Iranian Alert -- February 12, 2004 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD --Americans for Regime Change in Iran

The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 2.12.2004 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[DoctorZIn]

Iran fails to declare nuclear design

By Roula Khalaf in London
Published: February 11 2004 19:53 | Last Updated: February 11 2004 19:53

United Nations inspectors have found a new type of centrifuge design in Iran and other experiments that Tehran has failed to declare, despite its claim in November that it had fully disclosed its nuclear programme.

The new findings come at a time of heightened concern about nuclear proliferation after the discovery of the rogue procurement network headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the so-called father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb.

President George W. Bush on Wednesday night called for tougher international action to control the spread of nuclear weapons. Western officials told the Financial Times that the International Atomic Energy Agency's findings in Iran would be included in a progress report prepared by Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency's director general, ahead of the IAEA's board meeting in March.

Iran submitted to the IAEA in November what was described as a comprehensive and accurate declaration of its nuclear programme. The declaration listed material and equipment along with information on the countries that had supplied them.

A western diplomat said the omissions detracted from Iran's credibility but did not add to Iran's known capabilities.

Despite western suspicions that Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons, the IAEA said in November that it had not yet found evidence that Iran's programme to develop the nuclear fuel cycle was aimed at anything more than energy production.

The new information comes as the UK, France and Germany continue to press Iran to suspend uranium-enrichment activities. This was part of an agreement reached in Tehran last October, but the parties have since disagreed on the interpretation of the suspension clause.

To the frustration of the Europeans, Tehran is believed to have continued to assemble centrifuges, which European governments consider a failure to fulfil obligations under the agreement.

"We're going to have quite a difficult period between now and the next [IAEA] board meeting," said a western official on Wednesday.

Of potentially greater risk to Iran is the IAEA's investigation into the black market network. Mr Khan has admitted a role in supplying technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea.

The agency is looking at whether Iran received weapons designs similar to those delivered to Libya. If evidence of this emerges, it would represent a devastating blow to Tehran's insistence that its nuclear programme is civilian.

Controversy over Iran's nuclear activities subsided in November after Tehran pledged full co-operation with the IAEA and agreed to sign the so-called additional protocol to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty, allowing greater access to inspectors.

The Iranian moves were facilitated by October's agreement with the UK, France and Germany. Uranium enrichment is allowed under the NPT but Iran was asked to suspend activities to build confidence.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1075982473817

[DoctorZIn]

Iran's young turn their backs on the revolution and grip of Ayatollahs

By Angus McDowall in Tehran
12 February 2004

Grey-robed and bearded, the elderly cleric paused at the exit of the plane and the crowd surged forward in ecstasy. They did not realise it, but the millions of Iranians who flooded the streets of Tehran and thronged the airport to greet the returning exile, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, were part of a political earthquake that would eventually bring down the most powerful man on earth and shake the world for the next quarter-century.

The revolutionary fervour that gripped Iran in 1979 stunned the world. The CIA spooks and well-dressed foreign businessmen who had haunted Iran's marbled corridors of power for decades were gone. In their place were a motley but triumphant crew of mullahs, thinkers and dissidents.

That November, students besieged the "nest of spies" as they called the American Embassy in Tehran and took dozens of US citizens hostage. President Jimmy Carter ordered a daring rescue operation that humiliatingly failed when two helicopters crashed into the desert floor before even reaching the capital.

He was gone within a year and his successor, President Ronald Reagan, allegedly forged a back-door deal to release the hostages on the day of his inauguration, more than 400 days after they were captured. In Lebanon, the long-running civil war became a new battle front for the Islamic Revolution as Iranian-backed Shia groups made suicide bombing an art form and drove the American military presence out of the country.

The new Islamic Republic prided itself on being a democracy forged in revolution, but freedom of speech and human rights quickly dropped from the agenda amid bloody purges and a social crackdown. As power was passed among the diverse factions of the new revolutionary government, the hanging judge, Sadeq Khalkhali, became the new face of state fear as he gleefully condemned the enemies of his revolution. Royalists and courtiers were strung up in their thousands, "like starlings on a wire", alongside revolutionaries who had backed the wrong ideological horse.

A terrorist campaign gripped the nation as the leftist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organisation bombed and slaughter- ed many of the new Islamic Republic's leading political lights and alienated many of its then numerous supporters. On the streets, piety became the law as conservative dress codes and social relations were rigidly enforced. University students with long hair were forcibly shaved and denounced by revolutionary committees.

Twenty-five years later, the revolution is running out of steam. After a decade of war and a decade of economic decline, Iranians are tired. Yesterday, 100,000 people gathered underneath the Azadi monument in western Tehran to celebrate the anniversary.

But their avowed support for the conservative rulers of Iran is in stark contrast to many of their fellow Iranians, who believe they have again seen the glimmer of democratic hope snuffed out before their eyes.

In 1997, as millions voted for the reformist President Seyyid Mohammed Khatami, a new wave of euphoria swept Iran. It seemed violence could be banished from politics and the voice of the people ring in government again. But in the years since, that turned to disillusionment as change was blocked by an entrenched hard core of unelected conservatives.

