Iran's Offer of Help to Rebuild
Afghanistan Heralds New Age of Diplomacy With the US
by Julian Borger
Senior western officials yesterday heralded a new spring in relations with
Iran, after the Islamic regime made an historic offer to help US-led efforts
in Afghanistan.
For the first time since Barack Obama came to office, US and Iranian
officials met at an international conference in The Hague, with diplomats
saying a possible turning point may have been reached between the US and the
country it labelled part of the axis of evil seven years ago.
Washington's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke,
had an informal meeting with the Iranian delegate, Mohammad Mehdi
Akhundzadeh. The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, later described the
exchange as "unplanned but cordial", adding that they had agreed to "stay in
touch".
Mark Malloch Brown, Britain's foreign office minister for Africa, Asia and
the United Nations, said Iranian offers of help could mark a new "spring in
the relationship" between the west and Iran.
He was responding to Akhundzadeh's public pledge at the conference of
Iranian co-operation in counter-narcotics and development efforts in
Afghanistan. . . .
[President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into
motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of
propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and
international financial transactions.--"Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran," ABC News, May
22, 2007]
["The attack was a warning to Iran and other adversaries, showing Israel's
intelligence capability and its willingness to mount operations far beyond
its borders in order to defend itself from gathering threats,"--"Israeli warplanes 'bombed Sudan
convoy'," Reuters, March 31, 2009]
[The Obama administration began putting its hopes of building a new
relationship with Iran into action Tuesday, signaling an ambitious push to
create an atmosphere of trust after three decades of animosity.--Glenn
Kessler, "At Summit on Afghanistan, U.S. Extends a Hand to
Iran," Washington Post, April 1, 2009]
[The primary imperative for the United States and President Barack Obama is
to put an end to Iran's nuclear race, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said
before his swearing-in Tuesday, adding that if the US failed to do so Israel
might be forced to resort to a military strike on the Islamic Republic's
nuclear installations.--"Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu: We may
be forced to attack Iran," Jerusalem Post, April 1, 2009]
[ . . . there have been longstanding plans for a pipeline from Turkmenistan
in Central Asia to India, which would go - TAPI, it's called: Turkmenistan,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, India.
India needs energy, and the natural source is Iran. And, in fact, they're
discussing an Iran-to-India pipeline. But if you could get natural gas
flowing from Central Asia to India, avoiding Iran, that would support the US
policy,--"Noam
Chomsky on US Expansion of Afghan Occupation, the Uses of NATO,"
democracynow.org, April 3, 2009]
[Iran has said before that it would consider stopping sensitive uranium
enrichment if guaranteed a supply of nuclear fuel from abroad. However, it
has also frequently insisted on its right to master the complete nuclear
fuel cycle, including enriching uranium, for peaceful purposes.--Raushan
Nurshayeva, "Iran
supports U.S.-backed nuclear fuel bank idea," Reuters, April 6, 2009]
[Sergei Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, said that the
Iran threat was a myth.--"Iran poses no threat
to US: Russia," Nation, April 8, 2009]
[Iran specialist Patrick Clawson, Ross's colleague at WINEP, described any
US-Iran dialogue that might emerge as mere theater. "What we've got to do
is...show the world that we're doing a heck of a lot to try and engage the
Iranians," he said. "Our principal target with these offers [to Iran] is not
Iran. Our principal target with these offers is, in fact, American public
opinion [and] world public opinion." Once that's done, he implied, the
United States would have to take out its big stick.--Robert Dreyfuss, "Dennis
Ross's Iran Plan," breitbart.com, April 7, 2009]
[ . . . since the Islamic revolution swept the CIA-installed Shah of Iran
from power, Iran's nuclear programs and its "inalienable right" - guaranteed
by the NPT - to nuclear technology had been subject to an extensive US-led
campaign of obstruction and intervention.
. . . on March 23, 2005, Iran made a confidential offer, suggested by
an advisory panel of European and U.S. scientists and experts, voluntarily
restricting certain of its inalienable rights. The offer included:
- Foregoing reprocessing of spent fuel and recovery of plutonium;
- A low ceiling on the level of enrichment;
- A limitation on the capacity of the enrichment program to that needed
to meet the contingency fuel requirements of Iran's power reactors;
- Immediate conversion of all enriched Uranium to fuel rods to preclude
even the technical possibility of further enrichment;
Furthermore, Iran offered to allow continuous on-site presence of IAEA
inspectors at uranium conversion and enrichment facilities to provide
unprecedented transparency, above and beyond even that required under the
Additional Protocol, signed, but yet to be ratified by the Iranian
Parliament.
. . . Not only would Bush-Cheney-Rice not let the E3/EU accept the offer;
they wouldn't even let the E3/EU acknowledge receipt of it.--Gordon Prather,
"Return to What Negotiations?," antiwar.com, April
11, 2009]
[Morningstar spoke of Iran as a potential gas supplier for Nabucco.
"Obviously, right now, gas from Iran creates some difficulties for the
United States as well as for other countries involved," he admitted. . . .
