Stop Bush Before He Attacks Iran officialwire.com
Here we go again. The administration says ''regime change'' is needed. Warnings are issued about the threat posed by the ''madman'' who leads the oil-rich country. Alarming intelligence estimates are leaked about nuclear weapons programs. The vice president warns ''monumental consequences'' if the alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons are continued. Neoconservatives call for military action. Administration operatives express scorn for international monitoring. The Pentagon is reported not only to be developing contingency plans for an assault, but already launching mock bombing runs to measure air defense capacities. Covert military incursions are said to be active on the ground. This isn't about the run-up to the Iraq invasion in 2002. These reports concern the administration's drumbeat about Iran and its fundamentalist government. With violence rising in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden still loose and civil war escalating in Iraq, it is preposterous for the administration to contemplate another war of choice in the Persian Gulf. But all signs point that way. Iran has oil and gas—lots of it, second only to Saudi Arabia in reserves. It controls the straits of the Persian Gulf, where 40 percent of the world's oil flows each day. It is headed by an Islamist fundamentalist who vows Israel should be wiped off the map. Iran admittedly has a nuclear energy program in process, and many believe that it is committed to building nuclear weapons. But this may well be more about the United States than about Iran. President Bush's polls are at record lows. Republicans face a brutal off-year election. Karl Rove has pledged to make the war on terror a partisan issue in the fall. It surely isn't an accident that the White House is turning up the heat on Iran now, just as it did against Iraq in the run-up to the 2002 elections. The White House preparations are ominous. Bush has said that an Iranian bomb is unacceptable. In dispatching troops to reconnoiter in Iran and airplanes to mock bombing runs, the White House is putting Iran and the world on notice: We're ready to strike if Iran goes on with its program. Despite reservations from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reports, the White House is contemplating the first use of nuclear weapons to ''take out'' the underground Iranian facilities that may be part of the weapons program. Is it conceivable that a president who sees himself on a divine mission has learned nothing from the debacle in Iraq? Remember the bit about being greeted as ''liberators'' in Iraq? Now, according to an anonymous contractor in Hersh's story, the White House is said to believe that the bombing will turn the people against the mullahs who run the government. That will counter the experience of every bombing effort since the invention of the airplane. The question is whether the Congress and the American people will roll over or stand up and call the administration to account. Surely, this is the time for Republicans to put aside their partisan zealotry and hold hearings—open and public—that explore the nature of the threat posed by Iran, the programs already under way by the administration and the intelligence estimates, here and elsewhere, and what they really say. Reportedly, the White House is briefing selected legislators—those who are cheerleaders for the war in Iraq. It doesn't want hearings because it doesn't want to inform the minority Democrats, much less the American people. The president believes he has absolute authority to launch a war of his choosing, without congressional approval, U.N. mandate or imminent threat. War would destabilize the Persian Gulf. Terrorism would spread. Bin Laden and others would rouse 1.2 billion Muslims with cries that the United States is seeking to destroy Islam. America would be supported by few if any of our allies—and actively, if not directly, opposed by Russia and China. We need international diplomacy, not unilateral bomb rattling toward Iran. We need a concerted plan for energy independence, reducing our reliance on foreign oil. We need to engage the world's nations in a grand alliance against terrorists—not isolate America as a rogue nation. It is time for Congress to act boldly and early before the administration rolls out another supposedly cost-efficient war in time for the fall elections.
by Rev. Jesse L. Jackson - Originally published by the Chicago Sun-Times.

IRAN NUKES

- Iranian Suicide Squads Ready To Hit US British Targets
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Iranian_Su...sh_Targets.html

London (AFP) Apr 16, 2006 - Iran has formed battalions of suicide bombers to hit American and British targets if its nuclear installations are attacked, The Sunday Times newspaper said. According to Iranian officials, 40,000 trained suicide bombers were ready to strike, the British weekly broadsheet said.

- US-Iran Facing Clash Dead Ahead
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Iran_Fa...Dead_Ahead.html

- US Analysts Detail War Plans Against Iran
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Analyst...ainst_Iran.html

- Top Iranian Commander Warns US Against Military Attack
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Top_Irania...ary_Attack.html

Iran to continue enriching uranium: Rafsanjani Yahoo! News
Iran will continue to enrich uranium, influential former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said on Monday, as concerns grow over possible U.S. military action against Tehran's nuclear program. "The Islamic Republic of Iran does not intend to stop," he said when asked about Iran's success at enriching uranium. "The Islamic Republic wants to continue along its path," he told reporters in Kuwait during a visit to the Gulf state. Last week, Iran announced it had enriched uranium for use in its power stations, stoking a diplomatic row with the West which suspects Tehran is trying to build an atomic bomb. Iran says it is seeking nuclear power to generate electricity. Rafsanjani, speaking through an interpreter, said he did not believe the United States would attack Iran. "We are sure that America will not enter into such a predicament," he added. "But if (Iran) is subjected to an aggression ..., then the war will have its consequences." Rafsanjani, who now heads a council that arbitrates Iranian legislative disputes, told reporters in Syria on Sunday during his Middle East tour: "We do not discount the possibility of U.S. aggression under any circumstance; we stress at the same time that it would not be in the interest of the United States, nor us." He added: "Harm will not only engulf the Islamic Republic of Iran, but the region and everybody." Iran's Gulf neighbors have repeatedly expressed concern at its nuclear program, saying that they would be the first affected if anything goes wrong -- whether a leak in a reactor or an actual strike. "We in the Gulf are worried by Iran's nuclear program," Abdul Rahman al-Attiya, secretary-general of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council, told reporters in Yemen. In Kuwait, Rafsanjani sought to ally Gulf fears, saying the nuclear program which he said was bound by the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency. "This is a comprehensive treaty and the paths toward any breaches are blocked," he said. Iran's nuclear ambitions have added tension in the Gulf region, which is already worried about instability in Iraq since the 2003 U.S.-led war that ousted Saddam Hussein.
By Mohamed Ghobari

IRAN NUKES

- Pentagon Declines Comment On Report Of Iran Strike Plans
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Pentagon_D...rike_Plans.html

Washington (AFP) Apr 18, 2006 - The Pentagon declined to comment Monday on a report that US military planning for Iran began in 2002 and has been continually updated since. "This is the United States Defense Department. We plan for all sorts of things," said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.

- Iran 'Ready For War' But Seeks Peace
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Iran_Ready...eeks_Peace.html

- War With Iran Will Do US More Damage, Ex-Officials Warn
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/War_With_I...cials_Warn.html

- Iran's Real Nuclear Power
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Irans_Real...lear_Power.html

For those who missed it, the following is Steven Simon's op-ed article in Sunday's NYT (co-written with Richard Clarke) warning about an intemperate approach to Iran. It makes eminent sense. As with Iraq, however, the open question is whether the ultimate decision-makers are listening.


April 16, 2006
Op-Ed Contributors
Bombs That Would Backfire
By RICHARD CLARKE and STEVEN SIMON
WHITE HOUSE spokesmen have played down press reports that the Pentagon has accelerated planning to bomb Iran. We would like to believe that the administration is not intent on starting another war, because a conflict with Iran could be even more damaging to our interests than the current struggle in Iraq has been. A brief look at history shows why.

Reports by the journalist Seymour Hersh and others suggest that the United States is contemplating bombing a dozen or more nuclear sites, many of them buried, around Iran. In the event, scores of air bases, radar installations and land missiles would also be hit to suppress air defenses. Navy bases and coastal missile sites would be struck to prevent Iranian retaliation against the American fleet and Persian Gulf shipping. Iran's long-range missile installations could also be targets of the initial American air campaign.

These contingencies seem familiar to us because we faced a similar situation as National Security Council staff members in the mid-1990's. American frustrations with Iran were growing, and in early 1996 the House speaker, Newt Gingrich, publicly called for the overthrow of the Iranian government. He and the C.I.A. put together an $18 million package to undertake it.

The Iranian legislature responded with a $20 million initiative for its intelligence organizations to counter American influence in the region. Iranian agents began casing American embassies and other targets around the world. In June 1996, the Qods Force, the covert-action arm of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, arranged the bombing of an apartment building used by our Air Force in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans.

At that point, the Clinton administration and the Pentagon considered a bombing campaign. But after long debate, the highest levels of the military could not forecast a way in which things would end favorably for the United States.

While the full scope of what America did do remains classified, published reports suggest that the United States responded with a chilling threat to the Tehran government and conducted a global operation that immobilized Iran's intelligence service. Iranian terrorism against the United States ceased.

In essence, both sides looked down the road of conflict and chose to avoid further hostilities. And then the election of the reformist Mohammad Khatami as president of Iran in 1997 gave Washington and Tehran the cover they needed to walk back from the precipice.

Now, as in the mid-90's, any United States bombing campaign would simply begin a multi-move, escalatory process. Iran could respond three ways. First, it could attack Persian Gulf oil facilities and tankers — as it did in the mid-1980's — which could cause oil prices to spike above $80 dollars a barrel.

Second and more likely, Iran could use its terrorist network to strike American targets around the world, including inside the United States. Iran has forces at its command that are far superior to anything Al Qaeda was ever able to field. The Lebanese terrorist organization Hezbollah has a global reach, and has served in the past as an instrument of Iran. We might hope that Hezbollah, now a political party, would decide that it has too much to lose by joining a war against the United States. But this would be a dangerous bet.

Third, Iran is in a position to make our situation in Iraq far more difficult than it already is. The Badr Brigade and other Shiite militias in Iraq could launch a more deadly campaign against British and American troops. There is every reason to believe that Iran has such a retaliatory shock wave planned and ready.

No matter how Iran responded, the question that would face American planners would be, "What's our next move?" How do we achieve so-called escalation dominance, the condition in which the other side fears responding because they know that the next round of American attacks would be too lethal for the regime to survive?

Bloodied by Iranian retaliation, President Bush would most likely authorize wider and more intensive bombing. Non-military Iranian government targets would probably be struck in a vain hope that the Iranian people would seize the opportunity to overthrow the government. More likely, the American war against Iran would guarantee the regime decades more of control.