Now the reformist movement appears to be dying fast, threatening the creeping liberalisation it struggled to promote. Thousands of reformist candidates have been barred from running in next week's Majlis elections, in what has been described as a parliamentary coup d'état.

Yesterday, President Khatami warned that the Islamic Republic must follow the path of reform or risk being taken over by extremists, who he said resembled the Taliban in Afghanistan. "They oppose freedom and democracy in the name of religion. Their model is a detestable and violent one," he told the mainly conservative crowd during the anniversary rally. But although most Iranians still support the social and political changes at the heart of the reformist agenda, the movement is on the back foot. The conservatives are expected to take back the Majlis after next week's elections, and to seize the presidency in mid-2005. But as another period of conservative rule beckons, the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic has never seemed weaker.

Voter turnout at last year's municipal elections fell below 20 per cent in large cities such as Tehran, a staggeringly small figure in a country where polling booths have drawn more than half of the population for almost every election since the revolution. The conservatives had wanted a show of strength at the anniversary celebrations. But yesterday's crowds were a shadow of those who once thronged here. The fire has gone out of Iran's revolutionary spirit.

A black-bearded conservative in dark glasses said the crowd this year was bigger than before. "Anybody with eyes can see this is the largest demonstration ever," he said, as curious boys nearby talked about Arsenal and Manchester United. Another man said the people had made the revolution and won the war and would turn out for the election to prove the Islamic Republic's strength. But the mood was more countryside carnival than revolutionary rally.

Fundamentally, the Islamic Republic today is very different to when millions took to the streets for the return of Ayatollah Khomeini from exile in early 1979. Then, less than half the population was literate and more than 60 per cent was rural. Now the population has doubled and the majority are educated city-dwellers. Most are barely adults. The new generation is eager for change, but has shunned the political activism of its forebears.

Apart from occasional demonstrations, attended by a few thousand, there is little sign the young are interested in politics. Instead, the reformist generation is pushing back the boundaries of social acceptability, often taking its cue from the West. Rock music, fast cars, parties and relationships define middle-class Iranians more than religion or revolution.

Falling mosque attendance also suggests that far from inculcating Iranians with religious zeal, the revolution has dampened Iranian enthusiasm. An eminent sociologist and reformist commentator who did not want to be named said: "Before the revolution, there was a strong religious culture, otherwise the revolution would not have been religious. The interesting point is that the present generation does not care who rules, but how."

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=490443

[DoctorZIn]

Quarantined by the People, Iran's Regime Has Lost Its Authority

PARIS, February 11 /PRNewswire/

Reza Pahlavi of Iran Declares that Breaking this Quarantine Translates Into Siding Against the People

Reza Pahlavi of Iran today compared the clerical regime to a terminally- infected and quarantined patient. At a press conference, hosted by the French American Press Club and attended by nearly 100 members of the international media, the 43 year old opposition leader to the clerical regime argued that, while at odds with the Iranian people's desire for secularism and a democratic system of government, "It may be that the regime has physically separated Iranians from the world and from each other. Politically, however, the clerical regime is today in a quarantine, isolated, by the people who have, in effect, cut off its support and sapped its authority."

Fielding questions in English, French and Farsi, Reza Pahlavi drew attention to the regime's own recently released opinion poll, whereby 90% of Iranians had declared their intentions not to vote in the forthcoming Majles election -- for any candidate, so long as it is within this regime; this he declared, "Demonstrates that Iran's political conflicts are not based on tactical differences between the so called reformists and conservative factions, but that it is a conflict between the people of Iran and the regime in its entirety."

Reflecting on 25 years of theocracy within his homeland, Reza Pahlavi said, "The legacy of the clerical regime has been one of enmity, polarisation, hostility, class warfare and war with modernity. For 25 years, the regime has thrived by having created an atmosphere of permanent crisis. The Iranian people today reject that. They want peace, stability, prosperity and security. They want to build equity and, in fact, they want modernity." He added that "faced with these facts, the regime has no choice but retreat from many of its positions of zeal. For international consumption, it must temper its image. But the real question is that will it be able to make the ultimate concessions: to popular sovereignty, a transparent economy, or equal rights for all citizens? If it does, it will mean its end."

Reza Pahlavi, who has been leading a campaign of political defiance by calling for nonviolent acts of civil-disobedience against the Iranian theocracy, is the former Crown Prince of Iran. He is an accomplished jet fighter pilot and graduate of US Air Force Training Program at the former Reese Air Force Base. Author of Winds of Change, The future of democracy in Iran, he is a Political Science graduate of the University of Southern California. He resides in the State of Maryland, and is married to Yasmine Etemad Amini who, last month, gave birth to their third daughter, Princess Farah Pahlavi.

Distributed by PR Newswire on behalf of Secretariat of Reza Pahlavi

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=116792

[AdmSmith]

EU-Syria deal under threat

A historic trade and political deal between the EU and Syria hangs in the balance after demands on Damascus to take a firmer line against weapons of mass destruction.