Interestingly, even as Morningstar spoke in Sofia, the US delegate at the
conference in Ashgabat, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Krol,
made yet another proposal involving Iran in his speech. He said the US
remained open to the prospect of gas from Central Asia being exported to
Europe via Iran, which borders Turkmenistan to the south. Krol's audience
included Iranian delegates.--M K Bhadrakumar, "US promotes
Iran in energy market," Asia Times, April 28, 2009]
["I think there is a real fear there will be a process of talking past each
other," Mr. Crooke said. "The Iranians will say, 'we want to talk about
justice and respect.' The U.S. will say, 'are you willing to give up
enrichment or not?'"
To get past that impasse with Iran, and with Islamist groups generally, the
West will need to change its diplomatic language of threats and rewards, Mr.
Crooke said, and show more respect for their adversaries' point of
view.--Robert F. Worth, "Ex-Spy Sits Down With Islamists and the West," New York
Times, May 2, 2009]
[He predicted that the next wave of proliferation would involve "virtual
nuclear weapons states", who can produce plutonium or highly enriched
uranium and possess the knowhow to make warheads, but who stop just short of
assembling a weapon. They would therefore remain technically compliant with
the NPT while being within a couple of months of deploying and using a
nuclear weapon.
"This is the phenomenon we see now and what people worry about in Iran. And
this phenomenon goes much beyond Iran. Pretty soon . . . you will have nine
weapons states and probably another 10 or 20 virtual weapons
states."--Julian Borger, "Mohamed ElBaradei warns of new nuclear age," Guardian,
May 14, 2009]
[The U.S.-Russian team also judged that it would be more than five years
before Iran is capable of building both a nuclear warhead and a missile
capable of carrying it over long distances. And if Iran attempted such an
attack, the experts say, it would ensure its own destruction.--Joby Warrick
and R. Jeffrey Smith, "U.S.-Russian Team Deems Missile Shield in Europe
Ineffective," Washington Post, May 19, 2009]
[Israel is in the midst of a massive diplomatic, political and intelligence
campaign, both public and covert, that could lead - if those officials
behind it have their way - towards a military strike on Iran.--Richard
Silverstein, "Aipac's hidden persuaders," Guardian, May 15,
2009]
[Asked how a nuclear-armed Iran would affect their lives, 80 percent of
respondents said they expected no change. Eleven percent said they would
consider emigrating and 9 percent said they would consider relocating inside
Israel.--"Poll:
Most Israelis could live with a nuclear Iran," Reuters, June 14,
2009]
[Nabucco's viability critically depends on gas supplies from Turkmenistan
and Iran. . . . Turkmenistan clearly intends to cut back its dependence on
Russia for marketing its gas . . . From Moscow's perspective, it is equally
worrisome that Turkey and Iran have identified with Nabucco.--M K
Bhadrakumar, "Pipeline
deal is sweet music for Iran," atimes.com, July 15, 2009]
[The two-day military exercises are being closely watched by the region's
other littoral states - Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan - as well as
neighboring states in the Caucasus and Central Asia, some of which are
aligned with the West and are wary of a new level of Russia-Iran military
ties.--Kaveh L Afrasiabi, "Russia and
Iran join hands," atimes.com, July 30, 2009]
[Iran is unlikely to be able to produce enough highly enriched uranium (HEU)
for a nuclear weapon until at least 2013, according to a United States
government intelligence estimate made public last Thursday.--Daniel Luban,
"New
nuke report debunks Iran hawks," atimes.com, August 11, 2009]
["Given the fact that Article 42 [of Iran's Safeguards Agreement] is broadly
phrased and that the old version of Code 3.1 had been accepted as complying
with the requirements of this Article for some 22 years prior to the Board's
decision in 1992 to modify it as indicated above, it is difficult to
conclude that providing information in accordance with the earlier
formulation in itself constitutes non-compliance with, or a breach of, the
[NPT-related] Safeguards Agreement as such."--Gordon Prather, "IAEA Legal Expert Stifles Neocrazies,"
antiwar.com, August 22, 2009]
[Key to bringing Israel on board is a promise by the US to adopt a much
tougher line with Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons programme. The US,
along with Britain and France, is planning to push the United Nations
security council to expand sanctions to include Iran's oil and gas industry,
a move that could cripple its economy.--Ewen MacAskill and Julian Borger, "Barack Obama on brink of deal for Middle East peace
talks," Guardian, August 25, 2009]
[Western officials are leaking stories to the Associated Press and Reuters
aimed at pressuring the outgoing chief of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, to include a summary of intelligence alleging
that Iran has been actively pursuing work on nuclear weapons in the IAEA
report due out this week.
The aim of the pressure for publication of the document appears to be to
discredit the November 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on the
Iranian nuclear programme, which concluded that Iran had ended work on
nuclear weapons in 2003.--Gareth Porter, "Planted News
Stories Show New Bid by West to Say Iran Seeks Nuclear Weapons,"
counterpunch.org, August 26, 2009]
[Iran is wary of American troop presence in Afghanistan. India is worried
that the Americans will leave Afghanistan. . . .
If the US has not put pressure on India regarding the trans Iran-Afghanistan
trade corridor, it is because it needs all the help it can get to tackle the
crisis in Afghanistan.--Sudha Ramachandran, "The elephant
in India and Iran's room," atimes.com, November 21, 2009]