Iranian Alert -- November 16, 2003 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD

The US media almost entirely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, “this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year.” But most American’s are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East.

There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. Starting June 10th of this year, Iranians have begun taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy. Many even want the US to over throw their government.

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.

In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.

This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.

I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.

If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.

If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.

PS I have a daily ping list and a breaking news ping list. If you would like to receive alerts to these stories please let me know which list you would like to join.

A consensus on Iran

Washington Times
11.16.03

By any measure, the new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran's nuclear weapons program should be a wake-up call for anyone concerned about the acquisition of such armaments by rogue states. An IAEA report released last week to 20 governments shows that Tehran has had a nuclear program in existence for at least 18 years — one that involved using a number of technologies, including lasers, to enrich uranium.

Although written in highly technical language, the IAEA report is a broad indictment of Iran's behavior — in particular its refusal to come clean with the agency. "Iran's policy of concealment continued until last month, with cooperation being limited and reactive and slow in coming, changing and contradictory," the IAEA said. The agency added that Iran "has admitted that it produced small amounts of low-enriched uranium using both centrifuges and laser-enrichment processes ... and that it had failed to report a large number of conversion, fabrication and irradiation activities involving nuclear material, including the separation of a small amount of plutonium." In short, the IAEA report shows that Iran has violated safeguards obligations it has agreed to under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

But, after documenting in detail Iran's efforts to conceal its nuclear program from international inspectors, the IAEA bizarrely concluded that "no evidence" of an Iranian nuclear weapons program had been found. This last line drew a sharp rejoinder from Undersecretary of State John Bolton, who said Wednesday that this assertion "is simply impossible to believe." He noted that "Iran is trying to legitimize as 'peaceful and transparent' its pursuit of nuclear fuel cycle capabilities that would give it the ability to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons." The IAEA report confirms that Iran attempted to cover its tracks over the years by failing to report its activities "and in many cases, providing false declarations to the IAEA," Mr. Bolton said.

Nor is this solely the conclusion of the Bush administration. On Wednesday, the New York Times ran a major story reporting that Iran's nuclear program "turns out to have been broader than expected." The IAEA report "is full of examples showing that Iran fooled the global nuclear watchdog for years," the Times noted, adding that the IAEA's assertion that there is no evidence of a current weapons project in Iran "left many experts agape." That same day, the paper editorialized that Iran's belated agreement to more intrusive international inspections "is not good enough," and warned of the danger that terrorist groups and "rogue nations" like North Korea could produce a nuclear bomb.

That reaction to the IAEA report suggests that a new consensus may be emerging regarding Iran's cheating and concealment of its nuclear program.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20031115-114802-6806r.htm

THE AXIS OF TERROR

Carlos the Jackal pledges alliance to Osama bin Laden
by Amir Taheri
WEEKLY STANDARD
November 24, 2003

FEW CONVICTED MURDERERS and hijackers accept the label "terrorist." One who does--indeed, who embraces terrorism as among man's "noblest pursuits"--is a Venezuelan now serving a life sentence for murder in France. He is Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, better known as "Carlos the Jackal."

He has just published a book in French to announce his conversion to Islam and present his strategy for "the destruction of the United States through an orchestrated and persistent campaign of terror." Entitled "Revolutionary Islam" (Editions du Rocher, 2003) and published under the name Ilich Ramírez Sánchez-CARLOS, the book urges "all revolutionaries, including those of the left, even atheists," to accept the leadership of Islamists such as Osama bin Laden and so help turn Afghanistan and Iraq into the "graveyards of American imperialism."

Son of a militant Communist, Ilich was sent to Moscow to study at Patrice Lumumba University, an institution set up by the KGB to train terrorists from the Third World. That was in the 1970s, when the most fashionable cause was opposition to the U.S. intervention in Indochina.

Ilich opted for the less fashionable cause of Palestine, and soon moved to Lebanon, where he trained for operations organized by George Habash's People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).

Western intelligence services first noticed Ilich when he murdered two French policemen and a Lebanese informant in Paris in 1975. But the peak of his career came in 1975, when he led the team that took 11 OPEC oil ministers hostage in Vienna, then flew them to Algiers.

He spent most of the next 20 years on the run, living under assumed identities, constantly changing protectors, until his Sudanese friends finally betrayed him six years ago, when they allowed French authorities to abduct him from his home in Khartoum and fly him to Paris for trial.

In his book, Carlos recounts that he was born into a "fairly prosperous" bourgeois family. His father had attended a French school run by Catholic priests but soon rejected their beliefs. "Having lost faith in God," Carlos says, his father "looked to Marx and Lenin to fill at least part of the gap." Sánchez père was so passionate about his new creed that he named all three of his sons after the founder of Bolshevism: Vladimir, Ilich, and Lenin.