According to the Financial Times the UK, Germany and the Netherlands want Damascus to follow Libya?s example of renouncing weapons of mass destruction and Iran?s agreement to allow tough international inspections of its nuclear sites.

"Some member states feel they can beef up the language on WMD in the EU-Syria accord because of developments in Libya and Iran," an EU diplomat told the paper.

Last December, the EU has forged ahead with closer ties with Damascus despite efforts by Washington to isolate Syria on the international scene.

The country was the last of the 12 North African and Middle Eastern countries to sign an Association Agreement with Brussels.

Each pact creates preferential trade terms in exchange for closer cooperation on human rights concerns, terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

It marked the first time the EU had imposed a "conditionality" clause on WMD in a trade accord with a non-EU country.

Syria's signature of the agreement would also require it to lower trade levies and liberalise its economy, a move which the commission believes will bring the EU closer to creating a Euro-Mediterranean free-trade area by 2010.

But while the EU wants to use its relations with Syria to boost reform and help modernise the economy, Washington has taken a much firmer line.

Last December the US imposed sanctions on Damascus, accusing the regime of harbouring terrorist organisations, developing weapons of mass destruction and damaging peace-making efforts in the Middle East.

http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200402/7f7a0de1-3188-43e4-99b2-ed2f6d69708a.htm

[F14 Pilot]

EU presses for Iran

12 February 2004
Gulf Daily News, Bahrain

BRUSSELS: The European Commission (EC) welcomed yesterday the WTO's decision to grant observer status to Iraq and expressed hope that Iran would be given similar status "soon".

A spokeswoman for EU trade commissioner Pascal Lamy, said that the WTO general council had initiated a process to evaluate Iran's request for observership status. "This is something we also support ... we hope we can see soon also Iran's request to become a WTO observer accepted by the WTO and all its members," she said.

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Articles.asp?Article=73920&Sn=BUSI
----
EU still supports the Mullahs

[risk]

Wed 11 Feb 2004
3:40pm (UK)
Election Boycott Could Signal New Iranian Revolution
From http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2520153

"PA"

Under banners and balloons praising the Islamic Revolution, crowds streamed on to the streets of Teheran today to celebrate a death – the end of the Western-backed monarchy 25 years ago.

In another part of Teheran – away from the speeches and patriotic songs – a student activist was waging a quiet counterattack on the system that succeeded the shah.

He worked the phones and faxes to support the boycott of February 20 parliamentary elections that liberals consider have been hijacked by Iran’s ruling theocracy.

The dissident also dreams of someday joining an even bigger protest.

He calls it a “pink revolution:” applying the same tactics of mass resistance and clear goals that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini used to claim control of Iran in 1979.

“I don’t like what has happened,” said Roozbeh Riazi, a leader of the Office for Fostering Unity, Iran’s biggest reformist student movement.

A growing array of believers – from think tank analysts to veterans of Iran’s political scuffles – say next week’s elections may offer a defining moment for the country.

It could, they say, finally clarify and energise the so-called reform movement that started with the election of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997 and his calls for “Islamic democracy”.

“This boycott is the beginning of the collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” said Qasem Sholeh Sadi, a former lawmaker who wrote a stunning open letter in 2002 to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei complaining about a lack of political openness. “The boycott is the start of social disobedience.”

For years, Iranian reformists have been unable to find a unifying theme. Some pressed for more social freedoms. Others sought a greater voice in political affairs or expanded human rights.

But the anger over the elections could sharpen the focus straight to the top: the almost unlimited power of the ruling clerics.

President Khatami has not made it clear whether he will join the boycott. But he used the Islamic Revolution ceremonies to take a sharp jab at the system.

“Elections are a symbol of democracy if they are performed correctly,” Khatami said in a speech. “If this is restricted, it’s a threat to the nation and the system. This threat is difficult to reverse.”

[nuconvert]

"The European Commission (EC) welcomed yesterday the WTO's decision to grant observer status to Iraq and expressed hope that Iran would be given similar status "soon".

I hope they were just trying to be polite, or were thinking ahead, about Iran after the demise of the regime.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Is the EU going to make similar demands of Iran?

[F14 Pilot]

U.S. accuses Iran of still seeking nukes

Thu 12 February, 2004
Reuters, UK

BERLIN (Reuters) - U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton has accused Iran of pursuing efforts to acquire nuclear arms and of failing to comply with a commitment last year to suspend uranium enrichment activities.

"There's no doubt in our mind that Iran continues to pursue a nuclear weapons programme," Bolton told a security conference in Berlin on Thursday.

"They have not yet, in our judgement, complied even with the commitments they made in October to suspend their uranium enrichment activities," he added.

Germany, Britain, and France persuaded Iran last year to suspend uranium enrichment and agree to more intrusive inspections by the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"Essentially, they are not spinning centrifuges but their activity to put together the components they need for their uranium enrichment programme continue," Bolton said.