So how would bombing Iran serve American interests? In over a decade of looking at the question, no one has ever been able to provide a persuasive answer. The president assures us he will seek a diplomatic solution to the Iranian crisis. And there is a role for threats of force to back up diplomacy and help concentrate the minds of our allies. But the current level of activity in the Pentagon suggests more than just standard contingency planning or tactical saber-rattling.

The parallels to the run-up to to war with Iraq are all too striking: remember that in May 2002 President Bush declared that there was "no war plan on my desk" despite having actually spent months working on detailed plans for the Iraq invasion. Congress did not ask the hard questions then. It must not permit the administration to launch another war whose outcome cannot be known, or worse, known all too well.

Richard Clarke and Steven Simon were, respectively, national coordinator for security and counterterrorism and senior director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council.

IN THE RUBBLE - TOM ENGELHARDT (TOM DISPATCH, APRIL 16): Even as they stand in the rubble of their world, top Bush officials remain quite capable of making decisions that will export ruins to, say, Iran and create further chaos in the oil heartlands of the planet as well as here at home.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=77789

US RELEASES SATELLITE IMAGES OF IRANIAN NUCLEAR FACILITY PEOPLE'S DAILY (BEIJING, APRIL 17)
http://english.people.com.cn/200604/17/eng...417_258938.html

IS IRAN PREPARING FOR WAR? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON TIMES, APRIL 17): Iran and its terrorist allies are playing a very dangerous game indeed.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060416-103028-6653r.htm

MENACING HINDSIGHT - TOD LINDBERG (WASHINGTON TIMES, APRIL 18): Iranian threats must not be ignored.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060417-094711-4589r.htm

HE RUNS IRAN, WE RUN - MARK STEYN (WASHINGTON TIMES, APRIL 17): That's how it goes with the Iranians. The more they claim they've gone nuclear, the more U.S. intelligence experts -- whoops, where are my quote marks? -- the more US intelligence "experts" insist no, no, it won't be for another 10 years yet.
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/200604...03032-2261r.htm

THE PENTAGON PREPS FOR IRAN - WILLIAM M. ARKIN (WASHINGTON POST, APRIL 16): Iran needs to know -- and even more important, the American public needs to know -- that no matter how many experts talk about difficult-to-find targets or the catastrophe that could unfold if war comes, military planners are already working hard to minimize the risks of any military operation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6041401907.html

IRAN'S RECKLESS LEADERSHIP EDITORIAL (SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, APRIL 17): The president of Iran is playing right into the hands of the hawks within the Bush administration who have designs on a military strike against the country.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...EDGIOI9FK51.DTL

YOU WANNA TALK? LET'S TALK: THE CASE FOR NEGOTIATING WITH IRAN - FRED KAPLAN (SLATE, APRIL 17)
http://www.slate.com/id/2139845/

IRAN CARROTS AND STICKS : U.S. HARDLINERS' PUBLIC BRANDISHING OF MILITARY STICKS HAS ALREADY WEAKENED THE U.S. CASE AND UNDERMINED INTERNATIONAL WILLINGNESS TO SQUEEZE IRAN - JEFFREY LAURENTI (MOTHER JONES, APRIL 17)
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/colu...and_sticks.html

BOMBS THAT WOULD BACKFIRE - RICHARD CLARKE AND STEVEN SIMON (NEW YROK TIMES, APRIL 16): Attacking Iran would invite terrorist reprisals.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/opinion/...%2fContributors

RISKING THE ULTIMATE BLOWBACK: DON'T BLITZ IRAN - BRIAN CLOUGHLEY (COUNTERPUNCH, APRIL 15/16)
http://www.counterpunch.org/cloughley04152006.html


IRAN'S SITTING DUCK - MICHAEL LEVI (NEW YORK TIMES, APRIL 18): Taking nuclear weapons decisively off the table would reinforce the taboo against the bomb, and make American actions to oppose proliferation more effective.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/18/opinion/18levi.html

ARE YOU READY TO TRUST BUSH AS HE TACKLES NUCULER IRAN? - LEONARD PITTS JR. (BALTIMORE SUN, APRIL 16)
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines

READING TEHRAN - AZAR NAFISI (WASHINGTON POST, APRIL 16): It is when they discover this "other Iran" -- enigmatic, humorous, self-critical and sensual -- that Americans will celebrate the differences that make each culture unique but also experience the shock of recognition, discovering how much they have in common with Iranians.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6041401895.html

British government sources say the prime minister will support diplomatic moves, but not military actions.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0418/dailyUpdate.html?s=mesdu

U.S. refuses to denie report of Iran strike plans:

The Pentagon declined to comment Monday on a report that US military planning for Iran began in 2002 and has been continually updated since.
http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=119385

===
Gordon Prather: Busting empty bunkers:

Military planners told the White House that if they wanted to be sure to destroy the underground uranium-enrichment bunker at Natanz – which is to eventually hold those 50,000 gas-centrifuges, but is now empty – they'd have to nuke it.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12766.htm

===
Prominent U.S. Physicists Send Warning Letter to President Bush:

Thirteen of the nation’s most prominent physicists have written a letter to President Bush, calling U.S. plans to reportedly use nuclear weapons against Iran “gravely irresponsible” and warning that such action would have “disastrous consequences for the security of the United States and the world.”
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12769.htm

===

Fallout: The human cost of nuclear catastrophe:

Flash presentation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/page/0,,1748554,00.html

Lieberman: US could attack Iran's nukes:

The US is probably incapable of completely destroying the Iranian nuclear program, but as a last resort it could attempt to knock out "some of the components" in order to "delay and deter it," Senator Joe Lieberman, the former Democratic vice presidential candidate and a serving member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has told The Jerusalem Post.
http://tinyurl.com/og989

Israel may have to go it alone on Iran: report :

The head of the ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beitenu party, poised to enter the next cabinet, said Monday that Israel may have to take its own pre-emptive action to stop Iran acquiring nuclear weapons
http://tinyurl.com/z6xwa

===
Eric Margolis : Countdown Over Iran:

It’s both fascinating and dismaying watching the manufactured `crisis’ over Iran reach new intensity each week. Iran poses no real military threat to anyone, but listening to the Bush Administration or the US media one would think that that Tehran was about to unleash a nuclear holocaust on the world.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12768.htm

===
Report - IAEA informed of Iran's P-2 centrifuge programmes:

The New York Times had quoted United States security officials as saying Iran's use of P-2 centrifuges was worrisome as the process would not only accelerate the enrichment process but production of an atomic bomb.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12771.htm

===
Congressman Ron Paul: Sanctions against Iran :

We cannot underestimate the irrational, almost manic desire of some neoconservatives to attack Iran one way or another, even if it means crippling a major source of oil and destabilizing the worldwide economy.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12773.htm

Bombs That Would Backfire

By RICHARD CLARKE and STEVEN SIMON

The parallels to the run-up to to war with Iraq are all too striking: remember that in May 2002 President Bush declared that there was "no war plan on my desk" despite having actually spent months working on detailed plans for the Iraq invasion. Congress did not ask the hard questions then. It must not permit the administration to launch another war whose outcome cannot be known, or worse, known all too well.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12761.htm

===
The US, Iran and the End of the International Order

By Jussi Sinnemaa

As the IAEA has repeatedly acknowledged, Iran is not in violation of any of her legal obligations as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In fact, Iran has allowed far more intrusive international inspections of her nuclear facilities than required by the NPT. Iran remains the only country to have done so.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12762.htm

- Ahmadinejad Says Iran Army Will Cut Off Hand Of Aggressor
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Ahmadineja..._Aggressor.html

Tehran, Iran (AFP) Apr 19, 2006 - Hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed Tuesday that Iran would "cut off the hand of any aggressor", as the Islamic republic's army put on a show of strength in their annual military parade.

- Big Powers Meet As Questions Mount Whether Iran Will Turn Into Iraq
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Big_Powers..._Into_Iraq.html

- Some Experts Suspect Iranian Nuclear Program More Advanced Than Thought
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Some_Exper...an_Thought.html

- No Agreement Among Powers On Iranian Sanction
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/No_Agreeme...n_Sanction.html

US Pressuring Russia To Drop Weapons Sale To Iran
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Pressur...le_To_Iran.html

Moscow (AFP) Apr 19, 2006 - Russia is coming under US pressure to cancel a contract to deliver Tor-M1 mobile air defence systems to Iran due to concerns about Tehran's nuclear programme, a respected business daily reported Tuesday.

Iran unlikely to meet UN demands: Straw Yahoo! News
Britain does not expect Iran to comply with United Nations Security Council demands to halt uranium enrichment by the end of April, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on Wednesday. Amid suspicions in the West that Tehran is seeking nuclear weapons, Iran last week defied U.N. demands and declared it had enriched uranium to a level used in power stations. Iran says it only wants nuclear technology to produce electricity, not bombs. The U.N. Security Council has asked the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to report by April 28 on Iran's compliance with a council demand that it stop enriching uranium and answer the agency's questions on its nuclear program. "We are working on the basis that Iran will not meet the proposals from the Security Council on the 30-day deadline," Straw told BBC Radio Four in an interview from Saudi Arabia. His comments are consistent with a long-held view from Britain that Iran is showing no signs of complying. Straw said negotiating with Iran was unpredictable. "But what is most likely to happen is that the matter will move back to the Security Council and there will then be discussions about the next steps which the international community will take," he added. Straw's comments followed a meeting in Moscow of senior officials from the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France -- the council's permanent members -- and Germany. No agreement emerged from the talks on Tuesday. Straw, echoing similar remarks by his Russian and French counterparts, said world powers would wait for the IAEA's report before considering future action. The United States, which already enforces its own sweeping sanctions on Iran, wants the Security Council to be ready to take strong diplomatic action, including so-called targeted measures such as a freeze on assets and visa curbs. Straw again played down the likelihood of military action against Iran, even though President Bush on Tuesday refused to rule out nuclear strikes if diplomacy fails to curb the Islamic Republic's atomic ambitions. "I have always acknowledged that the United States government formally is in a different position from that of the European governments upon this theoretical issue about the use of force," said Straw. "But in practice both the Americans and the Europeans, and Russia and China are committed to finding a diplomatic solution to this issue."

http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/ar...st_iran?mode=PF


US expected to press for sanctions against Iran
Tension over nuclear development may lead to a freeze on assets
By Guy Faulconbridge, Reuters | April 18, 2006

MOSCOW -- The United States will press other major world powers today to consider what it calls targeted sanctions against Iran as an April 30 deadline nears for Tehran to demonstrate to the UN that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons.