The chief interest of Carlos's book, however, lies not in the reminiscences of a bit player from the 1970s, but in the light it sheds in two areas. First, it recounts how Arab states like Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq routinely used terrorism as an instrument of state policy, often with support from the Soviet Union and its allies. And second, it illuminates the connection between radical atheism and radical religion, showing how one ideology can serve as the antechamber to another seemingly its opposite. Just as Carlos's father made Marxist-Leninist ideology his religion, so Carlos has turned his new religion into the ideology of "revolutionary Islam."

By the mid-1980s Carlos had decided that Marxism-Leninism was a dying creed. Yet its goal, the destruction of imperialism personified by the United States, remained in his view "the highest goal of humanity." Carlos had also concluded that the United States could not be destroyed by any military rival. What was needed was a campaign of terror that would separate the United States from its allies and then destroy its self-confidence. This campaign would require a large number of volunteers ready both to kill and to die for the cause. Carlos saw that only revolutionary Islam could recruit the large numbers of killers and martyrs necessary to destroy the United States.

Carlos claims that terrorism is "the cleanest and most efficient form of warfare." By killing civilians, he argues, the terrorist saps the morale of the enemy and forces its leadership to submit to the demands of the revolution or surrender. By killing a few, the terrorist saves the lives of the many. He cites several examples.

In November 1979, Iranian "students" raided the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took diplomats hostage. The Carter administration, fearful that the Americans would be executed, abandoned its "plots" against the Khomeinist revolution, and thus forestalled events that could have led to the deaths of tens of thousands of people.

Similarly, when Hezbollah suicide bombers attacked American targets in Beirut in 1983, a total of 300 Americans, including 241 Marines, were killed, forcing Washington to abandon its ambition of reshaping Lebanon. And in 1993 the murder of 18 U.S. Army Rangers in Mogadishu forced President Clinton to withdraw American peacekeepers from Somalia and abandon plans for the Horn of Africa, avoiding bigger conflicts that could have cost many more lives.

Carlos does not say why it is good for mankind to destroy the United States. His method is religious and admits of neither doubts nor counterarguments. The West is evil, and the United States is the leader of the West. Thus the United States is evil. At one point he says the United States is an incarnation of Satan (Shaytan) and should, therefore, be hated without question, just as believers hate Satan without asking why.

Carlos urges Islamist groups to conclude alliances with all radical elements, including Maoists and nationalists, in a joint campaign against the United States. He wants all radicals to rush to Afghanistan and Iraq to kill Americans, while hordes of "volunteers for martyrdom" organize suicide attacks inside the United States.

And he makes a number of forecasts: The United States will reshape Iraq, Syria will disintegrate, and Lebanon will fall apart while Hezbollah is destroyed. Kosovo will become independent, and Sudan will be carved up. Libya will surrender to the United States. Even France will be divided into smaller countries, according to what Carlos claims is a secret American plan worked out by Henry Morgenthau in the 1940s. Carlos believes that, in the medium-term at least, only two states--North Korea and Iran--will be able to resist the United States, thus representing "the last hopes of mankind." The war against the United States, then, is going to be a long one, and the Americans will win the first rounds.

One question worth exploring in all this is whether Carlos is really a Muslim. Since Islam has neither baptism nor excommunication, we have no grounds for saying he's not. But neither is there reason to think he has any authority to speak on behalf of Islam. He is an individual with a peculiar view of the world that has nothing to do with what Islam has taught for 15 centuries. Moreover, his knowledge of Islamic doctrine, theology, history, and political philosophy is almost nonexistent. He thinks the first four caliphs were members of a dynasty known as the "Rashidis," and he confuses Hajjaj Ibn Yussef, the brutal governor of Kufa, with Mansur al Hallaj, the mystic who was crucified for blasphemy.

At one point Carlos presents himself as "the voice of Islam and history." At another point he poses as an authority on theology (fiqh) and offers a plan for "reforming the faith" under which "obligations" such as prayer, fasting, and the pilgrimage to Mecca become secondary. Instead, the number one duty of Muslims becomes "fighting the United States by any means" available. He dwells on the necessity for all Muslim men to grow beards and all Muslim women to wear the "revolutionary" head-cover (the hijab) invented in Lebanon in the 1970s. He says that beards and the hijab can be used as tools of terror, to dishearten the Americans by reminding them that "their enemy Islam" is in their midst.