Western diplomats earlier told Reuters the IAEA had uncovered designs for machines in Iran that can be used to make bomb-grade material, calling into question Tehran's pledge to cooperate with the agency.

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=457276&section=news

[Pan_Yans Wife]

President Announces New Measures to Counter the Threat of WMD
Remarks by the President on Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
Fort Lesley J. McNair - National Defense University
Washington, D.C.

2:30 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for the warm welcome. I'm honored to visit the National Defense University. For nearly a century, the scholars and students here have helped to prepare America for the changing threats to our national security. Today, the men and women of our National Defense University are helping to frame the strategies through which we are fighting and winning the war on terror. Your Center for Counterproliferation Research and your other institutes and colleges are providing vital insight into the dangers of a new era. I want to thank each one of you for devoting your talents and your energy to the service of our great nation.

I want to thank General Michael Dunn for inviting me here. I used to jog by this facility on a regular basis. Then my age kicked in. (Laughter.) I appreciate Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, from Germany. Mr. Ambassador, thank you for being here today. I see my friend, George Shultz, a distinguished public servant and true patriot, with us. George, thank you for coming; and Charlotte, it's good to see you. I'm so honored that Dick Lugar is here with us today. Senator, I appreciate you taking time and thanks for bringing Senator Saxby Chambliss with you, as well. I appreciate the veterans who are here and those on active duty. Thanks for letting me come by.

On September the 11th, 2001, America and the world witnessed a new kind of war. We saw the great harm that a stateless network could inflict upon our country, killers armed with box cutters, mace, and 19 airline tickets. Those attacks also raised the prospect of even worse dangers -- of other weapons in the hands of other men. The greatest threat before humanity today is the possibility of secret and sudden attack with chemical or biological or radiological or nuclear weapons.

In the past, enemies of America required massed armies, and great navies, powerful air forces to put our nation, our people, our friends and allies at risk. In the Cold War, Americans lived under the threat of weapons of mass destruction, but believed that deterrents made those weapons a last resort. What has changed in the 21st century is that, in the hands of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction would be a first resort -- the preferred means to further their ideology of suicide and random murder. These terrible weapons are becoming easier to acquire, build, hide, and transport. Armed with a single vial of a biological agent or a single nuclear weapon, small groups of fanatics, or failing states, could gain the power to threaten great nations, threaten the world peace.

America, and the entire civilized world, will face this threat for decades to come. We must confront the danger with open eyes, and unbending purpose. I have made clear to all the policy of this nation: America will not permit terrorists and dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most deadly weapons. (Applause.)

Meeting this duty has required changes in thinking and strategy. Doctrines designed to contain empires, deter aggressive states, and defeat massed armies cannot fully protect us from this new threat. America faces the possibility of catastrophic attack from ballistic missiles armed with weapons of mass destruction. So that is why we are developing and deploying missile defenses to guard our people. The best intelligence is necessary to win the war on terror and to stop proliferation. So that is why I have established a commission that will examine our intelligence capabilities and recommend ways to improve and adapt them to detect new and emerging threats.

We're determined to confront those threats at the source. We will stop these weapons from being acquired or built. We'll block them from being transferred. We'll prevent them from ever being used. One source of these weapons is dangerous and secretive regimes that build weapons of mass destruction to intimidate their neighbors and force their influence upon the world. These nations pose different challenges; they require different strategies.

The former dictator of Iraq possessed and used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. For 12 years, he defied the will of the international community. He refused to disarm or account for his illegal weapons and programs. He doubted our resolve to enforce our word -- and now he sits in a prison cell, while his country moves toward a democratic future. (Applause.)

To Iraq's east, the government of Iran is unwilling to abandon a uranium enrichment program capable of producing material for nuclear weapons. The United States is working with our allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that Iran meets its commitments and does not develop nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

In the Pacific, North Korea has defied the world, has tested long-range ballistic missiles, admitted its possession of nuclear weapons, and now threatens to build more. Together with our partners in Asia, America is insisting that North Korea completely, verifiably, and irreversibly dismantle its nuclear programs.

America has consistently brought these threats to the attention of international organizations. We're using every means of diplomacy to answer them. As for my part, I will continue to speak clearly on these threats. I will continue to call upon the world to confront these dangers, and to end them. (Applause.)

In recent years, another path of proliferation has become clear, as well. America and other nations are learning more about black-market operatives who deal in equipment and expertise related to weapons of mass destruction. These dealers are motivated by greed, or fanaticism, or both. They find eager customers in outlaw regimes, which pay millions for the parts and plans they need to speed up their weapons programs. And with deadly technology and expertise going on the market, there's the terrible possibility that terrorists groups could obtain the ultimate weapons they desire most.

The extent and sophistication of such networks can be seen in the case of a man named Abdul Qadeer Khan. This is the story as we know it so far.

A. Q. Khan is known throughout the world as the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. What was not publicly known, until recently, is that he also led an extensive international network for the proliferation of nuclear technology and know-how.