World crude oil prices topped $70 a barrel yesterday, the highest level in nearly eight months, amid heightened market fears that Washington might consider military action against Iran.

Speculation that the United States may be laying the groundwork for possible force is widely expected to be dismissed today at a meeting in Moscow of officials from the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany, and Russia.

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has further roiled the nuclear debate by declaring that his country is testing a centrifuge that could be used to more speedily create fuel for power plants or atomic weapons.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been unable to verify Iran's assertion that its program is entirely peaceful, said yesterday that it would send a team of inspectors to Iran within two days to try to make a determination.

Officials at the IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog agency based in Vienna, refused to comment on the new statement about the centrifuges.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the United States wants the Security Council to be ready to impose targeted measures such as a freeze on assets and visa curbs. It is not seeking restrictions on oil and gas sales, to avoid creating hardships for the Iranian people.

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said yesterday that Iran would not halt its program but would cooperate with UN inspectors as the April 30 deadline approaches for the IAEA to issue a report on Iran's compliance.

''We have always signified our willingness to allow inspectors to come to Iran and visit our nuclear sites. If there are still questions and ambiguities that need to be answered, then these should be answered," he said.

Some analysts familiar with Iran's nuclear technology said yesterday that Ahmadinejad might be deliberately exaggerating Iran's capabilities, either to boost his political support or to persuade UN watchdogs to back off.

''He was likely posturing for his own political advantage and playing to national sentiment. We have to remember that the nuclear issue is very popular in Iran," said Khalid R. al-Rodhan, an Iran nuclear analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

The UN Security Council has demanded that Iran cease enrichment work, which the United States and some allies suspect is meant to produce nuclear weapons. But Russia and China, two of the council's five veto-holding members, have opposed punishing Iran. Russia's Foreign Ministry said yesterday that the Kremlin would insist today on a diplomatic solution to the standoff.

Ahmadinejad last week said for the first time that Iran is testing a P-2 centrifuge for enriching uranium. Such a device would be a vast improvement over the P-1 centrifuges that Iran says it has used to do small-scale enrichment.

Iran previously told the agency it gave up work on P-2 centrifuges three years ago. But the IAEA and some independent groups question whether Iran might have a parallel, secret nuclear program.

''If the statements prove to be true, it would be a very serious concern," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

Material from the Associated Press was included in this article.

Decision on Iran must await IAEA report: Russia Yahoo! News
Russia said on Wednesday big powers should defer any decision on action against Iran until after a U.N. deadline set for Tehran to halt uranium enrichment. Britain predicted that Iran will not comply in time. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said world powers had failed to agree on sanctions at a meeting in Moscow on Tuesday because some, including Russia, wanted to wait until the U.N. nuclear watchdog reports on Iranian compliance on April 28. "No final documents were worked out as we are convinced of the need to wait for the IAEA report due at the end of the month," Lavrov told reporters. Russia and China oppose sanctions and both have veto power in the United Nations Security Council. At the end of March, the council gave Iran a month to halt enrichment and answer questions from the International Atomic Energy Agency on its nuclear program. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he doubted Iran would comply with U.N. demands by the deadline. "We are working on the basis that Iran will not meet the proposals from the Security Council on the 30-day deadline," Straw told BBC radio during a visit to Saudi Arabia. An Iranian delegation headed to Moscow for talks on the dispute, Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki told state radio. He said officials from the Foreign Ministry and the Supreme National Security Council would "discuss possible solutions which could pave the way to reach a comprehensive understanding based on a recognition of Iran's right to nuclear technology." The stand-off grew more tense after Iran said last week it had enriched uranium to a low level and planned to produce it on an industrial scale. The United States and its European allies say Tehran could divert highly enriched uranium to make bombs. Iran says it only wants nuclear power for civilian use, but Russia said Tehran was not responding to international demands. "In the course of the talks concern was registered that the Iranian government has so far not reacted in a positive manner to the steps demanded by (the IAEA and the Security Council), including a halt to all work on enrichment and chemical processing," RIA news agency quoted Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin as saying.

DISRUPTION
Market worries that the nuclear crisis might disrupt Iranian oil exports kept oil above $72 a barrel, though it eased back from the record level it hit on Tuesday. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy joined Lavrov in saying discussion of sanctions should await the IAEA report. "For the moment we're not there yet. Let's wait for April 28," he told France's RMC radio. Tuesday's meeting of deputy foreign ministers from Russia, China, the United States, Germany, France and Britain underlined international differences over punitive action against Iran. The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to approve targeted sanctions against Tehran unless its suspends its uranium enrichment program. Russia and China say they are not convinced sanctions will work, even though they also have doubts about Iran's intentions. All the powers have said they are determined to solve the problem through diplomatic means, but the United States is alone among them in not ruling out military action. "Nobody is talking about a military invasion of Iran or military action against Iran. We are taking diplomatic action through the United Nations Security Council," British Prime Minister Tony Blair told parliament. However, asked on Tuesday if his options included planning for a nuclear strike, President Bush said: "All options are on the table." High-level diplomacy will continue, with Bush planning to raise the nuclear issue with his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao, who is visiting the United States. Iran will also be on the agenda when German Chancellor Angela Merkel meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in the western Siberian city of Tomsk next week.
By Meg Clothier

IRAQ II OR A NUCLEAR IRAN? - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, APRIL 19): The level of incompetence that the Bush team has displayed in Iraq, and its refusal to acknowledge any mistakes or remove those who made them, make it impossible to support this administration in any offensive military action against Iran.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/04/19/opinion/19friedman.html
PAID SUBSCRIPTION

REPORT: BLAIR WILL NOT BACK IRAN STRIKE: BRITISH GOVERNMENT SOURCES SAY THE PRIME MINISTER WILL SUPPORT DIPLOMATIC MOVES, BUT NOT MILITARY ACTIONS - TOM REGAN (CSMONITOR.COM, APRIL 19)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0418/dailyUpdate.html

BUSH WON'T RULE OUT NUCLEAR STRIKE ON IRAN - EDMUND BLAIR, REUTERS (YAHOO! NEWS, APRIL 18): Asked if options included planning for a nuclear strike, Bush replied: "All options are on the table. We want to solve this issue diplomatically and we're working hard to do so."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060418/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_dc

IRAN, YOU RAN, LET'S BOMB IRAN: WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS AND YOU'RE BECOMING NIXON 2.0, WHY NOT JUST NUKE SOMEONE, AND SMIRK? - MARK MORFORD (SF GATE, APRIL 19): Do not rule out the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Do not rule out another a massive air strike, ground troops, special forces, a strategy so intense it makes Iraq look like a jog in the park.
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/

FACING DOWN IRAN: OUR LIVES DEPEND ON IT - MARK STEYN (OPINION JOURNAL FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL PAGE, APRIL 19): The cost of de-nuking Iran will be high now but significantly higher with every year it's postponed.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/f...e/?id=110008231

THE NUCLEAR POWER BESIDE IRAQ: NOW THAT IRAN UNQUESTIONABLY INTENDS TO BUILD A NUCLEAR BOMB, THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY HAS FEW OPTIONS TO STOP IT -- AND THE WORST OPTION WOULD BE A MILITARY STRIKE - JAMES FALLOWS (ATLANTIC)
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200605/fallows-iran

CALLING IRAN'S BLUFF - ROBERT SCHEER (SF GATE, APRIL 19): The theocrats of Iran have had their power immeasurably strengthened by Bush's policies.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...EDGNSGUBS31.DTL

U.S. & IRAN-- FRIENDS SEPARATED BY RELIGIOUS FANATICS AT THE TOP - TOM D'ANTONI (HUFFINGTON POST, APRIL 19): ?Hey, guy in Tehran. I want to tell you that there are lots of people trying to remove our lunatic from office. I?m hoping there are like-minded folks in your neighborhood. Maybe we?ll be glad to see each other again.?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-dantoni/...ep_b_19388.html

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1158

Iran Flaunts Low-Level Enrichment to Conceal High-Powered Weaponizaton Plant

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

April 14, 2006, 7:27 PM (GMT+02:00)


Hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s claim of Iranian success in low-level uranium enrichment was more bombastic than frank. Before springing his disclosure at a sacred mausoleum in the northern town of Mashhad on April 11, DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources disclose he paid a stealthy visit to Neyshabour in Khorassan, 38 kms to the southeast.

There, he inspected a project he omitted to mention in his Mashhad speech about low-level enrichment, namely, a top-secret plant under construction that is designed to run 155,000 centrifuges, enough to enrich uranium for 3-5 nuclear bombs a year.

This is Project B, or the hidden face of the enrichment plant open to inspection at Natanz.

This plant, due for completion next October, is scheduled to go on line at the end of 2007. According to our intelligence sources, running-in has begun at some sections of the Neyshabour installation, which is located 600 km northeast of Tehran. DEBKAfile’s sources reveal too that the Neyshabour plant has been built 150 m deep under farmland covered with mixed vegetable crops and dubbed Shahid Moradian, in the name of a war martyr as obscure as its existence.

Already hard at work at Iran’s most ambitious nuclear project are hundreds of Iranian engineers, experts and assistants under the instruction of foreign specialists in the technology of centrifuge operation. Neyshabour is guarded day and night by the special Revolutionary Guards Corps elite Ansar al-Mahdi unit.

In Moscow Thursday, April 13, US assistant secretary of state on arms control Stephen Rademaker calculated that, with 54,000 centrifuges, the Iranians could produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb in 16 days. He was referring to the statement by Iran’s deputy nuclear chief Mohammed Saeed, who said his government planned to expand its enrichment program to 54,000 centrifuges from the 164 used in the small scale process announced Tuesday.

According to this reckoning, the Neshabour installation, when ready to go in three years, will have three times the capacity of Natanz and be able to turn out 9-15 bombs a year.