Carlos tells us little about the Islamic utopia that will cover the globe once Islam is established as "the sole religion of mankind." At one point he praises the Khomeinist system of rule by a mullah or group of mullahs. At another, he presents the "emirate" created by the Taliban in Afghanistan in 1998 as the model. Carlos is not interested in Chechnya, Kashmir, the Philippines, or Myanmar, where Muslim minorities are in conflict with non-Muslim states. Nor does he care if Muslims live under corrupt or even genocidal rulers, as long as those rulers are unfriendly toward the United States.

Where Islamists are fighting regimes that Carlos favors, he brands them "bandits" and "murderers." In this way he condemns Islamists who are fighting the Libyan regime. He is especially harsh on Algerian Islamist terrorists, whom he labels "gangsters." The reason is that Carlos was for years protected by the Algerian secret service.

A name-dropper, Carlos makes his own terrorist career out to have been something of historic significance. He pretends that many Arab leaders, from Muammar Qaddafi to Hafez al-Assad to Yasser Arafat, were his friends. He also claims to have known former Pakistani premier Benazir Bhutto "very well," though he does not say in what circumstances.

Carlos mentions the names of the seven men he most admires. Oddly enough, five are Palestinian Christians: George Habash, Waddi Haddad, Nayef Hawatemah, Kamal Nasser, and Naji Allosuh. Two are Muslim Arabs: the Algerian president, Abdul-Aziz Bouteflika, whom he calls "my beloved brother," and fugitive terrorist Osama bin Laden, upon whom he bestows the title of "sheikh."

Carlos's admiration for Bouteflika is based on a misunderstanding. Carlos writes that Bouteflika agreed to become president of Algeria mainly to prevent his country from being absorbed into the NATO system, "a tool of the United States." Carlos seems unaware that Algeria had already established a relationship with NATO. Indeed, at next May's NATO summit, Algeria along with three other Arab states and Israel will join a "partnership for peace" with the alliance.

Carlos is wholly dedicated to inciting Muslims to hate the United States and not at all interested in inspiring them to change the regimes that oppress them. The reason may lie in his own long association with some of the most repressive Arab regimes--regimes that, frightened by the liberation of Iraq, fear they may be the next dominoes to fall as the democratic impulse reaches the Middle East.

Amir Taheri is an Iranian journalist based in Paris.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/700

Dangerous Dabbling

November 16, 2003
The Economist

Iran has moved closer to admitting—and perhaps abandoning—all its experiments with fissile materials. But there is still a long way to go before the world can be sure it is not trying to make nuclear bombs It was, said the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, a “welcome and positive development”.

On Monday November 10th, Iran handed the agency a letter agreeing to let its inspectors make more intrusive checks on the country’s nuclear facilities and promising to stop immediately (though not necessarily permanently) all enrichment and reprocessing of nuclear materials. It was indeed good news, up to a point. Iran’s letter came as Mr ElBaradei sent a confidential report to the IAEA’s board members (which diplomats then showed to journalists) describing in unexpectedly strong language Iran’s .latest confessions of the nuclear experiments it has been conducting, in breach of its “safeguards agreement” under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The IAEA monitors Iran's nuclear programme. IRNA, Iran's official news agency, presents the official line on news events. See also the Iranian presidency and the Foreign Ministry. The Federation of American Scientists posts background information on the NPT. Australia's Uranium Information Centre gives details of the various types of nuclear reactor and how they work. The European Union outlines its relations with Iran.

Iran has repeatedly denied America’s accusation that it is using its civil nuclear-power programme as a cover for bomb-making. But it has been forced, by leaks from Iranian opposition groups and findings by IAEA inspectors, to change its story several times. It has now owned up to having secret nuclear facilities. Some of the experiments carried out there—such as producing small amounts of plutonium and uranium metal—are useful steps towards making a nuclear bomb but not much use for developing a modern nuclear-power programme, despite Iran’s insistence that this is all it is doing. The nuclear-power station that Russia is building for Iran at Bushehr on the Gulf coast is perfectly legal but questionable: why would a country with some of the world’s largest oil and gas reserves bother with the expense of nuclear power unless it had other motives?

In July, Mr ElBaradei went to Tehran, with the backing of many of the world’s main powers, to press the country’s government to sign an “additional protocol” to the NPT. This would give the IAEA’s inspectors the right to visit both declared and suspected nuclear facilities at short notice. The agency then gave Iran until the end of October to come clean about all its nuclear dabblings. Shortly before this deadline, Iran sent the IAEA what it said were full details of its activities. At the same time, the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany went to Tehran to press the regime to co-operate, and were given promises that Iran would sign up for the tougher inspections regime and suspend its enrichment of uranium (a technique useful for making either bombs or fuel for power plants).