For decades, Mr. Khan remained on the Pakistani government payroll, earning a modest salary. Yet, he and his associates financed lavish lifestyles through the sale of nuclear technologies and equipment to outlaw regimes stretching from North Africa to the Korean Peninsula.

A. Q. Khan, himself, operated mostly out of Pakistan. He served as director of the network, its leading scientific mind, as well as its primary salesman. Over the past decade, he made frequent trips to consult with his clients and to sell his expertise. He and his associates sold the blueprints for centrifuges to enrich uranium, as well as a nuclear design stolen from the Pakistani government. The network sold uranium hexafluoride, the gas that the centrifuge process can transform into enriched uranium for nuclear bombs. Khan and his associates provided Iran and Libya and North Korea with designs for Pakistan's older centrifuges, as well as designs for more advanced and efficient models. The network also provided these countries with components, and in some cases, with complete centrifuges.

To increase their profits, Khan and his associates used a factory in Malaysia to manufacture key parts for centrifuges. Other necessary parts were purchased through network operatives based in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. These procurement agents saw the trade in nuclear technologies as a shortcut to personal wealth, and they set up front companies to deceive legitimate firms into selling them tightly controlled materials.

Khan's deputy -- a man named B.S.A. Tahir -- ran SMB computers, a business in Dubai. Tahir used that computer company as a front for the proliferation activities of the A. Q. Khan network. Tahir acted as both the network's chief financial officer and money launderer. He was also its shipping agent, using his computer firm as cover for the movement of centrifuge parts to various clients. Tahir directed the Malaysia facility to produce these parts based on Pakistani designs, and then ordered the facility to ship the components to Dubai. Tahir also arranged for parts acquired by other European procurement agents to transit through Dubai for shipment to other customers.

This picture of the Khan network was pieced together over several years by American and British intelligence officers. Our intelligence services gradually uncovered this network's reach, and identified its key experts and agents and money men. Operatives followed its transactions, mapped the extent of its operations. They monitored the travel of A. Q. Khan and senior associates. They shadowed members of the network around the world, they recorded their conversations, they penetrated their operations, we've uncovered their secrets. This work involved high risk, and all Americans can be grateful for the hard work and the dedication of our fine intelligence professionals. (Applause.)

Governments around the world worked closely with us to unravel the Khan network, and to put an end to his criminal enterprise. A. Q. Khan has confessed his crimes, and his top associates are out of business. The government of Pakistan is interrogating the network's members, learning critical details that will help them prevent it from ever operating again. President Musharraf has promised to share all the information he learns about the Khan network, and has assured us that his country will never again be a source of proliferation.

Mr. Tahir is in Malaysia, where authorities are investigating his activities. Malaysian authorities have assured us that the factory the network used is no longer producing centrifuge parts. Other members of the network remain at large. One by one, they will be found, and their careers in the weapons trade will be ended.

As a result of our penetration of the network, American and the British intelligence identified a shipment of advanced centrifuge parts manufactured at the Malaysia facility. We followed the shipment of these parts to Dubai, and watched as they were transferred to the BBC China, a German-owned ship. After the ship passed through the Suez Canal, bound for Libya, it was stopped by German and Italian authorities. They found several containers, each forty feet in length, listed on the ship's manifest as full of "used machine parts." In fact, these containers were filled with parts of sophisticated centrifuges.

The interception of the BBC China came as Libyan and British and American officials were discussing the possibility of Libya ending its WMD programs. The United States and Britain confronted Libyan officials with this evidence of an active and illegal nuclear program. About two months ago, Libya's leader voluntarily agreed to end his nuclear and chemical weapons programs, not to pursue biological weapons, and to permit thorough inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. We're now working in partnership with these organizations and with the United Kingdom to help the government of Libya dismantle those programs and eliminate all dangerous materials.

Colonel Ghadafi made the right decision, and the world will be safer once his commitment is fulfilled. We expect other regimes to follow his example. Abandoning the pursuit of illegal weapons can lead to better relations with the United States, and other free nations. Continuing to seek those weapons will not bring security or international prestige, but only political isolation, economic hardship, and other unwelcome consequences. (Applause.)

We know that Libya was not the only customer of the Khan network. Other countries expressed great interest in their services. These regimes and other proliferators like Khan should know: We and our friends are determined to protect our people and the world from proliferation. (Applause.)

Breaking this network is one major success in a broad-based effort to stop the spread of terrible weapons. We're adjusting our strategies to the threats of a new era. America and the nations of Australia, France and Germany, Italy and Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom have launched the Proliferation Security Initiative to interdict lethal materials in transit. Our nations are sharing intelligence information, tracking suspect international cargo, conducting joint military exercises. We're prepared to search planes and ships, to seize weapons and missiles and equipment that raise proliferation concerns, just as we did in stopping the dangerous cargo on the BBC China before it reached Libya. Three more governments -- Canada and Singapore and Norway -- will be participating in this initiative. We'll continue to expand the core group of PSI countries. And as PSI grows, proliferators will find it harder than ever to trade in illicit weapons.