The clerical rulers in Tehran have long suspected the Americans or Israelis would eventually bomb Natanz out of existence. Therefore, four years ago, they began constructing its mirror - albeit on a far larger scale – in order to push ahead uninterrupted with enrichment for weapons, regardless of objections from the West, Israel and Arab neighbors.

Russian experts completed the initial plans in 2003 and construction began in early 2004. In late 2005, Bulgarian transport planes delivered tens of thousands of centrifuges from Belarus and Ukraine; they were transported directly to Neyshabour. In January 2006, 23 Ukrainian engineers arrived to start installing the equipment, joined in February by 46 Belarusian nuclear experts who are working in shifts to prepare the 155,000 P-1 and P-2 centrifuges for operation.

This compares with 60,000 in Nathanz – of which 40,000 are accessible for inspection while 20,000 are hidden in closed subterranean chambers.

Neyshabour, however, still needs to undergo experimental stages, according to our Iranian sources. It is far from sure that the Ukrainian and Belarusian experts will be able to put together a well-synchronized centrifuge project that is workable in the long term.

The Natanz project was long slowed by serious malfunctions in running the centrifuges purchased from Pakistan. They were only partially overcome lately. Now, Tehran needs three years to work in secret and in peace from outside interference and international inspections to achieve its first N-bomb.

Tehran’s “success” in enriching uranium, announced with fanfare last Tuesday, actually happened, according to our sources, eight months ago. Ahmadinejad timed his “disclosure” to achieve two goals:

One, as a fait accompli that would force the world to acknowledge that Iran had joined the world’s nuclear club as its eighth member, and two, to signal that the Islamic republic was close to achieving a nuclear weapon and capable of retaliating forcibly to international threats of penalties. Teheran’s grandiose war games two weeks ago were staged for the same purpose.

Russian and Chinese sources have their own interpretation of Tehran’s motives. They believe the Iranian president’s announcement was a knee-jerk reaction to the approaching UN Security Council deadline and the press reports of an approaching US military strike against its nuclear facilities. According to their theory, his bellicose stance was the prelude to a climb-down; Tehran would now announce its national objective has been accomplished and a line could be drawn on further advances.

DEBKAfile’s Iranian experts dismiss this theory as contrary to the mind-set of the Islamic republic’s rulers. They are convinced that Tehran sought the universal condemnation it encountered; it proved to the Iranian public that in a hostile world, Iran is fully justified in its go-it-alone program for arming their country with a nuclear weapon.

Most Americans Do Not Trust Bush on Iran: .

54 per cent of respondents say they do not trust George W. Bush to make the right decision about whether the country should go to war with Iran or not.
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/11612

===
US to call for freeze on Iran assets and visa curbs:

The US is pressing other world powers to consider what it called targeted sanctions against Iran as an April 30 United Nations deadline looms for Tehran over its nuclear program.
http://tinyurl.com/pa2tw

===
Iranian official's presence in U.S. queried:

The Bush administration yesterday was at a loss to explain the rare presence in Washington of an Iranian government official who slipped into the United States under mysterious circumstances, apparently to attend a scholarly conference.
http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?Stor...19-111937-2883r

===
U.S. envoy: Iran sanctions discussed:

A U.S. diplomat said Tuesday that envoys from the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany discussed sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, but failed to reach agreement on how to proceed further.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/world/14364483.htm

===
"New urgency" to curb Iran - U.S. official:

Russia said on Wednesday it wanted to refrain from taking action before a U.N. deadline set for Tehran to halt uranium enrichment expired, but a top U.S. official believed other countries were inching towards action.
http://tinyurl.com/q9u4t

===
The U.S. Nuclear Bunker Buster:

3 Million will die as result of attack:

Flash presentation. Must watch
http://tinyurl.com/p43yr

===
Russia will deliver air defense systems to Iran - top general :

At the end of 2005, Russia concluded a $700-million contract on the delivery of 29 Tor M1 air defense systems to Iran.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060419/46622413.html

===
China, Russia welcome Iran into the fold:

"The real intention behind the US fueling the Iran issue is to prompt the UN to impose sanctions against Iran, and to pave the way for a regime change in that country."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HD18Ad02.html

- Russian Rocket Woes Undermining Confidence In Nuclear Arsenal
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russian_Ro...ar_Arsenal.html

Washington (UPI) Apr 20, 2006 - Russian policy makers have reacted with fury to a recent article in Foreign Affairs discussing the growing problems Russia has in maintaining its ICBM nuclear delivery systems The article, entitled "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," by Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, ran in the March issue of Foreign Affairs.

- US Demands End To Russia-Iran Nuclear Cooperation
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Demands...ooperation.html

- Rice Expresses Confidence In Diplomatic Solution To Iran Nuclear Crisis
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Rice_Expre...ear_Crisis.html

- Russian Military Will Not Intervene In Iran Military Chief
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russian_Mi...tary_Chief.html

- UK Expects Iran To Defy Nuclear Deadline
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/UK_Expects...r_Deadline.html

- Iran Appoints New Man To Berlin With Nuclear Diplomacy Background
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Iran_Appoi...Background.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/...419-rferl03.htm

Azerbaijan: Iran Defense Chief Visits Amid Nuclear Standoff
By Jean-Christophe Peuch

Iran's defense minister arrived today in Azerbaijan for talks expected to focus on military cooperation between the two neighbors. Yet, Azerbaijani political experts believe there could be more to Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar's three-day visit, which comes amid growing speculation that the United States may ask Baku to contribute to possible military plans against Tehran.

PRAGUE, April 19, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- There has been little information about Mohammad-Najjar's visit.

Iran's state news agency, IRNA, on April 18 reported that Mohammad-Najjar, who is leading a high-ranking military delegation, is expected to hold talks with Azerbaijani military and civilian officials and tour army facilities.

Reports that the Iranian envoy will meet with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev could not be immediately confirmed.

Information from Baku is even scarcer, with local media saying that only a meeting between Mohammad-Najjar and Safar Abiyev, his Azerbaijani counterpart, is on the agenda.

Problematic Relations

Relations have traditionally been cold between Baku and Tehran -- a fact that perhaps makes the duration of Mohammad-Najjar's visit surprising.

Iran suspects Azerbaijan of spreading separatist ideas among the predominantly Azeri population of its northwestern provinces. Azerbaijan, in turn, alleges that its southern neighbor is working behind the scenes to undermine its secular statehood by funding radical Islamic groupings and smuggling religious missionaries across the border. The two countries are also at odds over the demarcation of their common Caspian Sea border.

Given this context, Azerbaijani political expert Rasim Musabeyov is doubtful that much will come from this week's meetings: "I believe [bilateral defense ties] are at their lowest possible level. In fact, I don't think this military cooperation goes beyond exchanges of delegations and, say, [ordinary] talks."

Diplomatic Moves

Mohammad-Najjar's visit comes amid a flurry of regional diplomatic activity possibly connected to Iran.

Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer was in Baku earlier this month. Azerbaijani President Aliyev is due in Washington on April 28 on his first visit to the United States since his election in 2003.

Also, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad are expected in Baku next month.

Azerbaijani media have been speculating that the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush may turn to Azerbaijan for help in case international negotiations fail to resolve Iran's nuclear standoff with the West.

Anti-Iran Coalition

On March 31, Azerbaijan's "Ayna" daily quoted unidentified U.S. officials as saying that Aliyev's government has given its preliminary consent to joining an anti-Iran coalition.

Azerbaijan's Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov, who held security talks in the United States last month, has denied the "Ayna" report. Addressing an April 6 news briefing, he said Baku has received no specific U.S. request with regard to Iran. However, he hinted that Iran's nuclear standoff was discussed at large during his visit to Washington.

There has been speculation in Baku that the meetings Aliyev will have in the United States later this month may not only focus on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, but also on Iran.

Addressing reporters in Baku today, Azerbaijan's presidential aide Novruz Mammadov remained vague enough to keep those speculations alive: "The president of Azerbaijan will meet nearly all U.S. government leaders. He will discuss bilateral relations, the fight against terrorism, regional security issues, energy cooperation, and problems pertaining to democratic developments. I believe that during his visit he will make specific statements on a number of issues, including the strategic cooperation between the U.S. and Azerbaijan, energy links, and problems related to democratic developments. Those statements could be made either orally, or in a written form."

Public Debate

Media reports that Azerbaijan could join an anti-Iran coalition have triggered public debate in the country. One part of the political elite believes Baku should align itself with Washington, while another part categorically rejects such an eventuality.

Political expert says he does not believe Baku will join a U.S.-led military coalition against Iran. Yet, he thinks the subject will likely be on the agenda of Mohammad-Najjar's talks.

"Given the situation Iran is in at the moment, its defense minister has certainly no time to waste on purely formal visits. Since he is coming to Baku and will remain there quite a long time, it means that very important questions will be on his agenda," Musabeyov said. "He may tell [his interlocutors] what Iran believes would be unacceptable and what possible risks await Azerbaijan. I think this is what he is going to discuss with Azerbaijan's military officials and, [possibly], with the head of state."

According to Musabeyov, Azerbaijan should be prepared for all possible eventualities -- whether or not it decides to take part in an anti-Iran coalition: "Even if [an anti-Iran military coalition] is set up without Azerbaijan participating in it, that does not mean that it will be immune to any possible risks. Anything can happen and this is why Azerbaijan is interested in examining all aspects of [Iran's nuclear issue], including its possible military risks."

Meanwhile, some Azerbaijani politicians have speculated that the regions of Qubadli, Zangilan, and Cabrayil may become the focus of attention in the event of U.S. military operations against Tehran.

Those three Azerbaijani administrative districts, which border Iran to the northwest, have been under Armenian occupation since 1993. In comments made to Azerbaijan's Day.Az news agency on April 18, Umid party leader Iqbal Agazade said that, in case of a U.S.-led war against Iran, Azerbaijan should first secure the return of those territories "for the sake of its own security."



Copyright © 2006. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. www.rferl.org

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/...ianovosti03.htm
U.S. urges all countries to cut nuclear ties to Iran
RIA Novosti

19/04/2006 20:08

MOSCOW, April 19 (RIA Novosti) - The U.S. deputy secretary of state on Wednesday called for all countries to sever nuclear ties with Iran, including construction of a nuclear power plant at Bushehr being built with Russian help.