The report that Mr ElBaradei sent to the IAEA’s board of governors on Monday analyses Iran’s latest disclosures. It says that there is no evidence, so far, that the country’s secret experiments were part of a bomb-making programme. However, it says, “given Iran’s past pattern of concealment, it will take some time before the agency is able to conclude that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes.” The report sharply criticises Iran for continuing a deliberate policy of concealment right up until last month, “with co-operation being limited and reactive and information being slow in coming, changing and contradictory.” It says Iran had pretended to have “lost” almost 2kg of uranium hexafluoride due to “leaking valves” but had in fact used this material in illicit enrichment experiments.

Diplomats expressed surprise at seeing such strong words as “failure” and “breaches” in the report. But John Bolton, a senior American official, attacked the IAEA for being too soft on Iran: the country's “massive and covert” effort to acquire nuclear capabilities made sense, he said, only as part of a programme to develop the atom bomb—so the report's conclusion that there was as yet no evidence of such a programme was “impossible to believe”.

Though Iran is playing down the significance of its experiments, arguing that they only produced tiny quantities of fissile materials, they show that the country has mastered some of the most important stages in nuclear bomb-making. Thus if it ever pulled out of the NPT, Iran could quickly have such weapons ready. In July, it brought into service a new missile capable, in theory, of carrying a nuclear warhead as far as Israel, or indeed reaching American bases in the Middle East.

On November 20th, the IAEA’s 35-country board will meet to decide what to do about Iran’s latest admissions. While Britain, Germany and France may argue that Iran’s new co-operativeness should be rewarded, America is expected to call for Iran's breaches of the NPT to be reported to the United Nations Security Council (which can choose to impose sanctions). This would infuriate the Iranian government, which no doubt hopes it has done just enough to avoid the Security Council’s censure. On Wednesday, President Muhammad Khatami hinted that the country's co-operativeness might stop if this were to happen.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2206339

US and EU may clash this week over Iran nuke

Sunday, November 16, 2003 - ©2003 IranMania.com

VIENNA, Nov 16 (AFP) - A hardline United States is set to clash this week with its more conciliatory European allies over taking Iran to the UN Security Council as a warning after two decades of hidden nuclear activities, according to diplomats.

The United Nation's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is to consider the move, which could expose Iran to punishing sanctions, when the agency's 35-nation board of governors meets Thursday in Vienna.

The United States accuses Tehran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons and wants the issue to go to the Security Council but most IAEA board members, led by Britain, France and Germany, oppose this, diplomats said.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said in a report last week that while Iran has violated international safeguards for 18 years by hiding nuclear activities that included making plutonium and enriched uranium, there was so far no evidence it is trying to make the bomb.

Britain, France and Germany have repeatedly urged opening up a dialogue with oil and gas-rich Iran while the United States does not even have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic.

A visit by the three European countries' foreign ministers to Tehran on October 21 won key concessions, including Iran's full disclosure of its past nuclear activities, a pledge to accept tougher inspections and a suspension of the enrichment of uranium.

Iran's IAEA ambassador Ali Akbar Salehi told AFP Saturday that Tehran had in October reached "an understanding" with Britain, France and Germany that it would be rewarded for its cooperation by not being taken to the Security Council.

"There has been an understanding and I'm sure that this part of the understanding is well received by the majority of the (IAEA) board," he said.

He said it was a "matter of principle" for Iran since Iran has "admitted our failures" and these had been "rectified and corrected."

Salehi said Iran "has gone to the extreme to win the trust of the international community. What else can Iran do?"

He warned that an IAEA finding that Iran is in non-compliance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a ruling that would automatically send the matter to the Security Council, would "escalate the issue into an international crisis."

Diplomats said Iran could back off from its pledge to sign an additional protocol on unannounced inspections or could resume uranium enrichment.

Britain, France and Germay are drafting a resolution for Thursday's meeting which would criticize Iran for its past failures to comply with NPT safeguards but avoid declaring it in non-compliance, diplomats said.

A diplomat said the formula might be "to make a severe judgement of Iranian lack of cooperation until October 21" but to acknowledge Tehran's cooperation since then.

The resolution would say that "Iranian cooperation must intensify within the framework of the additional protocol" to the NPT, that authorizes a rigorous inspection regime designed to prevent a country from hiding a weapons program.

The EU, Russia, non-aligned and even some Latin American states are believed to back this approach, with the United States, Canada and Australia insisting that Iran, due to its long history of of covert activities, must be declared in non-compliance if the NPT treaty is to have any meaning.

A Western diplomat said that the Russians, who have a multi-million dollar contract to build a nuclear power reactor in Iran, are particularly "afraid of strong language.

He said a non-compliance resolution could be worded in such a way that sanctions against Iran are not threatened and Tehran is given credit for cooperation.

But a diplomat for a non-aligned country said ElBaradei had not said in his report that Iran was in non-compliance and "a compromise would be to use the director general's language."

