|
Sanction the IAEA
Board, not Iran
By Gordon Prather
02/12/06 "WND" -- -- You probably heard that – as a result of
extreme pressure brought by the Bush-Cheney administration – a
"special" meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency
Board of Governors was convened last week to discuss what to do
about the "gravest" threat to develop to "our" national security
since the end of the Cold War.
The "threat"?
The announced resumption of certain IAEA Safeguarded programs,
voluntarily and temporarily suspended by Iran more than two
years ago.
What did the Board decide to do?
Well, you may have heard
misleading reports that the Board – unable to satisfy
itself that Bush-Cheney allegations that Iran had a
nuclear weapons program that IAEA inspectors had been
unable to find any trace of, despite almost three years
of intrusive inspections were without merit – did
"refer" the matter to the Security Council.
The Associated Press
even reported – falsely – that Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad had "ordered" the end of voluntary
cooperation with the IAEA "in response to the U.N.
agency decision to refer Iran to the Security Council
over fears the country is trying to develop a nuclear
bomb."
But there was no
referral.
Far from turning over
the alleged "Iranian nuclear crisis" to the Security
Council, the IAEA Board specifically "remains seized
with the matter."
The AP did correctly
report that "Iran will resume uranium enrichment and
will no longer allow snap IAEA inspections of its
nuclear facilities – voluntary measures it had allowed
in recent years in a gesture to build trust."
But, the AP didn't
tell you that Iran's Parliament had passed a law last
year that required – in the event the IAEA Board
reported Iran to the Security Council – the cessation of
all voluntary cooperation with the IAEA above and
beyond that required by Iran's Safeguards Agreement.
And, a resumption of all Iranian Safeguarded
nuclear programs that had been voluntarily
suspended.
Now, certain members of
the IAEA Board claim to have been unable to "satisfy"
themselves of "the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's
program." Hence
the Board called on Iran to:
- re-establish full
and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related
and reprocessing activities, including research and
development, to be verified by the Agency;
- reconsider the construction of a research
reactor moderated by heavy water;
- ratify promptly and implement in full the
Additional Protocol;
- pending ratification, continue to act in
accordance with the provisions of the Additional
Protocol which Iran signed on Dec. 18, 2003; and
- implement transparency measures, as requested by
the director general, including in GOV/2005/67,
which extend beyond the formal requirements of the
Safeguards Agreement and Additional Protocol, and
include such access to individuals, documentation
relating to procurement, dual-use equipment, certain
military-owned workshops and research and
development as the Agency may request in support of
its ongoing investigations.
But then the Board went on to:
Request[s] the director general to report to the
Security Council of the United Nations that these
steps are required of Iran by the Board and to
report to the Security Council all IAEA reports and
resolutions, as adopted, relating to this issue.
No referral?
Just a "request" that Director-General Mohamed
ElBaradei "report" to the Security Council the
absolutely outrageous discriminatory demands that his
Board of Governors has made of Iran – an IAEA member in
undisputed compliance with its Safeguards Agreement and
the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons?
Well, if the Board is lucky, ElBaradei won't make
such a report. And if he does, the Board better hope the
Security Council will just ignore it
Because, in anticipation of a such a report,
the Iranian delegate made these points in a
Note Verbale to the Board Feb. 2, 2006:
The mere fact that some members of
the Board – who have no privilege over
the others – pre-impose certain
decisions on the Board, goes against the
legal stance and authority of the Board.
Furthermore, these developments have
revealed the political pressures over
the Board and will jeopardize the
credibility of its decisions.
The resumption of R&D activities
after two and a half years of suspension
cannot provide the ground for taking
harsh decisions by the Board and
reporting the issue to the Security
Council. Those activities are
exclusively peaceful and completely
within the IAEA legal framework, and
their suspension was decided by Iran,
voluntarily and provisionally.
The Board decision to report the
issue to the Security Council has no
legal and technical basis.
Iran's right; it's the IAEA Board the
Security Council should sanction, not Iran.
Physicist James Gordon
Prather has served as a policy implementing
official for national security-related
technical matters in the Federal Energy
Agency, the Energy Research and Development
Administration, the Department of Energy,
the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also
served as legislative assistant for national
security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon,
R-Okla. -- ranking member of the Senate
Budget Committee and member of the Senate
Energy Committee and Appropriations
Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as
a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory in California
and Sandia National Laboratory in New
Mexico.
|
|
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Translate
this page
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