Speaking following a Moscow meeting of the deputy foreign ministers of the five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany, Nicholas Burns Burns also said Iran had crossed the line drawn by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog, and the Security Council had to offer an adequate diplomatic response to defiant Tehran.

He said the five permanent Security Council members and Germany, as well as the Group of Eight industrialized nations had to come to terms on specific moves toward Iran in the next two or three weeks.

Burns said Tehran's announcement of successful accomplishment of a research-scale nuclear fuel cycle last week must prompt IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei to conclude that Iran did not honor the IAEA and UN Security Council's demands to end uranium enrichment.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced April 11 that the Islamic Republic had successfully produced low-enriched uranium, which can eventually lead to Tehran receiving bomb-grade fuel, although experts say this might take years.

Burns said time had come to build up pressure on Iran via the Security Council and by efforts of individual countries. He also praised Russia's offer to enrich uranium for the Islamic Republic on Russian soil.

ElBaradei is expected to report to the UN Security Council on Iran's compliance with its non-proliferation commitments by the end of April. If the Islamic Republic fails to re-impose a moratorium on uranium enrichment by that time, as demanded by the Security Council, it might face economic isolation.

The IAEA head, who visited Iran April 13-14, said he could not confirm that Iran had enriched uranium to 3.5%, sufficient to produce sustained fission reactions in nuclear power plants, but called on the Islamic Republic to suspend all nuclear activities by the UN-set deadline.

Moscow said Wednesday IAEA board should consider the issue again before it goes to the United Nations.

Russia, which is helping Iran build a $800-million nuclear power plant, and China, a major consumer of Iranian oil, have so far opposed sanctions against Tehran.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/...ianovosti01.htm
Russian FM says Moscow talks brought no decision on Iran
RIA Novosti

19/04/2006 13:19

MOSCOW, April 19 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's foreign minister said Wednesday that diplomats from Russia, the United States, China, and the EU-3 did not reach a decision on specific measures relating to Iran's controversial nuclear program at talks in Moscow Tuesday.

Sergei Lavrov said a decision would be taken following a report on the Islamic Republic's compliance with the UN Security Council's demand to end uranium enrichment by the end of April, or face isolation.

"No decision was taken at yesterday's meeting, and we had not intended to do so, as we first have to wait for a report by IAEA director Mohammed ElBaradei at the end of this month," Lavrov said.

He also said that the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog, should consider ElBaradei's report on Iran before passing it on to the Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions if the country is found in breach of its non-proliferation commitments.

Lavrov said the deputy foreign ministers of all five permanent Security Council members - Russia, China, the United States, France, and the UK, along with Germany - had exchanged opinions on further steps in the long-running dispute with Iran, which is suspected of seeking to build nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear program.

Iran has dismissed such accusations, and insisted on its right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

"All the participants at yesterday's meeting were unanimous that Iran must take prompt and constructive steps in response to a decision to be made by the IAEA Board of Governors," the minister said.

Lavrov said the countries had agreed to continue talks in different formats to persuade Tehran to heed the international community's concerns. The minister said this would encourage a political resolution of the diplomatic conflict.

ElBaradei visited Tehran April 13-14 after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that the Islamic Republic had successfully produced low-enriched uranium.

The IAEA head said he could not yet confirm that Iran had enriched uranium to 3.5%, sufficient to produce sustained fission reactions in nuclear power plants, but called on the Islamic Republic to suspend all nuclear activities until the end of April to resolve outstanding issues by the deadline set by the UN Security Council.

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said Iran would not back down from its nuclear research, and that suspension of nuclear activities would not bring a positive solution to the existing crisis.

Russia and China, veto-wielding Security Council members with strong business interests in Iran, have so far opposed economic sanctions against Tehran.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/...0419-irna02.htm
Iran hopes to settle nuclear issue through negotiation
IRNA - Islamic Republic News Agency

Moscow, April 19, IRNA
Iran-Nuclear-Moscow talks
/Xinhua -- Iran hopes to settle the nuclear problem through negotiation and prevent it from escalating into a crisis, Iranian Ambassador to Russia Gholam-Reza Ansari to Russia stated hereon Tuesday, following the opening of the six-party consultations over the delicate issue.

"We must do everything possible to settle the Iranian nuclear problem in a tranquil atmosphere of negotiations. The region does not want a crisis and all the nations are against it," Ansari was quoted by the Itar-Tass news agency as saying.

"The Iranian leaders had stated that they were ready for a dialogue with the different sides in order to explain their program," Ansari was further quoted saying.

Deputy foreign ministers of Russia, the United States, China and the European trio, including Britain, Germany and France, are meeting in Moscow for a second day today to discuss Iran's nuclear program.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak heads the Russian delegation.

Ansari stressed that the Iranian side has no problems with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"Iran is ready to conduct its activity only under IAEA resolutions and in line with the laws effective in the IAEA," Ansari was further quoted.

Speaking live on Russia's Ekho Moskvy Radio, he said that IAEA inspections are being conducted in Iran.

"We want this cooperation to continue," Ansari remarked on radio.

"We are prepared to accept the proposals of other countries in order to prove that the Iranian nuclear program is of a purely peaceful nature. Nobody in Iran wishes to deviate from the peaceful uses of the atom," he said.

"We insist that doors should be open for the sake of greater transparency...Iran is prepared to host any foreign companies on its territory," Ansari added.

In a telephone conversation between Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, on Monday, Russia strongly urged Iran to halt its uranium enrichment activities.

/2321/1414

Rice: The US reserves the right to use any and all options to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons

April 20, 2006, 10:53 AM (GMT+02:00)

She spoke Wednesday at the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations.

US president George W. Bush, who earlier refused to rule out a nuclear response, will raise the Iranian issue with visiting Chinese president Hu Jintao Thursday at the White House. Beijing, like Moscow, opposes UN Security Council sanctions against Iran. The SC permanent members ended their crisis talks in Moscow Wednesday without agreement, except for a decision to wait for the IAEA report on Iran’s compliance with the council’s call to halt uranium enrichment by April 28. This is a mere formality. President Mahmoud Ahmaninejad has said time and again that Iran’s nuclear program will go ahead, and threatened Tuesday to “cut off the hands of any aggressors.”

Copyright 2000-2006 DEBKAfile. All Rights Reserved.

Iran scoffs at US military threat
Iran scoffed at the idea of U.S. military action to halt its nuclear program and gave no hint of compromise on Thursday before a visit by U.N. inspectors to assess Iranian compliance with Security Council demands. The International Atomic Energy Agency will report to the top world body on April 28 on whether Tehran has halted uranium enrichment and answered IAEA questions about its nuclear activities in line with a 30-day deadline set by the council. President Bush has vowed to stop Iran from getting atomic weapons and has refused to rule out military options, including nuclear strikes, if diplomacy fails. "The United States has been threatening Iran for 27 years and this is not new for us. Therefore we are never afraid of U.S. threats," Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar told reporters during a visit to neighboring Azerbaijan. "If you take into account the fact that they are not doing anything, this shows it is just talk," he said. Najjar said Iran was ready to negotiate, but would deal with any challenge confronting it. Senior IAEA inspectors were due in Iran on Friday to gauge Iranian compliance for the report that Mohamed ElBaradei, the U.N. watchdog's director, is preparing for the Security Council. Worries about the nuclear standoff have helped drive oil prices to record highs, with Brent crude trading above $74 a barrel on Thursday after a steep drop in U.S. gasoline stocks. Iran, the world's fourth-biggest oil exporter, says it wants only nuclear-generated electricity, not bombs. But its declaration last week that it had successfully enriched uranium and would now pursue large-scale production heightened international suspicions about its intentions.

SANCTIONS
The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to approve targeted sanctions on Iran, such as travel bans and asset freezes, if it refuses to back down. But China and Russia, the council's other two veto-holders, doubt punitive measures will work. Big-power talks in Moscow this week failed to produce a consensus on future action. European diplomats on Thursday dismissed as unacceptable a suggestion that Iran take a brief "technical pause" from nuclear enrichment to revive collapsed negotiations with the EU. They told Reuters Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), discussed this idea with Iranian officials in Tehran last week. "A full suspension is the only way to resolve this and the Iranians have given no indication they are willing to do that," a senior EU diplomat told Reuters. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday the world was mobilized to deny Iran nuclear weapons. "We are prepared to use measures at our disposal -- political, economic, others, to dissuade Iran," she said. Russia, however, rejected a call from the United States, which has long maintained its own trade embargo on Iran, to halt work on the Islamic Republic's Bushehr nuclear power station. Russia's state atomic energy agency is contracted to help Iran build the $1 billion reactor. A senior U.S. official said on Wednesday that a Russian withdrawal would help persuade Iran to abandon its separate uranium enrichment program. "Every country has the right to decide for itself with whom and in what way it cooperates with other states," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said, adding that only the U.N. Security Council could override this principle. Speaking in Moscow, UnderSecretary of State Nicholas Burns had also repeated Washington's view that Moscow should cancel the planned sale to Iran of Tor tactical surface-to-air missiles. Moscow and Tehran say they are for defensive purposes. Kamynin's statement did not mention the missile sales. Iranian nuclear negotiators were in Moscow on Thursday but there was no word on what they were doing. They met officials of Britain, France and Germany late on Wednesday, but a British diplomat said there had been no breakthrough. Bush, meeting Chinese President Hu Jintao in Washington on Thursday, did not appear to have persuaded him to allow tougher steps in the U.N. Security Council. Hu repeated Beijing's calls for a solution through "diplomatic negotiations." In Seoul, a senior European Union official called on Iran to comply with IAEA demands that it suspend all enrichment and reprocessing activities to allow a return to negotiations. "We remain committed to a diplomatic solution," EU Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner told a news conference.
By Edmund Blair

Iran scoffs at US military threat

By Edmund Blair

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran scoffed at the idea of U.S. military action to halt its nuclear program and gave no hint of compromise on Thursday before a visit by U.N. inspectors to assess Iranian compliance with Security Council demands.