However a Western diplomat said: "The Iranians have done new and welcome things, and that has to be recognized. But that doesn't erase the past.

"It would be a bad precedent if we pretended that the past never happened."

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=19742&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

Europe, US seek common approach to Iran atom plans

By Louis Charbonneau
16 Nov 2003 11:58:35 GMT
VIENNA, Nov 16 (Reuters)

The United States and Europe are inching closer to a deal on a resolution that would criticise Iran's concealment of nuclear research which Washington says was linked to a weapons programme, diplomats say.

On Thursday, the International Atomic Energy Agency's Board of Governors meets in Vienna to discuss an IAEA report on Iran's nuclear programme, detailing 18 years of failures by Iran to inform the United Nations body of sensitive atomic activities such as uranium enrichment and plutonium production.

The United States, which says Iran's nuclear power programme is a front to develop a bomb, is pushing the 35-nation board to pass a resolution declaring that Iran has not complied with its obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and report Tehran's breaches to the U.N. Security Council.

But France, Britain and Germany want to avoid a report to the Council, which would anger Tehran and could lead to the Council imposing economic sanctions. The Europeans are drafting an IAEA board resolution that chides Iran but avoids escalating the issue to U.N. headquarters in New York.

Washington does not have enough support to get a resolution through the board that would bring Iran before the Security Council -- its only allies appear to be Canada, Australia and New Zealand -- but both Europeans and Americans want a compromise that would at least let the board reach a consensus.

Diplomats told Reuters that France suggested noting Iran had violated the NPT, while the board would decide not to notify the Security Council and keep the issue at the IAEA in Vienna.

One Western diplomat who follows IAEA matters closely said the use of wording on "non-compliance" brought the proposal "closer to U.S. thinking on the issue".

The diplomat said there was another possible compromise -- notifying the Security Council of Iran's non-compliance "purely for informational purposes", with no threat of sanctions.

"It's impossible to say how this will all play out," the diplomat said. "It's too early to say what the board will do."

Diplomats said they hoped the Franco-German-British draft would be tabled before Thursday's IAEA board meeting.

IRAN'S WARNING

Iran, which denies having a secret weapons programme, said on Thursday any reference to Iran failing to comply with the NPT would be "unacceptable" and that reporting Iran to the Security Council would be a mistake with "unpredictable consequences".

"Things could very easily get out of control," Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Akbar Salehi, told Reuters.

Diplomats also said that the idea of a U.S.-European split on the Iran issue had been exaggerated, though they acknowledged that Europe and the United States disagreed on whether engagement or isolation was the best way of dealing with Iran.

On October 21, the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany succeeded in convincing Tehran to halt temporarily its uranium enrichment programme and accept a tougher regime of short-notice IAEA inspections of its nuclear sites.

This was widely described as proof that Europe's policy of engagement with Iran was superior, but one non-U.S. diplomat said Washington's tough approach deserved much of the credit for forcing Iran to open up its programme over the last year.

"Without the U.S. hard line, the international community would never have taken action" after an Iranian opposition group said in August 2002 that Iran was hiding a uranium enrichment plant and other facilities from the IAEA, the diplomat said.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L16321433.htm

Five weeks in Iran

By LUCINDA KIDD HACKNEY, Special to The News-Press
Published by news-press.com on November 16, 2003

The room is filled with the frenetic drumming of five young men pounding on giant dafs. They kneel on the Persian carpet. Sweat runs down their faces. The singer, body swaying to the rhythm, shouts the name of the Shiite Moslems’ beloved Ali, cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed, over and over. We are carried away by the emotion of the music.

I’m winding up a five-week journey in Iran (culturally known as Persia, which was the official name of the country until 1934). This is my going-away party, given by neighbors I got to know in the Kerman City suburb where I am staying, in the southeastern desert.

The hostess passes mounds of fresh fruit and pastry between glasses of steaming tea. In grand Persian style, she praises me for my visit and I try to reciprocate with the proper Farsi replies: “May your hand not hurt," and "I’ll die for you," for example.

According to Iranian travel industry statistics, fewer than 2,000 citizens from North and South America combined visited Iran in 1999, the latest year for which numbers are available. The U.S. State Department web site posts cautions to Americans about traveling to this country that stretches between Turkey and Iraq on the west and Afghanistan and Pakistan on the east. So what was I doing there?

The vacation was the culmination of a 24-year-old dream. It began in 1978, while I was at a tiny university in Oklahoma, and grew close to an Iranian roommate. After a year she went back to marry and help build the new Islamic Republic after the revolution overthrew the Shah. We decided I would visit after things settled down.

