by Tony Benn
[Excerpt from an interview
with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!]
I discovered after I left office, that without telling me, the plutonium
from our civil power stations, what we called "atoms for peace power
stations," all the time was going to the United States for its weapons
program. So, I've learned a lot from this. I'm now a passionate opponent of
nuclear power and nuclear weapons, always was against nuclear weapons. But
this story highlights the hypocrisy that lies behind so much of the comment
about the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
. . . but I never knew until yesterday, or until it came out a few days ago,
that we had helped to assist the Israelis in building it. . . .
Well, you see, the United States and Britain are in total breach of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Non-Proliferation Treaty says three things.
One, the nuclear powers will agree to disarm collectively. Secondly, that
other countries can develop nuclear technology. And thirdly, that nuclear
powers will give absolute assurances they will never use nuclear weapons
against a non-nuclear state. And both the United States and Britain have now
said that if their security was at stake, they would use nuclear weapons.
What Bush has done -- I don't think you realize it -- that make the case for
the spread of nuclear weapons, because I tell you this, if Iran had nuclear
weapons now, he would not dare to attack it. So, actually, Bush is
encouraging the spread, and when he went to India the other day, which isn't
a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, he signed an agreement. So, I
mean, the thing is total hypocrisy. I think if we could get that clear, then
we can consider how we deal with the situation that faces us.
. . . I was Energy Minister in 1976, thirty years ago, and I had three hours
with the Shah in Iran. The Shah, as you know, had been put there by the
C.I.A. They got rid of Mosaddeq, the very courageous Iranian leader, and
they put the Shah on the throne. And when I was there, the Americans were
pushing me to give nuclear technology to the Shah. And indeed, President
Gerald Ford, with Cheney as one of his very junior officials, and I rather
think Wolfowitz involved as well, was trying to get Iran to adopt nuclear
power.
. . . those three statements [Vice President Dick Cheney's, Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's on Iran's
nuclear program] would justify Iran going to the Security Council and making
a complaint that those three statements constituted a threat to them and a
threat to world peace. Now, of course, with the veto, would never get it
through, but that is something that if it were the other way round,
supposing Iranian ministers had made that statement, Bush would have made a
preemptive strike.
. . . and there are far more explicit statements than that from the Israelis
and from others - if you're under attack, or threatened attack, I suppose
it's reasonable to say, "If you attack me, there will be consequences." Now,
don't think I'm defending Ahmadinejad, who has made some statements that
have been very unhelpful, but this is all being built up.
Remember when Colin Powell went to the Security Council and said he had
pictures of mobile biological laboratories, a complete lie, and it's a
terrible thing to say, but I no longer feel under any obligation to believe
what my own prime minister says. I've never - I've disagreed with prime
ministers in the past. But I do not feel we are told the truth, and I don't
think the President tells the truth, and we are being moved into a situation
rather like Iraq, where, you remember, they went to the U.N. Security
Council, couldn't get support, so they attacked, anyway, and if I were the
Iranians, I would be very concerned.
I broadcast to Iran about once a week, and I say to them exactly what I'm
saying to you, and I think there is a danger. I don't think the United
States plans to invade Iran, but to bomb it. And when they complain that
Iran is involved in Iraq, well, who really is involved in Iraq? United
States and Britain have occupied the country, and then they say Iran is
providing some support for the Shias. . . .
We never say about Guantanamo Bay the truth, which is that America has
kidnapped these people and is holding them as hostages. We say it when the
Iraqis seize people, but there's been a kidnapping of all of these people by
the United States, and they're held outside international law.
. . . Brian Haw is a very principled man. He's been there, and his
revolutionary slogans say things like, "Don't kill children." "Love thy
neighbor as thyself," from the Bible, but this so worried the government
that they introduced an act of Parliament with the incredible title, the
Serious Crime and Disorder Act. So it is now a serious crime and disorder to
say, "Love thy neighbor as thyself," within yards of Parliament.
