(no subject)
Nov. 14th, 2004 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ergNuclear cynic.
Iran 'to halt uranium enrichment' © BBC MMIV
Iran has reportedly agreed to suspend uranium enrichment, as part of a deal with the EU aimed at resolving the dispute over its nuclear programme.
Diplomats told news agencies Tehran had sent a letter of acceptance to the United Nation's nuclear watchdog.
The EU has offered Iran a trade deal and a chance to buy nuclear fuel in exchange for the suspension of its uranium enrichment activities.
Iran insists its nuclear programme is purely for civilian use.
But Washington has accused Iran of wanting to develop nuclear arms.
Successful uranium enrichment could be seen as a key stage in the development of weapons-grade nuclear material.
The EU states have urged Iran to halt plans to enrich more than 30 metric tons of uranium - in line with a resolution passed by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in September.
There has been no official confirmation of Tehran's response as yet.
The IAEA has warned that if Iran fails to agree by 25 November, it may take the matter to the Security Council, which has the power to impose economic sanctions.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4011535.stm
Published: 2004/11/14 17:47:11 GMT
Britain, France and Germany are to present Iran with a deal this week - a package of incentives such as trade ties and imported nuclear fuel - in return for Tehran's total suspension of all uranium enrichment activities. © BBC MMIV
But Iran has been quite categorical about saying it will not stop its uranium enrichment, only suspend it, and only under certain conditions.This view is strongly endorsed by many ordinary Iranians, irrespective of their allegiance to the regime.
"Why should the US, Britain and Israel all have nuclear weapons and not us?" asks student Saida Hussain. It is a frequently repeated reaction, but Saida says she is willing to fight for Iran's rights if it comes to war.The 22-year-old has come to Tehran's main cemetery, Beshesht-e Zahra, to visit the grave of her uncle, who died in the Iran-Iraq war. She makes little distinction between nuclear power and nuclear weapons, but says the outside world can be sure that Iran will never use atomic weapons first."I want to tell outsiders not to think that young people today are different from young people in the early days of the revolution just because some Western culture has been penetrating into the country," she says.
Mehdi Mahmood, a 24-year-old member of the basiji or Islamic volunteer forces attached to the mosques, says: "Imagine you're in a classroom and a teacher walks in and distributes books to everybody but you. How would you feel? You feel isolated - you feel discriminated against."
No government in Iran can afford to say it is going to cancel the nuclear programme altogether ,Professor Zibakalam, He argues the nuclear issue is the same - Iran is being discriminated against by being told it cannot have enrichment technology. "They say don't give a hungry man fish to eat, but teach him how to catch them for himself," Mehdi says, using another down-to-earth metaphor to express Iran's need to master the fuel cycle independently. Ali - who doesn't want to give his real name - is a professional actor with little love for the regime, but he says that as an Iranian, the nuclear issue makes him feel humiliated."Imagine I've written a play and someone wants to censor it - I would feel suffocated," he says, adding that the nuclear issue is the same thing on a bigger, more international scale.
He wants his country to have a respectable position in the world, and argues it should not be forced to accept something against its interests. From reformers to hardliners, supporters or opponents of the Islamic system, there are few voices against Iran seeking nuclear technology. There are no Greenpeace-style activists in Iran questioning the country's rapid drive towards nuclear fuel. Some have even likened the current mood on the nuclear issue to the 1950s, when public opinion was solidly behind the government's attempts to nationalise its oil industry in the face of external exploitation.
"I could very well imagine that if the United States attacks Iran and the excuse is human rights, Iran's interference in Iraq, Iran's support for international terrorism, then maybe many Iranians will say you shouldn't have done this," says Professor Zibakalam of Tehran University's political science department. "But if the United States or Israel attacks Iran over the fact that Iran has been trying to develop its nuclear industry, then I think that public support would rally around the regime," he explains, pointing to the sense of growing nationalism.
When a Libyan-style solution was suggested - surrendering control of the nuclear fuel cycle in return for greater trade incentives - the reaction of a top Iranian official was hurt pride. It is clear from Professor Zibakalam that nuclear power seems to be increasingly bound up with Iran's self image: "No government in Iran can afford to say that because of international and US pressure it will cancel the nuclear programme altogether."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3758762.sm
I read this and think they're paying other countries for their energy, which will be less than the economic sanctions and then they'll go on developing their nuclear weapons because it's their country to protect and no one else gets to make these decisions for them.
They'll go with these discussions and payments, for the trade deal and this will actually enrich their economy. Pay the tithe, bring in materials which will confuse the inspectors by the time they arrive and avoid having required inspectors in the meantime.
Why do I think this? Because I don't imagine the U.S. would allow anyone to tell us whether we can have such weapons, not for a second.
