|
Bush nukes legal and ethical constraints
How does U.S. go after Iran after sweet deal with India, asks Haroon
Siddiqui
By HAROON SIDDIQUI
03/05/06 "Toronto
Star" -- -- E ye-Ran. That's what the Americans
call Iran — pronounced Ee-Ra'an. This is a minor matter, compared to
how the U.S. is bullying Iran over its nuclear program, even while
rewarding India for committing worse transgressions of international
nuclear rules.
All nation-states operate in their own interests, of course. But
American disregard for the law, and the moral and political
inconsistency of its foreign policy, has hit a new low under George
W. Bush.
On Thursday, he signed an historic nuclear deal with India — "a
Santa Claus giveaway," said the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace — with little or no regard for its impact on the effort to
contain Iran and North Korea.
Friday, he was in Pakistan rejecting a plea from his hosts that,
they, too, be given access to civilian nuclear technology, since
they are in the same boat as India, having developed the bomb on the
sly and refusing to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Bush responds, correctly, that India, a transparent democracy, has
not had an A.Q. Khan-like nuclear bazaar.
So you would think that the president — an advocate of democracy in
the Muslim world — would be leaning hard on Gen. Pervez Musharraf to
hasten civilian rule, rather than gathering more power in his hands.
Yet Bush only offered lame rhetoric: Yes, Musharraf must move
towards democracy but ...
The president needs the general in the war on terrorism, especially
hunting down Al Qaeda and Taliban remnants along the Afghan-Pakistan
border.
Bush needs India even more, for a host of reasons, including its
booming economy, which U.S. businesses want to tap.
Hence the nuclear concessions. Ignoring both U.S. and international
law, Bush has promised India access to high-end technology and a
guaranteed supply of nuclear fuel.
In return, India gets to keep its nuclear arms program. It will have
to open up only 14 of its 22 reactors for inspection. The rest it
can keep secret, including a fast-breeder reactor that produces the
plutonium for bombs. It can even build more breeders.
There is, however, an argument that, rather than a gift from Santa
Claus, this is a tough bargain. It opens up two-thirds of India's
secret program to inspection. Which is why the International Atomic
Energy Agency, the nuclear inspection arm of the UN, welcomes it.
But the lesson nuke-seeking nations can draw is clear: As the late
Z.A. Bhutto, prime minister of Pakistan, once famously said, eat
grass if you must to free up the resources to develop the bomb, and
the world will, eventually, embrace you.
"With one simple move, the president has blown a hole in the nuclear
rules that the world has been playing by," said Representative
Edward Markey, the leading critic of the deal in Congress.
How do you now go after Iran?
Unlike India, Pakistan or Israel, it signed the non-proliferation
treaty. It has not violated the treaty, which entitles it to develop
nuclear energy.
What Iran is guilty of is cheating — hiding some aspects of its
program — and a lot of fiery anti-American and anti-Israeli
rhetoric. But its cheating has been minuscule compared to Israel's,
India's and Pakistan's.
That's why the Atomic Energy Agency report, which goes before its
board of governors tomorrow, is so mild: The agency cannot give Iran
a clean bill of health but it can find no proof of a nuclear weapons
program.
"India is more guilty than Iran could be," says Dilip Hiro, a
London-based expert on Iran. "North Korea is more guilty than Iran
could be."
All this is awkward enough, but there's more.
Trying to sell the India deal to a skeptical Congress, Bush says
that giving India more nuclear power will "take the pressure off the
global demand for energy."
This is precisely what Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford said in the
1970s to rationalize their plan to sell the Shah of Iran nuclear
power plants. "But, flush with a bulging exchequer, thanks to rising
oil prices from 1973 and 1974, he ignored U.S. corporations and
awarded the first contract for a nuclear plant to Siemens of West
Germany," wrote Hiro in The Iranian Labyrinth (Nation Books, 2005).
One is left with no other conclusion than that the U.S. basically
does what it wants and tries to rationalize it by dictating the
media mantra of the day.
None of this should come as a surprise. After all, the U.S. was once
a great friend of Saddam Hussein.
Haroon Siddiqui writes Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiq@thestar.ca.
Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
Click below to post a comment on this article
(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.) |