There is a consensus among nations that proliferation cannot be tolerated. Yet this consensus means little unless it is translated into action. Every civilized nation has a stake in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction. These materials and technologies, and the people who traffic in them, cross many borders. To stop this trade, the nations of the world must be strong and determined. We must work together, we must act effectively. Today, I announce seven proposals to strengthen the world's efforts to stop the spread of deadly weapons.

First, I propose that the work of the Proliferation Security Initiative be expanded to address more than shipments and transfers. Building on the tools we've developed to fight terrorists, we can take direct action against proliferation networks. We need greater cooperation not just among intelligence and military services, but in law enforcement, as well. PSI participants and other willing nations should use the Interpol and all other means to bring to justice those who traffic in deadly weapons, to shut down their labs, to seize their materials, to freeze their assets. We must act on every lead. We will find the middlemen, the suppliers and the buyers. Our message to proliferators must be consistent and it must be clear: We will find you, and we're not going to rest until you are stopped. (Applause.)

Second, I call on all nations to strengthen the laws and international controls that govern proliferation. At the U.N. last fall, I proposed a new Security Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize proliferation, enact strict export controls, and secure all sensitive materials within their borders. The Security Council should pass this proposal quickly. And when they do, America stands ready to help other governments to draft and enforce the new laws that will help us deal with proliferation.

Third, I propose to expand our efforts to keep weapons from the Cold War and other dangerous materials out of the wrong hands. In 1991, Congress passed the Nunn-Lugar legislation. Senator Lugar had a clear vision, along with Senator Nunn, about what to do with the old Soviet Union. Under this program, we're helping former Soviet states find productive employment for former weapons scientists. We're dismantling, destroying and securing weapons and materials left over from the Soviet WMD arsenal. We have more work to do there.

And as a result of the G-8 Summit in 2002, we agreed to provide $20 billion over 10 years -- half of it from the United States -- to support such programs. We should expand this cooperation elsewhere in the world. We will retain [sic] WMD scientists and technicians in countries like Iraq and Libya. We will help nations end the use of weapons-grade uranium in research reactors. I urge more nations to contribute to these efforts. The nations of the world must do all we can to secure and eliminate nuclear and chemical and biological and radiological materials.

As we track and destroy these networks, we must also prevent governments from developing nuclear weapons under false pretenses. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was designed more than 30 years ago to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons beyond those states which already possessed them. Under this treaty, nuclear states agreed to help non-nuclear states develop peaceful atomic energy if they renounced the pursuit of nuclear weapons. But the treaty has a loophole which has been exploited by nations such as North Korea and Iran. These regimes are allowed to produce nuclear material that can be used to build bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programs.

So today, as a fourth step, I propose a way to close the loophole. The world must create a safe, orderly system to field civilian nuclear plants without adding to the danger of weapons proliferation. The world's leading nuclear exporters should ensure that states have reliable access at reasonable cost to fuel for civilian reactors, so long as those states renounce enrichment and reprocessing. Enrichment and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

The 40 nations of the Nuclear Suppliers Group should refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing equipment and technologies to any state that does not already possess full-scale, functioning enrichment and reprocessing plants. (Applause.) This step will prevent new states from developing the means to produce fissile material for nuclear bombs. Proliferators must not be allowed to cynically manipulate the NPT to acquire the material and infrastructure necessary for manufacturing illegal weapons.

For international norms to be effective, they must be enforced. It is the charge of the International Atomic Energy Agency to uncover banned nuclear activity around the world and report those violations to the U.N. Security Council. We must ensure that the IAEA has all the tools it needs to fulfill its essential mandate. America and other nations support what is called the Additional Protocol, which requires states to declare a broad range of nuclear activities and facilities, and allow the IAEA to inspect those facilities.

As a fifth step, I propose that by next year, only states that have signed the Additional Protocol be allowed to import equipment for their civilian nuclear programs. Nations that are serious about fighting proliferation will approve and implement the Additional Protocol. I've submitted the Additional Protocol to the Senate. I urge the Senate to consent immediately to its ratification.

We must also ensure that IAEA is organized to take action when action is required. So, a sixth step, I propose the creation of a special committee of the IAEA Board which will focus intensively on safeguards and verification. This committee, made up of governments in good standing with the IAEA, will strengthen the capability of the IAEA to ensure that nations comply with their international obligations.

And, finally, countries under investigation for violating nuclear non-proliferation obligations are currently allowed to serve on the IAEA Board of Governors. For instance, Iran -- a country suspected of maintaining an extensive nuclear weapons program -- recently completed a two-year term on the Board. Allowing potential violators to serve on the Board creates an unacceptable barrier to effective action. No state under investigation for proliferation violations should be allowed to serve on the IAEA Board of Governors -- or on the new special committee. And any state currently on the Board that comes under investigation should be suspended from the Board. The integrity and mission of the IAEA depends on this simple principle: Those actively breaking the rules should not be entrusted with enforcing the rules. (Applause.)

As we move forward to address these challenges we will consult with our friends and allies on all these new measures. We will listen to their ideas. Together we will defend the safety of all nations and preserve the peace of the world.