To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...er=emailarticle

Bush raises UN action against Iran:

US President George W. Bush said he has discussed with Chinese President Hu Jintao the possibility of the United Nations passing a motion against Iran that could order sanctions or action going up to military action.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18879879-38198,00.html

===
US prepared to go it alone over Iran :

US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has invoked self-defence as a potential justification for military intervention in Iran
http://euronews.net/create_html.php?page=d...le=354913&lng=1

===
Russians withhold judgment on Iran :

Russia will decide its stance on the Iranian nuclear crisis based on a report next week by the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the deputy foreign minister said today.
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2006/Apr/20060420News015.asp

===
Brazil follows Iran's nuclear path, but without the fuss :

As Iran faces international pressure over developing the raw material for nuclear weapons, Brazil is quietly preparing to open its own uranium-enrichment center, capable of producing exactly the same fuel.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12797.htm

===
Sen. Joseph Lieberman: I'd Support Iran Attack:

Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Tuesday that he would back a U.S. airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities if diplomatic options fail, becoming the first Democrat to announce his support for such a move.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/4/...4250.shtml?s=lh

- US Intel Chief Says Iran Still Years Away From Having Nukes
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Intel_C...ving_Nukes.html

Washington (AFP) Apr 21, 2006 - US intelligence chief John Negroponte said Thursday Iran's resumption of uranium enrichment is "troublesome" but the country is still years away from having enough fissile material to make a nuclear weapon.

- Iran's Army Warns 'Aggressors'
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Irans_Army...Aggressors.html

- Experts Warn Against Iran Sanctions
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Experts_Wa..._Sanctions.html

- UN Says Iran Aids Hezbollah
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/UN_Says_Ir..._Hezbollah.html

- Bush Seeks Chinese Support For Tough Action Against Iran
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Bush_Seeks...ainst_Iran.html

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?Stor...20-110709-2789r
Commentary: Talking to Tehran
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
UPI Editor at Large
Published April 20, 2006


WASHINGTON -- At least three unofficial Iranian emissaries have been in Washington this spring with the same recommendation: Send a high-ranking current or former U.S. official to Qom for secret talks with Ayatollah Ali Khameini to explore the possibility of a geopolitical deal before Iran passes yet another nuclear milestone -- e.g., a non-aggression treaty in return for taking Iran's gauntleted hand off the nuclear sword and resheathing it in an IAEA scabbard. An American exit from Iraq would also be part of the diplomatic mix.

For President Bush, this is rank appeasement. He sees his embattled presidency as a throwback to Winston Churchill on the backbenches of parliament surrounded by appeasers. Now it's a world of appeasers trying to blunt America's sword. Bush tells his out of town visitors to think of how history will judge his administration 20 years hence and not to worry about setbacks in Iraq.


Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh writes a long story for the New Yorker whose gist is Bush is contemplating a tactical nuclear strike against Iran's nuclear installations, now spread in at least 17 different locations. The absurd idea is not denied by Bush. He simply calls it "wild speculation." For the rest of the world this means that the only power in history to have used nuclear weapons -- "Little Boy" and "Fat Man" incinerated almost 200,000 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in less than a second -- is now seriously thinking of doing it again.

Bush's "wild speculation" description is now taken seriously in foreign media as yet another indication America's global imperial hubris is out of control. The damage it is doing to America's image is hard to quantify, but it is at least as serious as the Abu Ghraib "torture" pictures.

Neocon supporters of the Bush Administration are confident the president will order air strikes against Iran between the Nov. 2006 elections and Nov. 2008 when his successor will be elected. The post-strike scenario was put to one of these neocon supporters:

1. Swift minelayers sail from Bandar Abbas, the Iranian naval base at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz and sow a few score mines in the world's busiest oil shipping lane. All tanker traffic stops. U.S. and NATO minesweepers head for Hormuz. Iranian naval commandos in Zodiak rubber speedboats come alongside a supertanker and sink it by sticking limpet mines along the waterline. Oil futures quickly pass $100 a barrel and keep climbing.

2. Saudi Arabia's Shiite minority, employed in the eastern Saudi oilfields, begins blowing oil pipelines. Sabotage is reported at Ras Tanura, the world's largest oil loading port.

3. U.S. air strikes obliterate Bandar Abbas.

4. Iraq's two Shiite militia, armed and funded by Iran's Revolutionary Guards, are ordered into action against Iraq's U.S.-funded and trained army and police forces and against U.S. forces. U.S. casualties mount again. Congress calls for an immediate evacuation of U.S. forces into Kuwait. The Kuwaiti parliament balks and declares its neutrality in what is now the new U.S.-Iran war.

5. Hezbollah and Hamas fire several thousand rockets and missiles over Israel's protective barrier killing scores of Israelis. The IDF is ordered back into Gaza to wipe out the terrorists.

6. Hezbollah's militia goes into action against U.S. interests in Beirut.

7. Shiite and Sunni Arabs close ranks against the U.S.-Zionist enemy. Arab streets erupt in mass anti-U.S. demonstrations. Arab governments recall their ambassadors from Washington.

8. The entire Muslim world closes ranks behind Iran.

9. A "dirty bomb" explodes in lower Manhattan. Casualties are far lower than on 9/11 when the Twin Towers were destroyed. But a 60-square-block area has to be permanently evacuated. It will be uninhabitable for several years due to dangerous levels of radiation.

The neocon interlocutor smiled, then shrugged his shoulders and called the scenario "wild speculation." White House calculus ignores the fact that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's President and a member of a fanatical sect of Shiite Islam, believes in the apocalypse in his own lifetime. Some people who know him say he thinks global death and destruction is only two years away and that this will be followed by the return of the 12th Imam, known as the Mahdi. Iran's president, who claims the Nazi holocaust was pure fiction, and that Israel should be erased from the map, only has power over his cabinet. Under Supreme Leader Khamenei come the intelligence services, the armed forces, the revolutionary guards, parliament, broadcasting -- and the government. So the time for secret talks with the real no. 1 was yesterday.

Richard Armitage, a tough Republican who was deputy Secretary of State under Colin Powell, says it would behoove the U.S. to talk to Iran directly -- not simply at the level of the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad to talk about the future of Iraq. So far, the U.S. has resisted direct talks with Tehran about its nuclear aspirations and mandated the EU3 -- the U.K., France and Germany -- to be its surrogate.

The stakes are so high, Armitage says, the situation "merits talking to the Iranians about the full range of our relationship... everything from energy to terrorism to weapons to Iraq. We can be diplomatically astute enough to do it without giving anything away."

When Nikita Khrushchev warned the U.S. that the Soviet Union would bury America, Washington didn't break diplomatic relations but went on talking -- throughout the Cold War -- and the evil empire collapsed.

During the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, with the world poised on the edge of nuclear war, brilliant U.S. diplomacy always left Khrushchev a way out of his geopolitical power play. He was trying to find a shortcut to nuclear parity with the U.S. The Soviet dictator took his missiles home, the U.S. agreed not to invade Cuba, and later took its obsolete Jupiter missiles out of Turkey.

Perhaps Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is not a student of Machiavelli. But Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jim Schlesinger are still among us -- and ready to serve, not a public circus, but a top secret head-to-head with Velayat-e-Faqih, "the Guardianship of the Jurisprudent." That's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Prophet's proconsul in the holy city of Qom.

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?Stor...20-041214-3399r

Analysis: U.N. links Iran to Lebanon's Hezbollah
By William M. Reilly
UPI United Nations Correspondent
Published April 20, 2006


UNITED NATIONS -- The United Nations has for the first time named Iran a supporter of Hezbollah, an Islamic Shiite resistance group based in Lebanon and a bitter foe of Israel.

The mention came in a report to the U.N. Security Council under Secretary-General Kofi Annan's name, but prepared by his special envoy Terje Roed-Larsen. Among its requests, the report calls for the removal of all foreign forces from Lebanon.


The semi-annual report was sent to the panel of 15 nations earlier this week and a copy was obtained by United Press International prior to its official publication.

The prime target of the report was the Syrian military and Palestinian militias based in the Arab country.

Annan said in the report, "I note the assurance of the Lebanese Army Command that it has the capacity to collect the arms of Palestinian militias if and when a political decision to that effect is taken."

He also welcomed recent statements from both groups indicating a willingness to put their arms "under the state's authority."

The report further called for "free and fair" elections in a Lebanon not dominated by Syria, which has maintained a vast "intelligence network in its neighbor."

As for Hezbollah, the direct link it shares with Iran -- considered the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism -- is underscored midway through the document.

"Hezbollah maintains close ties, with frequent contacts and regular communication, with the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran," Annan said in the report. "In this context, particularly, I have taken note of statements by senior Syrian officials urging a continuation of the 'resistance.'"

The group is described by the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations as "a Lebanese umbrella organization of radical Islamic Shiite groups and organizations. It opposes the West, seeks to create a Muslim fundamentalist state modeled on Iran, and is a bitter foe of Israel."

The council added, "Hezbollah is also a significant force in Lebanon's politics and a major provider of social services, operating schools, hospitals, and agricultural services, for thousands of Lebanese Shiites."

It has long been regarded as funded largely by Tehran.

"There has not yet been any noticeable change in the operational status and capabilities of Hezbollah," the report said. "A group engaged in the democratic political process of opinion formation and decision-making can not simultaneously possess an autonomous armed operational capacity outside the authority of the state."

Hezbollah's inclusion in the government underlined the significance of its possible transformation into solely a political party, Annan said, reiterating his belief "the carrying of arms outside the official armed forces is impossible to reconcile with the participation in power and in government in a democracy."

He also said leaders of most Lebanese political factions had told him they view with favor the eventual integration of Hezbollah into the armed forces.

However, Annan said arms are still being shipped to Hezbollah, as recently as February.

"Arms destined for Hezbollah had been transferred from Syria into Lebanon," the secretary-general said he was told. "Twelve trucks carrying ammunition and weapons of various kinds, including Katyusha rockets, crossed the border from Syria.

"Discovered a few days later at a checkpoint inside Lebanon, the trucks were allowed to continue their journey towards their destination in South Lebanon," he continued, adding an army statement indicated "transportation and storage of ammunition belonging to the 'resistance,' once inside Lebanon, were subject to the ministerial policy statement of the current Lebanese government, which considered the 'resistance' to be legitimate."