Time passed and Iran seemed ever further away as the hostage crisis in 1979 caused the United States and Iran to break diplomatic ties. Relations were further strained when the United States sided with Iraq in its eight-year-war with Iran, from 1980 to 1988. Then there was the U.S. trade embargo clamped on Iran in 1995, for allegedly sponsoring terrorist acts through connections with the Arab group Hezbollah.

Recent reports indicated things had relaxed in Iran since the reform-minded president Hojjat-ol-Eslam Seyed Mohammed Khatami was elected in 1997. I decided to search for my friend.

In an old address book I found her family’s address. I gave it a shot, and sent the letter, including my e-mail address.

Almost five months later, I received an amazing e-mail: "Salaam Cindy jan!!!!!!… I received your letter a few hours ago….Me and my family would love to see you here in Iran…"

My Lonely Planet guidebook and all the Iranian travel web sites I checked were adamant that it would be hard for a U.S. citizen to get a tourist visa, without being on an organized tour with an Iranian company.

I sent all my passport details, to my friend Zari. Her 22-year-old son, Ali, started calling on travel agencies in Kerman.

The owners of Kerman Travel had gotten an American a visa once before and agreed to try once I bought a roundtrip flight to Iran and sent in my itinerary to assure the foreign ministry I had an exit date.

I got the visa five days before my flight. After a 10-hour flight to Europe, a 10-hour wait in Zurich, and a five-hour flight to Iran, I landed at 4:45 a.m., Aug. 6, at Mehrabad Airport in sprawling greater Tehran, estimated population: 12 million.

Along with the other female passengers, I slipped on proper Islamic dress before exiting the plane: manteau (a raincoat-like garment that covers female curves and hangs somewhere below the knee) and scarf.

Entering the airport I saw no signs that said anything about "Death to America" or "America – the Great Satan," those famous slogans from early revolution days. In fact, there was nothing scary at all about the airport.

I picked up my luggage, went through customs in about 30 seconds, and exited the doors into the arms of old friends.

Although I’d expected to be watched during my visit, no one ever asked me for my identification except when I applied for a visa extension – which was granted without a hitch.

My friends took me to all the major tourist areas in southeast and central Iran. The historic sites were spectacular, the Islamic architecture with its mosaic tiles and complex domes was breathtaking and the desert mountains were magnificent.

As a child in Sunday school I had heard a lot about ancient Persia, which is covered extensively in the Old Testament books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther and Daniel. So walking up the Grand Stairway of Persepolis – the Greek name by which most of the world knows the city started by Darius I in 518 B.C. – was an awesome experience.

At the top of the steps is the gateway to Xerxes’ palace, guarded by two 20-foot-tall bull relief statues.

Accompanied by a 22-year-old Iranian guide with excellent English we spent about six hours touring this World Heritage Site. The grounds are about two by three football fields in size and chock-full of columns and portals, statues, relief panels, the tombs of Artaxerxes II and III and a museum.

Of course ancient Persia is just one aspect of Iran. The culture of the predominately Zoroastrian population was changed forever by Arab conquest in 637 A.D. Most of the country converted to Islam within several hundred years. But the Persian people tenaciously held on to their native language and pursued their own cultural refinements.

I quickly learnedy that Iranians don’t like being called Arab. A little over half the population is descended from the ancient Elamites, part of the Babylonian Empire, or the Arians, whose ancestors came from the Central Asian Steppes. There are also Iranians of Azari, Kurdish and Turkish ancestry. Only about 4 percent can claim Arabic lineage. Subsequently, Persian cuisine, art, poetry and classical music are very different from their Arabic counterparts.

There is no better example of distinctly Persian Islamic architecture than the Emam Khomeini Square in Esfahan, constructed by Shah Abbas I in the early 1600s. We took a horse-drawn carriage ride around the square at sunset. The warm light shining on the turquoise, yellow, aqua and deep-blue tiles of the two giant-domed mosques was spectacular.

As the sun set we were joined by hundreds of Iranian tourists who showed up for what seems the favorite past-time in the country – picnicking with everything but the kitchen sink.

I asked people how often they saw people from the United States. Almost no one had ever met an American – except those of Iranian decent. But they all seemed glad to see me.

Something that made me glad were the low prices. The most expensive meal I ate was at a café on a mountain road in northern Tehran. A dish of six grilled lamb chops, saffron rice and salad was about $8. The average meal cost $3. Moderate hotel rooms were $30 a night and the five-stars were $75 to $120.

Nothing in Iran was as austere as I had expected. It appears the interpretation of Islamic law has eased since the revolution.

Although more than half of the women wore chadors — those body-length wraps that cover hair to ankles — many younger women in the cities flaunted shorter and tighter-fitting manteaus and many wore their long hair flowing out the back of their scarves. Young couples, probably engaged or married, held hands in public. And there was a lot of lively music — even Western pop music — blasted out open car windows.