Over the last two years, a great coalition has come together to defeat terrorism and to oppose the spread of weapons of mass destruction -- the inseparable commitments of the war on terror. We've shown that proliferators can be discovered and can be stopped. We've shown that for regimes that choose defiance, there are serious consequences. The way ahead is not easy, but it is clear. We will proceed as if the lives of our citizens depend on our vigilance, because they do. Terrorists and terror states are in a race for weapons of mass murder, a race they must lose. (Applause.) Terrorists are resourceful; we're more resourceful. They're determined; we must be more determined. We will never lose focus or resolve. We'll be unrelenting in the defense of free nations, and rise to the hard demands of dangerous times.

May God bless you all. (Applause.)

END 3:07 P.M. EST

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/print/20040211-4.html

[DoctorZIn]

Thanks for the post.

[DoctorZIn]

Iran's Anti-Americanism in Decline [Excerpt]

February 12, 2004
The Washington Post
Karl Vick

TEHRAN -- On Revolution Day, the Iranian equivalent of the Fourth of July, Azadi Street was again transformed from east-west artery to carnival midway. Men lined up for free yogurt. Hawkers coaxed women to finger the material on baby clothes. Children clamored for a turn throwing darts at George W. Bush's caricature.

Hossein Asadi put three darts right between the eyes of the caricature, sketched on a pair of boards mounted in a sideshow tent. He walked away with a new yellow tennis ball but no change in his feelings, which were nothing if not admiring.

"They like me to hit George Bush, so I hit George Bush," said Hossein, 15. "They say it's the great Satan, but I say it's a great country."

Wednesday marked 25 years since an elderly Muslim cleric with eyes the color of coal declared Iran a theocracy. But while religious figures remain firmly in charge, sweeping aside an entire reform movement last week with the stroke of a pen, another pillar of the revolution appears shakier.

Anti-Americanism is not what it used to be in Iran.

As the United States and Iran edge warily toward possible rapprochement, the Iranian public makes no secret of its appetite for restoring relations formally severed in 1980 after militant students took over the U.S. Embassy. In recent months, Iranians say, the appetite has grown for an unexpected reason: Iranian pilgrims returning from Iraq are spreading admiring stories of their encounters with American troops.

Thousands of Iranians have visited the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala since the war ended. Many have expressed surprise at the respectful and helpful behavior of the U.S. soldiers they met on the way.

Leila Araki, waiting in the back of a car as her husband peddled shoes, said her mother-in-law somehow lost her money on the road to Karbala. She said a U.S. soldier reached into his pocket and handed her taxi fare back to Najaf.

"This is something quite contrary to what we have been told about Americans," said Araki, 31, who was told of Americans flashing a thumbs-up and saying, "Good, Iranians."

"They were really surprised. I would never be this respected and well-treated even in my country, by my countrymen."

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0212iran12.html

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Our servicemen and women are wonderful good-will ambassadors. I'm proud of them!

[DoctorZIn]

[DoctorZIn]

The Tehran Times recently published a John Kerry campaign letter: Kerry Says He Will Repair Damage If He Wins Election. (

Via Little Green Footballs) Quoting the letter:

"It is in the urgent interests of the people of the United States to restore our country's credibility in the eyes of the world. America needs the kind of leadership that will repair alliances with countries on every continent that have been so damaged in the past few years, as well as build new friendships and overcome tensions with others.

We are convinced that John Kerry is the candidate best qualified to meet this challenge. Senator Kerry has the diplomatic skill and temperament as well as a lifetime of accomplishments in field of international affairs. He believes that collaboration with other countries is crucial to efforts to win the war on terror and make America safer."

The Tehran Times did not included the list of the letter's signers, which can be seen at the Kerry Web site: Letter for Democrats Abroad. While there may some doubt as to who send what to whom and why, what is clear is that the theocratic Iranian regime approved of the letter and its publication. And considering Kerry's approach to foreign policy, there's also no doubt that the mullahs would prefer Kerry over George "Axis of Evil" Bush.

In a 1970 interview, Kerry referred to himself as an "internationalist" and said, "I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations." (Via LGF)

Kerry has since softened his language a bit, but his position today appears to be essentially the same. In his December 2003 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Kerry claimed that he "will not cede our security to any nation or institution." Yet throughout the speech he repeatedly invokes the United Nations and advocates "collective action," "international sanction," a "new era of alliances," and rejoining the "community of nations." In contrast, he criticizes President Bush for being "unilateral," "imperial" and "intoxicated" with American power.

Ultimately he declares: "I will treat the United Nations as a full partner -- not only in the war on terror, but in combating other common enemies like AIDS and global poverty."

A "full partner"? So much for not ceding our security to any nation or institution.

In regard to Iran, a country even our appeasing State Department ranks as the world's worst sponsor of terrorism, Kerry said:

"[T]he Bush Administration stubbornly refuses to conduct a realistic, non-confrontational policy with Iran even where that may be possible. As President, I will be prepared early-on to explore areas of mutual interest with Iran, just as I was prepared to normalize relations with Vietnam a decade ago."