Beirut confirmed the Lebanese military had not been authorized to prevent further movement of the material "which had been a common practice for more than 15 years."

However, Annan said Roed Larsen has been assured by the Lebanese government and military "further cases of arms transfers would be put to the direct decision of Prime Minister (Fouad) Siniora, and that no further transfers of ammunitions and weapons have occurred since this incident."

Hezbollah continues to justify its existence as a "resistance" movement by Israel's ongoing occupation of the Shaaba farms area, which the United Nations had determined to be Israeli-occupied Syrian territory but which many Lebanese claimed.

Lebanon and Syria recently agreed it should be regarded as Israeli-occupied Lebanese territory when the border between Lebanon and Syria is demarcated.

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?Stor...20-115610-9924r
Experts: Iran sanctions may be ineffective
By Harbaksh Singh Nanda
United Press International
Published April 20, 2006


ALMATY, Kazakhstan -- While Washington continues to solicit international support to slap sanctions against a defiant Iranian regime, experts at an international conference in Almaty Thursday suggested that the economic and other embargoes against Tehran may not prove effective.

"We have seen in the past that the economic sanctions against various states have proved to be counter effective," Vyacheslav Kuznetsov, Director of the Institute of Social and Political Research, said at the Fifth Annual Eurasian Media Forum.

Echoing similar views, Dr. Kenneth Courtis of Goldman Sachs said that the former dictator of Iraq was exporting more oil during the sanctions than the total oil being produced in Iraq today. "With Iran's geography and the oil reserves, no sanctions can work against it," Courtis opined at the opening session of the three-day event.

The media forum has attracted nearly 350 journalists, politicians, political commentators and bureaucrats and diplomatic envoys from all over the world to deliberate on various topical issues, including the Iran dilemma.

Richard Holbrooke, a former Clinton ambassador to the United Nations and former assistant secretary of state urged host Kazakhstan to exert political pressure on its two giant neighbors, China and Russia, to help Washington tighten the noose against nuclear aspirant Tehran.

Holbrook said that Iran's nuclear plans have reached a stage of frenzied political concern in Washington and among the Bush administration. "The concern cannot be overstated," the former ambassador said, adding that he was not speaking for the Bush administration. "Today Iran tops the U.S. agenda. This will be a major issue during the upcoming G-8 summit in St. Petersburg and also during this week's summit between President Bush and visiting Chinese President Hu Jintao," Holbrooke said.

Landlocked Kazakhstan lies between Russia and China and is geographically close to Iran. Any military action against Tehran could seriously affect this former Soviet Republic. U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney is due to visit Kazakhstan in the next three weeks and Iran is likely to dominate bilateral talks.

Kuznetsov said that Moscow was definitely exerting pressure on Iran "but sometimes the pressures don't work."

But Holbrooke minced no words, saying, "The U.S. is upset at Russia's stance on Iran. I believe that Moscow should support Washington against Tehran."

He hailed Kazakhstan for giving up its nuclear arsenal back in 1994. "If Kazakhstan set such a fine example, Iran wants to go the other way," Holbrooke said.

Answering questions if the Iran issue would split the U.N. Security Council, the former Clinton administration official said that Bush administration has not had a smooth ride with the international body in seeking consensus.

Courtis, however, said that an Iran resolution lies in Moscow and Beijing. "If the U.S. fails to win China's support, the Iran issue will not be resolved," the managing director of Goldman Sachs said.

These comments come at a time when Chinese President Hu Jintao is visiting the United States for bilateral talks with President Bush.

Meanwhile, Russia on Thursday said it would continue supporting construction of a nuclear power plant in Iran, saying it poses no threat to the international non-proliferation regime. Russia's state atomic energy agency is contracted to help Iran build the $1 billion nuclear reactor.

"The construction of a nuclear power plant in Bushehr is being carried out in compliance with all international agreements," Russia's Federal Atomic Energy Agency head Sergei Kiriyenko told a news conference in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.

In the United States, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday cautioned against assuming that the White House is keen on military intervention in Iran.

Although President Bush has repeatedly said that all options, including the use of force, are possible to stop Iran from producing nuclear warheads, Rice said in Chicago that diplomatic measures must first be exhausted.

Rice said that many "diplomatic tools" will be used and that she hoped Iran would get the message from a unified international community. The U.N. Security Council has given Iran until April 28 to halt uranium enrichment.

The Security Council is so far divided on the Iran issue. While Germany, France and Britain have said they would push for a diplomatic solution, Russia and China have both opposed any sanctions and a military solution.

The United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, discovered three years ago that Iran had carried out secret nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.

Iran says it has the right to enrich nuclear energy for civilian purposes, but the West believes Tehran is using the process to secretly and illegally build nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge.

Russia must freeze arms deals with Iran: US Yahoo! News
Russia must stop any arms deals with Iran and other nations must bar the sale of dual-use technologies to Tehran to put pressure on Iran to abandon its nuclear program, a senior U.S. official said on Friday. "It's time for countries to use their leverage against Iran," said senior State Department official Nicholas Burns, adding: "We think its very important that countries like Russia freeze any arms sales planned for Iran." Washington wants Moscow to cancel the planned sale to Iran of Tor tactical surface-to-air missiles. Moscow and Tehran say they are for defensive purposes. "We hope and we trust that that deal will not go forward," said Burns of the Tor deal. Burns, who met in Moscow this week with officials from Russia, China, Germany, France and Britain to plan strategy against Iran, said nations must pressure Iran individually as well as work collectively at the U.N. Security Council. He said there was a "sense of urgency" among nations to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, especially after it announced last week it had begun the enrichment of uranium. A meeting among political directors from the six countries is expected to take place in Paris on May 2 and the group would try then to reach an agreement on what diplomatic action to take next against Iran, Burns said. In addition, he said the Group of Eight industrialized nations would focus on Iran at their July summit. Russia strongly opposes the use of sanctions against Iran and has also rejected a call from the United States, which has long maintained its own trade embargo on Iran, to halt work on the Islamic Republic's Bushehr nuclear power station. Russia's state atomic energy agency is contracted to help Iran build the $1 billion reactor.

Iran shells Iranian Kurdish positions in Iraq-PUK:

Iranian forces shelled Iranian Kurdish rebel positions inside mountainous northern Iraq on Friday to repel an attack, an Iraqi Kurdish official said.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L21121431.htm

===
Cheney has tapped Iranian expatriate, arms dealer to surveil discussions with Iran:

Speaking on condition of anonymity, three intelligence sources identified the Iran-Contra middleman as having been put back on the payroll, acting as a human intelligence asset and monitoring any movement in discussions about Iran’s alleged burgeoning nuclear weapons program.
http://tinyurl.com/flevh

===
Iran years away from having nukes’:

US intelligence chief John Negroponte has said Iran's resumption of uranium enrichment is "troublesome" but the country is still years away from having enough fissile material to make a nuclear weapon.
http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=66431

===
Russia toughens opposition to Iran sanctions :

Hardening its opposition to sanctions against Iran, Russia said on Friday the U.N. Security Council should only consider such measures if it had proof the Islamic Republic was trying to build nuclear weapons.
http://tinyurl.com/kxufy

===
Russia backs Iran's nuclear programme:

Russia today offered its most outspoken support yet of the controversial nuclear programme in Iran, its neighbour and trading partner.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2145200,00.html

===
Russia Will Not Agree to Iran Sanctions Without Proof :

Russia says again it will not agree to sanctions against Iran until Moscow sees hard evidence that Tehran's nuclear program is not for peaceful purposes
http://www.payvand.com/news/06/apr/1177.html

===
Taking matters in hand:

Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator and head of the Supreme National Security Council, tells Amira Howeidy that Iran does not need nuclear weapons to promote its influence in the region and that punishing Iran for pursuing a nuclear programme will damage everyone
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/791/re6.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../23/wiran23.xml


Iran 'models nuclear plan on Pakistan'
By Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 23/04/2006)

The United States arms control chief has given warning that Iran is "very close to the point of no return" in acquiring the technological expertise to make a nuclear weapon.

"In terms of activities on the ground in Iran, it is fair to say that the Iranians have put both feet on the accelerator," said Robert Joseph, the senior US State Department official responsible for countering nuclear proliferation.

His comments, which come as the United Nations Security Council prepares to meet to discuss the crisis this week, indicate that Washington believes that the stakes are rising rapidly in the West's confrontation with the Islamic republic.

Earlier this month, Teheran claimed to have enriched uranium for the nuclear fuel cycle. It has pushed ahead with its programme while taking advantage of a diplomatic stand-off between Moscow and Washington over possible UN sanctions.

Iran is following tactics outlined by its former chief nuclear negotiator in comments to clerics and academics previously unreported in the West. Hassan Rowhani made clear that Iran's goal was to present the world with a fait accompli over its nuclear ambitions.

"If, one day, we are able to complete the fuel cycle and the world sees that it has no choice, that we do possess the technology, then the situation will be different," he told the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council. "The world did not want Pakistan to have an atomic bomb or Brazil to have the fuel cycle, but Pakistan built its bomb and Brazil has its fuel cycle."

He delivered the speech in September, a month after Iran sparked the latest stage of its showdown with the international community by resuming uranium conversion, in breach of previous accords, following the election of its hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Mr Rowhani reiterated to his audience Iran's public insistence that it is seeking nuclear technology only for peaceful civilian purposes. But his comparison to Pakistan's secret development of an atomic weapon is significant, as Iran acquired much of its nuclear know-how from A Q Khan, the rogue scientist known as the father of the Pakistani bomb.

During the speech, Mr Rowhani emphasised that Iran had intended to complete its programme in secret. "This was never supposed to be in the open. But in any case the spies exposed it," he said, in reference to the revelation by opposition exiles of Iran's clandestine nuclear operations.

Karim Sadjadpour, an Iranian analyst with the International Crisis Group, said Teheran was aiming to shape the debate with its claims.

"Iran is betting that it can redraw the West's red lines by creating facts on the ground. At the time they re-commenced uranium conversion activities in Isfahan, last August, much fuss was made in the US and EU, but it eventually became an irreversible fait accompli. They may well believe that the West will eventually come to accept their enrichment activities as well."

