Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Iran: New Nuke Charges Raise Stakes in Upcoming Talks

Charges that Iran has a secret underground uranium enrichment plant will bolster calls by Israel and U.S. right-wing hawks to impose "crippling sanctions" against Tehran, even as world leaders are set to formally engage the country in talks.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inter Press Service

Charges by U.S. President Barack Obama and the leaders of France and Britain Friday that Iran is building a secret underground plant to enrich uranium appear certain to heighten tensions just days before critical talks between Tehran and its three accusers, as well as Germany, China and Russia.

The charges, which were issued at a previously unscheduled press conference at the Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Pittsburgh, are also certain to bolster longstanding calls by Israel and right-wing hawks here to immediately impose “crippling sanctions” against Tehran, even as the Obama administration begins to formally engage it at talks set to begin Oct 1.

“The U.S. and other countries must immediately impose crippling sanctions on the Iranian regime, including cutting off Iran’s imports of gasoline,” said Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “The world cannot stand by and watch the nightmare of a nuclear-armed Iran become reality.”

Even the traditionally dovish chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, while asserting his continued support for diplomatic engagement with Iran, insisted that “now is the time to supplement engagement with more robust international sanctions.”

Pressure on Tehran to halt its nuclear programme, he said, should be escalated in light of what he called “Iran’s continuing deception” about its nuclear activities.

For its part, Tehran denied that it had misled the international community about the construction of the new facility near Qum to enrich uranium similar in design to its Natanz plant. The latter has been subject to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) since its existence was publicly exposed by an Iraqi-based anti-government group in 2002.

Tehran said it had sent a letter to the IAEA informing it of what it called a “pilot fuel enrichment plant” Sep. 21.

A U.S. official, who briefed the press on background in Pittsburgh Friday, argued, however, that Iran sent the letter only because it had “learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised”.

In an interview Thursday with Time Magazine in New York City, where he has been attending the opening of the U.N. General Assembly this week, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that Iran was in full compliance with IAEA rules.

“If I were Obama’s adviser, I would definitely advise him to refrain from making this statement because it is definitely a mistake,” he said.

In Vienna, the IAEA’s press office confirmed receipt of the letter which, according to a spokesman, had also insisted that no nuclear material had yet been introduced into the new plant.

Under the basic Safeguards Agreement of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT), of which Iran is a signatory, member states are required to declare their nuclear facilities and designs at least 180 days before introducing nuclear materials there.

In his remarks, Obama said western intelligence agencies had been tracking construction of the plant for “several years” and that “its size and configuration … [are] inconsistent with a peaceful programme.”

“Iran’s decision to build yet another nuclear facility without notifying the IAEA represents a direct challenge to the basic compact at the centre of the non-proliferation regime,” he said, noting that German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who claimed to have a scheduling conflict, “wished to associate herself with his remarks”.

“We remain committed to serious, meaningful engagement with Iran to address the nuclear issue through the P5-plus-1 [the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany] negotiations,” Obama said in reference to the Oct. 1 meeting.

“At that meeting, Iran must be prepared to cooperate fully and comprehensively with the IAEA to take concrete steps to create confidence and transparency in its nuclear programme and to demonstrate that it is committed to establishing its peaceful intentions through meaningful dialogue and concrete actions,” he added.

One U.S. official who later briefed the press said intelligence officials from Washington, Paris, and London had briefed the IAEA about the plant Thursday. “And the IAEA, I’m happy to say, is following up very vigorously,” he added. For its part, the IAEA said it had requested Tehran to “provide specific information and access to the facility as soon as possible”.

The official insisted that an additional protocol of the safeguards agreement between Iran and the IAEA that Tehran voluntarily accepted in 2003 required it “to declare nuclear facilities as soon as they begin construction”.

According to the official, construction on the new facility began before March 2007 when he said Tehran unilaterally renounced its acceptance and that, in any case, the IAEA did not consider the renunciation valid.

“So clearly this is inconsistent… obviously a violation of their safeguards agreement,” the official concluded.

Tehran has claimed that the additional protocol, which was never ratified by its parliament, ceased to be binding on it as of October 2005, when it first announced its withdrawal. Diplomatic sources cited by the BBC Friday said work on the plant began in earnest in 2006.

The U.S. official said Washington was sharing the “very sensitive intelligence information” collected to date with both Russia and China in order to gain their support for international sanctions in the event that the negotiation that begin next week do not quickly bear fruit.

While Obama himself did not himself threaten sanctions against Tehran, both French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown did so explicitly.

“We cannot let the Iranian leaders gain time while the motors are running,” the French president said in an apparent reference to Iran’s continued defiance of Security Council resolutions that it halt its uranium enrichment activities at Natanz. “If by December there is not an in-depth change by the Iranian leaders, sanctions will have to be taken.”