Lest we forget what kind of regime Kerry proposes being "non-confrontational" with, WorldNetDaily reports: Iran hosting global terrorist conference.

"Just as the U.S. State Department approves wider contact with Iran and as members of Congress begin planning the first official trips in 25 years, Tehran is sponsoring a 10-day conference of major terrorist organization beginning [this] week.

The purpose of the conference is to discuss anti-U.S. strategy. Among the groups headed to Iran to participate are: Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and al-Qaida allies Ansar Al Islam."

Yesterday marked the 25th anniversary of Iran's Khomeinist revolution. A short history of its reign of terror is contained in Amir Taheri's op-ed, Tehran Tyranny's 25th. (Via 'Free Iran' News)

"Khomeinism, a form of fascism, was, and remains, a consistent political doctrine. [...] [Today's ruling] Khomeinists sincerely believe that a woman is half as valuable as a man and that she should cover her hair because it emanates rays that drive men wild with lust. They genuinely believe that men who shave their beards will go to hell. They regard the West as a civilization in decline, and its values, including human rights and democracy, as decadent.

Their strategic goal is to destroy Western-dominated civilization and replace it with a better, Islamic, one. They dream of wiping Israel off the map and, one day, hoisting their flag of faith atop the White House."

For the Iranian theocracy and the terrorists it supports, the choice for the next American president is no contest: John "Non-Confrontational" Kerry.

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000279.html

[DoctorZIn]

Reza Pahlavi Foresees Democratic Iran

February 11, 2004
CNSNews.com
Eva Cahen

With the approach of widely contested legislative elections in Iran, the son of the late Shah is urging the world's democracies to withhold diplomatic support for the government in Tehran, which he said was anyway powerless as only the country's divine council was allowed to create and approve laws.

"The elections are meaningless," Reza Pahlavi told a press conference in Paris on Wednesday, the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Shah's government, in what became known as the Islamic Revolution.

"It is critical not to mistake so-called reforms and elections as a cure for the Islamic Republic. Even perfect elections are meaningless for a parliament that does not have the right to make laws. This is a theocracy, remember ..."

The elections are scheduled for Feb. 20 after a campaign marked by a stand-off between reformists and the hard-line Guardians Council, which advises the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

President Mohammad Khatami has protested that the elections will not be fair because thousands of reformist candidates have been disqualified and people would have no motivation to vote.

Pahlavi pointed out that a recently released opinion poll indicated that 90 percent of Iranians did not intend to vote for any candidate, within the current regime.

He argued that this "demonstrates that Iran's political conflicts are not based on tactical differences between the so called reformists and conservative factions, but that it is a conflict between the people of Iran and the regime in its entirety."

Pahlavi said a non-violent movement of civil disobedience against the rule of the mullahs was gaining strength and the best support Western countries could offer would be to deny legitimacy to a government which Iranians themselves no longer considered legitimate.

The 43-year-old, who has lived in exile in the United States since his father was overthrown in 1979, predicted that Iranians would "soon tear down the black wall of the Islamic Republic and join the free world."

Pahlavi said he maintains contact with a wide array of the Iranian population, including students, workers, clergy, military and intellectuals. Nine out of ten Iranians no longer support the Islamic regime, he asserted.

Pahlavi said, "it is the people who are isolating the regime, cutting off support and sapping its authority. Indeed, it is striking the extent to which this regime has lost authority, not just vis-e-vis the people, but within the regime and with respect to the organs of the government itself."

While he foresees the regime falling, Pahlavi pleaded against armed intervention, which he said could result in a massacre.

"It is just a question of time that the cracks in the regime will widen and the Iranian people will have achieved democracy themselves."

Asked whether he envisioned returning to the throne his father was forced to abdicate, Pahlavi said he hoped Iranians would be able to hold a referendum to decide what kind of government they wanted.

If they chose a constitutional monarchy, he would be available, but he would not impose himself.

Pahlavi said he imagined Iran's future as a secular democracy, bringing peace and stability to the region.

After the Islamic Revolution, his country had become "a convention center for the terrorist industry, a meeting place for those who fund, organize, lend logistic and scientific support, plan events and coordinate strategies against the free world.

"Maybe the reverse could happen when Iran becomes a democracy."

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200402%5CFOR20040211g.html

[DoctorZIn]

I just received this from a student in Iran...

"Doc, I think this thread, 11th of Feb, was one of the greatest threads I have ever read so far.
Thank You"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1075801/posts

[Pan_Yans Wife]

"It is just a question of time that the cracks in the regime will widen and the Iranian people will have achieved democracy themselves."

If Reza Pahlavi, who has his finger on the pulse of the turmoil in Iran, can say, "Patience!", two thoughts come to mind.

First, the momentum is building, as you suggested recently regarding a coming shift in the EU's position.

And lastly, that the framework is being built... not only in terms of Iranians seizing control of their nation, but also in their plans for their future.

In my opinion, revolution is just one half of the equation, being prepared to govern wisely is the other.