If there was anything negative about Iran at all, I guess I’d have to say the air pollution, trash and traffic in Tehran. Iranian driving as a whole would scare the living daylights out of most Americans. My mouth dropped open many times as motorcycles loaded with families of four and five members — no one wearing a helmet — wove in and out of the dented cars. But I just kept telling myself: At least there’s nobody driving drunk here.

I just scratched the surface of multi-faceted Iran in my five-week trip. There’s so much more to see. I still dream of camping with nomads and riding horses with the Turkmen people. Maybe next year, I tell myself.

http://www.news-press.com/news/lifestyle/031116iran.html

Top Iraqi scientist flees to Iran as weapons hunters struggle to keep tabs on key people

By DAFNA LINZER
The Associated Press
11/16/03

The Iraqi scientist who headed Saddam Hussein's long-range missile program has fled to neighboring Iran, a country identified as a state sponsor of terrorism with a successful missile program and nuclear ambitions, U.S. officers involved in the weapons hunt told The Associated Press.

Dr. Modher Sadeq-Saba al-Tamimi's departure comes as top weapons makers from Saddam's deposed regime find themselves eight months out of work but with skills that could be lucrative to militaries or terrorist organizations in neighboring countries. U.S. officials have said some are already in Syria and Jordan.

Experts long feared the collapse of Saddam's rule could lead to the kind of scientific brain-drain the United States tried to prevent as the former Soviet Union collapsed. But the Bush administration had no plan for Iraqi scientists and instead officials suggested they could be tried for war crimes.

"There are a couple hundred Iraqis who are really good scientists, particularly in the missile area," said Jonathan Tucker, a former U.N. inspector now with the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute in California. "In the chemical and biological areas, their work wasn't state of the art but it was good enough to be of interest to other countries."

Only now is the State Department exploring the possibility of a government-funded program to block a scientific exodus and prevent Iraqis from doing future research in weapons of mass destruction. Initial cost estimates for the program run about $16 million, according to a Nov. 3 draft proposal obtained by AP.

Two members of the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency involved in questioning scientists in custody told AP the Iraqis continue to deny the existence of illicit weapons programs in Iraq. Dozens of Iraqi scientists have been questioned and less than 30 remain in custody. All of them, including senior members of Saddam's regime, have been subjected to lie-detector tests, which have come up clean on weapons questioning, the DIA officers said.

But U.S. scientists and weapons experts, who all spoke on condition of anonymity, said they're having trouble finding some Iraqi experts in Iraq and have no way of tracking ones they've met.

"They could leave Baghdad tomorrow and we'd never know," said one senior official involved in the hunt. "Very few are obligated to tell us where they're going or what they're up to."

U.N. inspectors spoke with Dr. Modher in Baghdad a week before the U.S.-led war began on March 20. Two U.S. weapons investigators say they believe he crossed the Iraq-Iran border on foot at least two months after U.S. forces took Baghdad.

His activities in Iran are unclear and may explain why his disappearance hasn't been publicly disclosed. The CIA declined to discuss its efforts with Iraqi scientists or identify individuals.

Thought to be in his mid-50's, the Czech-educated scientist specialized in missile engines. He met numerous times with U.N. inspectors during the 1990s and earlier this year when he argued that the Al-Samoud missile system under his command wasn't in violation of a U.N. range limit. The inspectors determined otherwise when tests showed it could fly more than 93 miles. They quickly began destroying the Iraqi stock, much to his frustration.

"Dr. Modher was declared by Iraq to have been one of the principal figures in their missile programs," said Ewen Buchanan, spokesman for the U.N. inspectors.

In the late 1980s, Modher headed up the Iraqi military's Project 1728, part of an effort to produce engines for longer-range missiles.

He was the protege and favored colleague of Iraqi Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel, Saddam's right-hand man and son-in-law who briefly defected to Jordan in 1995. There, Kamel told U.N. inspectors during interrogations about his work and Dr. Modher's efforts to build a missile powerful enough to strike most major European cities.

According to the interrogation transcripts, Kamel said Modher and a nuclear physicist named Mahdi Obeidi both took work and documents from their offices. U.N. inspectors investigated the claim but found nothing.

In July of this year, Obeidi gave the CIA a stack of papers and a piece of equipment that had been buried in his backyard for 12 years. In return, he has become the only Iraqi scientist allowed to move to the United States since the beginning of the U.S. occupation.

Other than Obeidi, who is living along the East Coast with his family, another scientist known to have left the country is Jaffar al-Jaffer who founded Iraq's nuclear program in the 1980s. He's in the United Arab Emirates, where U.S. troops are stationed, and has been questioned by U.S. and British intelligence officials.