“Confronted by the serial deception of many years, the international community has no choice today but to draw a line in the sand,” Brown added. “And I say on behalf of the United Kingdom today, we will not let this matter rest. And we are prepared to implement further and more stringent sanctions.”

At the U.N. General Assembly earlier this week, Obama had lobbied both Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and Chinese President Hu Jintao – whose governments have previously expressed strong scepticism about the desirability of increased sanctions against Iran – for support for a hard line at next week’s talks with Tehran.

The Russian leader was more responsive than in the past when it has all but ruled out additional sanctions against Tehran. China reportedly remains opposed, but one of the briefing officials Friday said “we should stay tuned for the Chinese position in the coming days now that they are aware of this new information.”

“This gives the United States and its partners a stronger hand in the negotiations, [as] Iran is looking very embarrassed right now,” according to Michael Levi, an expert on Iran’s nuclear programme at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

He added that it also puts Obama in a “bit of a tricky position because this is another talking point for people who say that Iran is incorrigible and that Obama is wasting his time talking to them.”

But Marc Lynch, a Middle East expert at George Washington University, said Friday’s move may reduce the chances of confrontation, if only because it may change Iran’s own calculations by demonstrating “the quality of Western intelligence and the difficulty of deception and denial.”

“The timing of the announcement, immediately following the consultations at the U.N. and the G20 and just before the [Oct. 1] meetings, makes it seem extremely likely that that the Obama administration has been waiting for just the right moment to play this card,” he wrote on his blog on foreignpolicy.com.

“Now they have. It strengthens the P5+1 bargaining position ahead of October 1, changes Iranian calculations, and lays the foundations for a more serious kind of engagement,” he added.

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to PRA’s Right Web (https://rightweb.irc-online.org). His blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts and two-time failed presidential candidate, is a foreign policy hawk with neoconservative leanings who appears set to become the next senator from Utah.


Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman and longtime “superlobbyist” who has supported numerous neoconservative advocacy campaigns, has become embroiled in the special prosecutor’s investigation into the Donald Trump campaign’s potential collusion with Russia during the 2016 presidential election.


Jon Lerner is a conservative political strategist and top adviser to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. He was a key figure in the “Never Trump” Campaign, which appears to have led to his being ousted as Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser.


Pamela Geller is a controversial anti-Islam activist who has founded several “hate groups” and likes to repeat debunked myths, including about the alleged existence of “no-go” Muslim zones in Europe.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Although overlooked by President Trump for cabinet post, Gingrich has tried to shape affairs in the administration, including by conspiring with government officials to “purge the State Department of staffers they viewed as insufficiently loyal” to the president.


Former Sen Mark Kirk (R-IL) is an advisor for United Against Nuclear Iran. He is an outspoken advocate for aggressive action against Iran and a fierce defender of right-wing Israeli policies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Other than the cynical political interests in Moscow and Tehran, there is no conceivable rationale for wanting Bashar al-Assad to stay in power. But the simple fact is, he has won the war. And while Donald Trump has reveled in positive press coverage of the recent attacks on the country, it is clear that they were little more than a symbolic act.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The reality is that the Assad regime is winning the Syrian civil war, and this matters far less to U.S. interests than it does to that regime or its allies in Russia and Iran, who see Syria as their strongest and most consistent entrée into the Arab world. Those incontrovertible facts undermine any notion of using U.S. military force as leverage to gain a better deal for the Syrian people.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An effective rhetorical tool to normalize military build-ups is to characterize spending increases “modernization.”


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Pentagon has officially announced that that “long war” against terrorism is drawing to a close — even as many counterinsurgency conflicts  rage across the Greater Middle East — and a new long war has begun, a permanent campaign to contain China and Russia in Eurasia.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Revelations that data-consulting firm Cambridge Analytica used ill-gotten personal information from Facebook for the Trump campaign masks the more scandalous reality that the company is firmly ensconced in the U.S. military-industrial complex. It should come as no surprise then that the scandal has been linked to Erik Prince, co-founder of Blackwater.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As the United States enters the second spring of the Trump era, it’s creeping ever closer to more war. McMaster and Mattis may have written the National Defense Strategy that over-hyped the threats on this planet, but Bolton and Pompeo will have the opportunity to address these inflated threats in the worst way possible: by force of arms.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

We meet Donald Trump in the media every hour of every day, which blots out much of the rest of the world and much of what’s meaningful in it.  Such largely unexamined, never-ending coverage of his doings represents a triumph of the first order both for him and for an American cult of personality.


RightWeb
share