AUDIO/VIDEO/FULL TEXT
[Tony Benn was a Cabinet minister in the Wilson and Callaghan governments
from 1964 - 79, as Minister of Technology, Secretary of State for both
Industry and Energy and President of the Council of European Energy
ministers in 1977.]
"The world's nuclear
arsenal," BBC News, May 2, 2000
"NUCLEAR WEAPONS
DATABASE," Center for Defense Information, February 3, 2003
Harold Pinter, "The Nobel
Lecture," Nobelprize.org, December 7, 2005
Enver Masud, "Iran Has an 'Inalienable Right' to
Nuclear Energy," The Wisdom Fund, January 16, 2006
Patrick J. Buchanan, "Bush Blows Hole Through
Non-Proliferation Treaty," Antiwar.com, March 8, 2006
[Developing a new weapon would also, according to expert advice from Cherie
Booth's Matrix chambers, be a material breach of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. . . .
"The Trident missiles will last for another 20 years," he said. "Who on
earth are we going to take on with them anyway? Replacing them wrecks any
standing we have when we preach non-proliferation to countries like
Iran. . . .
The FPC
report says that Britain's independent deterrent is an illusion. The
missiles are stored in the United States and have to be collected by a
British submarine before it goes on patrol."--Michael Smith, "Revealed:
UK develops secret nuclear warhead," Sunday Times, March 12, 2006]
[Last week, former Israeli Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said in Washington
that the West does have a military option against Iran and that a joint
US-NATO-Israeli air strike against dozens of nuclear facilities in Iran
could set back Teheran's nuclear programs for several years.--Nathan
Guttman, "US monitoring Israel's Iran options,"
Jerusalem Post, March 13, 2006]
"US backs
first-strike attack plan," BBC News, March 16, 2006
[It is obvious that Bush intends to attack Iran and that he will use every
means to bring war about.--Paul Craig Roberts, "Is Another 9/11 in the
Works?," antiwar.com, March 16, 2006]
Gordon Prather, "Washington: The
Biggest NPT Violator," antiwar.com, March 18, 2006
[Nuclear Weapons: Their use, or the threat of their use, necessarily
constitutes state terrorism. They are the only real "weapon of mass
destruction."
The second thing to remember is that they are absolutely indispensable to
any nation that wishes to maintain even the kind of sovereignty still
available in our ever smaller and more interconnected modern world. . . .
Sadly, the NPT provides the perfect mechanism for leveraging the minor issue
of Iran's potential nuclear program into a trumped-up confrontation with the
rest of the world, thereby creating the route by which the U.S. will
manipulate the UN into (ultimately) providing the minimal cover it needs for
its military confrontation with Iran.--Randal Mark, "Nonproliferation:
From Noble Lie to Pretext for War," antiwar.com, March 21, 2006]
["The Security Council reaffirms its commitment to the Treaty on the
Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons and recalls the right of States Party,
in conformity with articles I and II of that Treaty, to develop research,
production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without
discrimination."--Gordon Prather, "Neo-Crazy Plans for
Iran," antiwar.com, April 15, 2006]
Hans Blix, "Don't
forget those other 27,000 nukes," International Herald Tribune, June
8, 2006
[Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade
uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that
"incorrect," noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90
percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA
monitoring. . . .
The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a onetime CIA officer and special
assistant to John R. Bolton--Dafna Linzer, "UN Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House
Panel," Washington Post, September 14, 2006]
[The National Nuclear Security Administration announced on Friday that it
had selected a design by the California-based Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW). It would be the
first of a new generation of secure and reliable nuclear warheads
initially intended for the Navy's submarine-launched intercontinental
ballistic missiles. . . .
Sen. Dianne Feinstein . . . questioned how other countries would view the
U.S. effort to develop new nuclear weapons at the same time that the United
States is pushing Iran, North Korea and other countries to drop nuclear
weapons programs.--Walter Pincus, "Nuclear Warhead Plan Draws Opposition,"
Washington Post, March 4, 2007]
Frida Berrigan, "The
United States' Nuclear Hypocrisy," alternet.org, March 8, 2007