But Jaffar, like a handful of senior scientists being held by U.S. forces in Iraq, hasn't provided any information on the whereabouts of suspected chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. While President Bush said he launched the war to disarm Iraq of its deadly arsenal, such weapons remain elusive.

David Kay, the chief weapons hunter, has said his teams so far have found new information on Iraqi missile systems. But a conversation with Modher could have cleared up unanswered questions about Iraq's true capabilities for delivering weapons of mass destruction.

Modher traveled to Germany in 1987 to buy high-tech equipment through H & H Metalform, a company whose senior officers were later tried in Germany and found guilty of violating the country's export control laws, U.N. inspectors said.

The equipment enabled Iraq to make components for Scud missiles similar to the ones they later fired at Israel and Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War.

When that conflict ended, Iraq faced U.N. sanctions forbidding it from purchasing any new weapons-making equipment.

But four years later, Modher was caught by U.N. inspectors when he inquired about Russian-made gyroscopes from a Palestinian middleman. At the time, Tariq Aziz, then Iraq's deputy prime minister, told U.N. inspectors Modher had acted on his own and would be punished for breaking sanctions. He allegedly spent 2½ years in jail.

Kay told reporters in Washington last month that "senior Iraqi officials, both military and scientific" had moved to Jordan and Syria, "both pre-conflict and some during the conflict, and some immediately after the conflict."

He didn't mention Iran, although its long, shared border with Iraq has been an easy crossing point for militants and Shiite pilgrims headed to Iraqi shrines.

Jordanian and Syrian officials dismissed claims that wanted Iraqis are inside their countries and Kay has offered no names of those believed to have fled.

But signs of an exodus have led to a renewed push by nonproliferation experts and government officials to keep the scientists from wandering.

The 11-page State Department plan aimed at preventing Iraqi scientists from fleeing is entitled "The Science Technology and Engineering Mentorship Initiative for Iraq."

Such initiatives are critical but late, said Tucker of the Monterey Institute.

"This is something that should have been done immediately after the war ended," he said. "The initial approach, which was to treat them as criminals and threaten them with prosecution only makes scientists want to leave or stay away."

http://www.nj.com/newsflash/international/index.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?a0496_BC_Iraq-TheScientists

Americans angry at losing the game
IRIB News

Tehran, Nov 16 - Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi here on Saturday said that given the Americans lost the game in their claims over Iran's peaceful nuclear activities, their frustration and excuses to abuse the current situation is quite natural.

Addressing journalists after arriving in Iran from his three-day visit to China and Japan, he added that as stated by the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Elbaradei in his report on Iran's nuclear program, there is no evidence that Iran intends to develop nuclear weapons.

He hoped that given the attempts currently underway, the due decision on the issue will be made in the upcoming meeting of the IAEA board of governors and that it will be finalized.

Turning his "fruitful" visit to China and Japan and his briefing of the officials of both states on the latest developments in Iran's nuclear program, he termed Iran's expectation from the two countries in this respect as the most pivotal issue discussed with the Chinese and Japanese officials.

"In earlier visits to China and Japan, they had advised Iran to accept the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) additional protocol.

Given Iran's recent positive approach to the issue, it is high time for the two countries to cooperate and assist in settling the problems currently facing Iran in this respect," he added.

The official noted that he informed the Chinese and Japanese officials that given Iran has provided the agency with information beyond their expectations, the US should not be given a chance to abuse Iran's transparency in this respect.

"The Chinese and Japanese authorities welcomed Iran's transparency and promised that they will take a more effective role within the IAEA framework to build up the confidence of the world countries in Iran," he added.

Kharrazi reiterated that Iran is currently making contact with various European states to hold talks on the issue, hoping to have a positive meeting on November 20 and witness a decision in Iran's favor.

In response to the question pertaining to the future decision of IAEA board of governors on Iran, he said that there is no reason for disapproval of Iran's signing of the protocol by the agency board.

Concerning Iran's confidence in the commitments of the European countries, he said, "In their visit to Tehran, the three EU member states took on commitments towards Iran, of which one article pertains to settling Iran's nuclear issues within the IAEA framework.

Turning to the concurrence of his visit to Japan with that of the US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, he said that this was just a coincidence and that his trip was aiming at a different issue.

Asked about the release of the Iranians still held captive in Iraq, he referred to Iran's great efforts to the effect and said that the head of Iraq's interim governing board Jalal Talebani has promised to follow up the issue.

"Most of the detainees are individuals who despite Iran's warnings have entered Iraq illegally. Nonetheless, it is our duty to follow up the case and attempt to release them," he concluded.

http://www.iribnews.com/Full_en.asp?news_id=192513

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.