well when you make such a patently absurd equivalence argument it is easy to believe you are being motivated by something irrational.

What country is Israel wiping from the map? Palestine? If it were the case the Palestinians would have been gone decades ago in a cloud of napalm and high explosives in a matter of weeks. But Israel is not like its neighbors or enemies. [Look up Black September to see how Arabs really thought of Palestinians]

There is a double standard for a reason. It makes sense here.

At no point has Israel has ever threatened its neighbors with offensive use of nuclear weapons. At no point has there been the threat of Israeli nukes ending up in terrorist hands. At no point has Israel ever threatened to close off vital trade routes in a tiff.

The fact that you have to go to bat for an Islamicist dictatorship to make your point shows how silly the POV really is? Are you really that big of a fan of religiously inspired repression?

Israel when developing its nuclear program was not nearly as provocative or obvious in a way to try to spark a conflict. They kept it secret and were discreet in their actions as to not gain public attention. This is what countries do when they really want to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran is not doing this. They are doing what North Korea did a few years back. Mix harmless developments in nuclear power with harsh rhetoric and political actions designed to irk their neighbors. Nuclear blackmail.

MSAM

I know you are trying

I know you are trying re-imagine Israel as a benign democracy flourishing in the middle east, but when you claim that Israel is not a proliferation threat you conveniently forget to mention that Israel offered to sell apartheid South Africa nucear weapons and delivery systems.

And for Israel not threatening to close vital water ways, with the support the Israelis get from the US and their significant edge in military power compared to their neighbors, they are not facing the sitaution Iran is dealing with, and hence what they would do in similar circumstances is unkown.

DONALDFRANCOEUR

Stop the madness!

Well said. Thank you. I took the liberty of sharing your article with as many people as I could.

NWWORK

5:26 PM ET

yet again

yet again the US are bullying the smaller nations. iran maybe generating all this nuclear stuff but it doesnt mean they plan on using them as weapons! work wear and safety boots are all elements of this story.

ZENWICK

11:10 PM ET

A lovely fairy tale

Iran is supposedly justified in limiting access to its scientists and facilities because spies are rife in the IAEA. But if Iran wasn't trying to hide something, there wouldn't be anything to spy on, would there?

I'm sure if this writer tried hard enough, he could find perfectly reasonable excuses for each facet of Adolf Hitler's life's work.

6:27 PM ET

Well, if every time your

Well, if every time your scientists are mentioned in IAEA reports, or talk to the inspectors, they are murdered on the streets and when the world's sole super power keeps threatening that all options are on the table (read military action) regarding the nuclear sites that you declare, then you may limit access to protect your people and facilities.

DIAMONDLOU

3:28 AM ET

Here we go again...

Article byline:

"Despite all the hype, Iran's nuclear program has yet to violate international law. It's time to calm down, think, and above all halt the rush to war."

This is how the "progressives" insisted Hitler be dealt with prior to the outbreak of WW ll. Let's appease evil, and maybe it will go away. That worked well, didn't it?

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Dummy up people, please for humainty's sake.

8:52 AM ET

Welcome rationality

Mr. B.: Thanks so much for a reasonable statement about Iran; very rare in the media these days. Reminds me of the 1898 runup to the Spanish-American
War, a total manipulated scam. (Known to history fans; perhaps not to the general public)
There is yet another aspect to this. If the Iranians could be persuaded to untertake a nuclear program using the Thorium Liquid Fueled Reactor (LFTR), that would provide them with a very serviceable fission power source, without any worry about bombs. They could also demonstrate to the world a safe and inexpensive alternative fission plant, which can't blow up, melt down , or produce unmanageable amounts of waste, unlike all the Fukushima type plants now in existence.

BAUHAUS

3:49 PM ET

Iran has TONS of oil, they don't need Nuclear power.

I am usually pretty progressive on most if not all issues but not on nuclear proliferation. I don't care if it's politically incorrect or even international illegal. None of that is relevant if we end up in a nuclear war.
The United States used the weapons against Japan twice in the forties and came within moments of using them during the Korean War when China invaded during the 50's. Then during the 60's, Human civilization almost ended altogether during the Cuban missile crisis. 50,000 years of human evolution and in half a century we almost snuff ourselves out on several different occasions. And this is at the hands of an enlightened, first world democracy.. I'm just glad we are still here to talk about it.

I can't believe folks are SERIOUSLY suggesting that we give the nuclear button now to a brutal martyrdom-oriented theocracy with a history violence, terrorist associations and a desire to wipe another country off the earth?!

These politically correct sentiments that every nutcase in the world should have a right to proliferate nuclear weapons just because the U.S. did is going to end with extinction of our species someday.

INGSOC

9:13 PM ET

Missing the forest for the trees.

One of the more conspicuous problems with Mr. Butt's analysis is that he essentially places Iran on the same terms as Argentina, Brazil, et al. This is inherently and fundamentally the wrong starting point when discussing nuclear programs and international law.

The reason is simple: Iran is vastly different from these other "nuclear option" nations. How is it different?

Apart from hosting a totalitarian regime, the key point is that Iran is a theocracy - an Islamic theocracy at that, which makes it doubly dangerous.

It is important to understand that the goals of theocratic governments - particularly fundamentalist Islamic governments - is to pursue a global caliphate. This idea that we can live and let live, that we can sit side-by-side Iran as friends, is absurd at its core and the reason should be obvious to anybody who understands religion and the nature of theocracies.

From a foreign policy perspective, it makes sense to differentiate Iran from nations like Argentina or Brazil.

The challenge, I think, is principally not a question of military power but rather a question of providing support and motivation to the reformers and students in Iran who so desperately seek genuine freedom.

RALPH123

4:32 AM ET

January 29, 2012

you have

You have no idea of what you are talking about. The only issue you have...

TOMMYER

11:32 AM ET

January 30, 2012

The same people that told us

The same people that told us Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and how horrible of a leader Kadaffi was Even though people in his country went to college for free and got a "housing allowance" floor steamer reviewswhen they got married, because he believed everyone should have a home.

Foreign Policy Magazine

Inside National Security

Despite all the hype, Iran's nuclear program has yet to violate international law. It's time to calm down, think, and above all halt the rush to war.

BY YOUSAF BUTT | JANUARY 19, 2012

(59)