The Security Council meets on Friday to hear a report on Iran's nuclear activities from the International Atomic Energy Agency. But although the agency's director, Mohamed ElBaradei, is certain to report that Iran has ignored the ultimatum to halt enrichment work, US, British and French hopes of moving towards imposing sanctions are slim.

Russia hardened its stand against such punitive measures last week. Its foreign ministry said Moscow would consider sanctions only if "concrete facts" emerged that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. China, which also holds a Security Council veto, leans towards the Russian position.

Iran made an apparent attempt yesterday to confuse the situation ahead of the UN meeting when it said it had reached a "basic" agreement with Moscow to enrich uranium in Russia. The announcement made no mention of whether Teheran would cease enrichment in Iran - a key UN demand.

Last week, Moscow rejected an appeal by Washington to halt the sale of air defence missile systems to Teheran in a $700 million (£392 million) deal. "This is not the time for business as usual with the Iranian government," said Nicholas Burns, a senior US State Department official.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle...middleeast&col=

Khaleej Times Online >> News >> MIDDLE EAST
Iran rejects UN ultimatum over uranium enrichment suspension
(DPA)

23 April 2006



TEHERAN - Iran on Sunday rejected the ultimatum by the United Nations Security Council to suspend uranium enrichment before the deadline of April 28.


“Iran’s uranium enrichment activities are irrevocable,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Assefi said Sunday in a press conference.

The spokesman also denied press reports that Iran has promised the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) a temporary suspension of the enrichment process.

Assefi said Iranian diplomats are currently in Vienna to elaborate further on Iran’s nuclear stance, but he voiced concerns about the contents of the final report on Iran’s nuclear activities to be presented by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei.

“If the report is based on a correct technical evaluation, then there will be no grounds for any worry, but our concern has always been - and still is - the politicization of the case,” the spokesman said.

The UN Security Council is awaiting ElBaradei’s report before taking action on Iran. The Islamic state might face trade sanctions but at least two of the council members, China and Russia, are reportedly against sanctions.

Assefi noted Iran has so far only worked with P-1 centrifuges but said that also the use of P-2 centrifuges - which accelerate the enrichment process - would be in line with the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and “Iran could therefore not be prohibited from using them.”

The spokesman reiterated that the Russian proposal to enrich converted Iranian uranium on Russian territory was still under consideration but needed the preparation of the necessary ground before Teheran would take a final decision.

He also referred to the cancellation of the scheduled visit of the IAEA team to Iran last Friday and said “Iran would welcome IAEA officials and inspectors in Iran whenever they want.”

Back to Story - Help
Intelligence on Iran nuclear threat seen as inadequate Sun Apr 23, 11:36 AM ET



The United States doesn't have enough good intelligence to know whether or not Iran will be capable of producing nuclear weapons in the near future, top congressional intelligence committee members said on Sunday.

Iran said earlier on Sunday it would not abandon its work on nuclear enrichment, which the United Nations has demanded it halt, and was prepared to face sanctions from abroad.

Asked on Fox News Sunday when Iran might be capable of producing nuclear weapons, House Permanent Select Committee on

Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican, said: "I'd say we really don't know.

"We're getting lots of mixed messages," Hoekstra said.

"We've got a long way to go in rebuilding our intelligence community. .... We don't have all of the information we would like to have.

Jane Harman of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, concurred. "Our intelligence is thin," she told Fox News. "I don't think we have enough sources, I don't think our analysis is sharp enough."

Washington has said it wants a diplomatic resolution over Iran's nuclear ambitions but has not ruled out military action, a step its allies, as well as Russia and China, oppose.

"This is not a time to be saber-rattling in our government," said Harmon. "Just the fact that the Iranian government is making a lot of noise doesn't prove their capabilities.




Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.


Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback

http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060424140904.o9gvsko5.html

Iran president threatens to quit NPT

TEHRAN, April 24 (AFP) Apr 24, 2006
Iran will quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if Western powers want to prevent the country from possessing nuclear technology, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned Monday.
"Our policy is to work within the NPT and the Agency," he said, referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"But if we see that they don't want to accept our rights we will reconsider, and nothing important will happen," the hardline president told a news conference.

"It is time for the agency to restore its reputation. They haven't done anything but cause nuisance," he said of the IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-I..._r=1&oref=login

Iran President: Israel Is a 'Fake Regime'
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: April 24, 2006
Filed at 9:55 a.m. ET

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday renewed his criticism of Israel, calling it a ''fake regime'' that cannot continue to exist.

''Some 60 years have passed since the end of World War II. Why should the people of Germany and Palestine pay now for a war in which the current generation was not involved?'' Ahmadinejad said at a news conference.

''We say that this fake regime (Israel) cannot not logically continue to live,'' he said.

The remarks by the hard-line leader came a day after interim Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert urged the international community to work against Iran's nuclear program, saying Tehran's ambitions threaten not only Israel but all of Western civilization.

Israel has long identified Iran as its biggest threat, and these concerns have grown amid repeated calls by Ahmadinejad for Israel's destruction.

''From the point of view of seriousness, this tops the state of Israel's list, it is potentially an existential threat,'' a government statement quoted Olmert telling the weekly Cabinet meeting.

''The Iranian nuclear program should concern many countries, especially those with global responsibility,'' Olmert said, adding that the international front against Iran should include the United States, Europe and other Western countries.

Also Monday, a top Iranian official said Tehran is prepared to freeze its uranium enrichment for a short time, but this should not be construed as a readiness to abandon it.

''Iran would not have a problem with a short-term suspension (of uranium enrichment). But the difficulty is that the West and the United States would use that as an excuse for extending'' the suspension, said Hasan Rowhani, a member of the Supreme National Security Council.

Rowhani's statement was not immediately endorsed by other officials and it was unclear if he spoke for the government.

The comments came four days before Friday's expiration of a U.N. Security Council deadline for Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors material for nuclear warheads.

''Their final aim is to prevent Iran from completing the enrichment technology,'' Rowhani said. ''Our red line in Iran's nuclear case is that Iran's rights must be guaranteed and we must be able to enrich (uranium).''

The United States says Iran is using a civilian nuclear program as a cover for producing weapons. Iran denies that, saying its program is designed only to generate electrical power.

Earlier this month, Iran announced that for the first time it had enriched uranium with the use of 164 centrifuges, a step toward large-scale enrichment -- which would be necessary to for making nuclear fuel or weapons.

Iran president says no need now for US talks Yahoo! News
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Monday there was no need for U.S.-Iran talks now that a permanent Iraqi government was in place. Asked whether he believed Iran and the United should still hold talks over Iraq, he told a news conference: "By God's will, we think that right now, because of the presence of a permanent government of Iraq, there is no need." Iran and the United States had previously agreed to discuss how to stabilize Iraq, where a four-month-old deadlock over forming a government of national unity was broken on Saturday. Iraqi Prime Minister-designate Jawad al-Maliki is now choosing a cabinet to share power among Shi'ites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds to try to halt violence and avert a sectarian civil war. Ahmadinejad also said he did not expect sanctions to be imposed on Iran over its nuclear program. "I think it is very unlikely for them to be so stupid to do that," he said when asked about pressure by some Western states for sanctions to curb Iran's atomic ambitions. "I think even the two or three countries who oppose us are wise enough not to resort to such a big mistake," he said.

WESTERN PRESSURE IRKS AVERAGE IRANIANS: THREATS OF SANCTIONS OR MILITARY ACTION WORRY SOME IRANIANS, BUT HAVE UNITED MOST HERE IN DEFIANCE - ANGUS MCDOWALL (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, APRIL 24)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0424/p06s03-wome.html

WESTERN PRESSURE IRKS AVERAGE IRANIANS: THREATS OF SANCTIONS OR MILITARY ACTION WORRY SOME IRANIANS, BUT HAVE UNITED MOST HERE IN DEFIANCE - ANGUS MCDOWALL (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, APRIL 24)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0424/p06s03-wome.html

BUSH'S THOUSAND DAYS - ARTHUR SCHLESINGER JR. (WASHINGTON POST, APRIL 24): A thousand days remain of President Bush's last term -- days filled with ominous preparations for and dark rumors of a preventive war against Iran. There is no more dangerous thing for a democracy than a foreign policy based on presidential preventive war.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6042301014.html

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT: TALK OF A U.S. STRIKE ON IRAN IS EERILY REMINISCENT OF THE RUN-UP TO THE IRAQ WAR - ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI (LOS ANGELES TIMES, APRIL 2)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions

DIFFERENT COUNTRY, SAME PROPAGANDA: THE US PUBLIC IS BEING PREPPED FOR WAR ON IRAN IN WAYS THAT ECHO TO ILL-FATED WAR ON IRAQ - EMAD MEKAY (AL-AHRAM)
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/791/re7.htm

ANTI-IRANIAN HYSTERIA - ERIC MARGOLIS (LEW ROCKWELL.COM, APRIL 23): Iran poses no real military threat to anyone, but listening to the Bush Administration or the US media one would think that Tehran was about to unleash a nuclear holocaust on the world.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis25.html

ATTACK IRAN, IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION - JEREMY BRECHER AND BRENDAN SMITH (NATION, APRIL 22/COMMON DREAMS)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0422-22.htm

AT THE VERY LEAST, LET'S NOT REPEAT IRAQ PAUL GESSING (ANTIWAR.COM, APRIL 24): If President Bush takes us to war and Congress lets him do it without a constitutional declaration of war, we will have learned nothing from the history of Iraq and will thus be doomed to repeat it (or worse).
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/gessing.php?articleid=8890

EYE OF THE BEHOLDER - ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE (WASHINGTON TIMES, APRIL 24): At least three unofficial Iranian emissaries have been in Washington this spring with the same recommendation: Send a high-ranking current or former U.S. official to Qom for secret talks with Ayatollah Ali Khameini to explore a geopolitical deal before Iran passes yet another nuclear milestone.
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/200604...91905-7415r.htm

TEHRAN'S TRUMP CARD - CLIFFORD KUPCHAN (LOS ANGELES TIME, APRIL 23): Tehran's oil could well force Washington to act alone, if it acts at all.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions

THE FRIGHTENED EUROPEAN EDITORIAL (CHICAGO TRIBUNE