Iran 'to halt uranium enrichment' © BBC MMIV
Iran has reportedly agreed to suspend uranium enrichment, as part of a deal with the EU aimed at resolving the dispute over its nuclear programme.
Diplomats told news agencies Tehran had sent a letter of acceptance to the United Nation's nuclear watchdog.
The EU has offered Iran a trade deal and a chance to buy nuclear fuel in exchange for the suspension of its uranium enrichment activities.
Iran insists its nuclear programme is purely for civilian use.
But Washington has accused Iran of wanting to develop nuclear arms.
Successful uranium enrichment could be seen as a key stage in the development of weapons-grade nuclear material.
The EU states have urged Iran to halt plans to enrich more than 30 metric tons of uranium - in line with a resolution passed by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in September.
There has been no official confirmation of Tehran's response as yet.
The IAEA has warned that if Iran fails to agree by 25 November, it may take the matter to the Security Council, which has the power to impose economic sanctions.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4011535.stm
Published: 2004/11/14 17:47:11 GMT
Britain, France and Germany are to present Iran with a deal this week - a package of incentives such as trade ties and imported nuclear fuel - in return for Tehran's total suspension of all uranium enrichment activities. © BBC MMIV
But Iran has been quite categorical about saying it will not stop its uranium enrichment, only suspend it, and only under certain conditions.This view is strongly endorsed by many ordinary Iranians, irrespective of their allegiance to the regime.
"Why should the US, Britain and Israel all have nuclear weapons and not us?" asks student Saida Hussain. It is a frequently repeated reaction, but Saida says she is willing to fight for Iran's rights if it comes to war.The 22-year-old has come to Tehran's main cemetery, Beshesht-e Zahra, to visit the grave of her uncle, who died in the Iran-Iraq war. She makes little distinction between nuclear power and nuclear weapons, but says the outside world can be sure that Iran will never use atomic weapons first."I want to tell outsiders not to think that young people today are different from young people in the early days of the revolution just because some Western culture has been penetrating into the country," she says.
Mehdi Mahmood, a 24-year-old member of the basiji or Islamic volunteer forces attached to the mosques, says: "Imagine you're in a classroom and a teacher walks in and distributes books to everybody but you. How would you feel? You feel isolated - you feel discriminated against."
No government in Iran can afford to say it is going to cancel the nuclear programme altogether ,Professor Zibakalam, He argues the nuclear issue is the same - Iran is being discriminated against by being told it cannot have enrichment technology. "They say don't give a hungry man fish to eat, but teach him how to catch them for himself," Mehdi says, using another down-to-earth metaphor to express Iran's need to master the fuel cycle independently. Ali - who doesn't want to give his real name - is a professional actor with little love for the regime, but he says that as an Iranian, the nuclear issue makes him feel humiliated."Imagine I've written a play and someone wants to censor it - I would feel suffocated," he says, adding that the nuclear issue is the same thing on a bigger, more international scale.
He wants his country to have a respectable position in the world, and argues it should not be forced to accept something against its interests. From reformers to hardliners, supporters or opponents of the Islamic system, there are few voices against Iran seeking nuclear technology. There are no Greenpeace-style activists in Iran questioning the country's rapid drive towards nuclear fuel. Some have even likened the current mood on the nuclear issue to the 1950s, when public opinion was solidly behind the government's attempts to nationalise its oil industry in the face of external exploitation.
"I could very well imagine that if the United States attacks Iran and the excuse is human rights, Iran's interference in Iraq, Iran's support for international terrorism, then maybe many Iranians will say you shouldn't have done this," says Professor Zibakalam of Tehran University's political science department. "But if the United States or Israel attacks Iran over the fact that Iran has been trying to develop its nuclear industry, then I think that public support would rally around the regime," he explains, pointing to the sense of growing nationalism.
When a Libyan-style solution was suggested - surrendering control of the nuclear fuel cycle in return for greater trade incentives - the reaction of a top Iranian official was hurt pride. It is clear from Professor Zibakalam that nuclear power seems to be increasingly bound up with Iran's self image: "No government in Iran can afford to say that because of international and US pressure it will cancel the nuclear programme altogether."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3758762.sm
I read this and think they're paying other countries for their energy, which will be less than the economic sanctions and then they'll go on developing their nuclear weapons because it's their country to protect and no one else gets to make these decisions for them.
They'll go with these discussions and payments, for the trade deal and this will actually enrich their economy. Pay the tithe, bring in materials which will confuse the inspectors by the time they arrive and avoid having required inspectors in the meantime.
Why do I think this? Because I don't imagine the U.S. would allow anyone to tell us whether we can have such weapons, not for a second.
