Iranian Alert -- January 8, 2004 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD --Americans for Regime Change in Iran

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.

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg	Freepers/Avg	Monthlies
19	Massachusetts	350.00	11	31.82	261	1.34	135.00	9

Iran: A Capital Idea? Experts Disagree On Whether To Relocate Earthquake-Prone Tehran

By Golnaz Esfandiari, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Tehran lies on major seismological fault lines, and following the earthquake in Bam, which killed more than 30,000 people, Iranian officials are considering moving the capital to safer ground. Experts warn that an earthquake in Tehran of the same magnitude as the one in Bam could kill hundreds of thousands of people and destroy most of the city's buildings.

Prague, 7 January 2004 (RFE/RL) -- The idea of moving the Iranian capital has been under discussion since 1989, due to Tehran's heavy pollution, overcrowding, and risk of earthquakes.

But the proposal is receiving renewed attention after more than 30,000 people died in last month's 6.8 earthquake in Bam, in southeastern Iran.

The head of the Supreme National Security Council has raised the issue, and the rapporteur of the parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee has said parliament is prepared to pass an urgent plan to change the site of the capital, home to some 12 million people.

Iran is among the most earthquake-prone countries in the world, and experts say it's only a matter of time until a major tremor strikes Tehran.

Manuel Berberian is a senior seismologist who published the first complete study on the seismology of Tehran some 20 years ago. He says the likelihood of a major earthquake hitting Tehran is great. "[My colleagues and I] have clearly mentioned there [in the report] that the city, as well as the [city of] Ray to the south, has been devastated by several earthquakes, and the city itself is located by the North Tehran Fault, which is to the north, and several faults to the south, as well numerous faults crisscrossing the city," he said, "So we know the hazard of the city, but we cannot predict the time of the earthquake."

Tehran experienced its last major earthquake in 1830, when an estimated 45,000 people were killed. Experts say the fault lines around Tehran have been slipping and gathering energy ever since.

The probability of an earthquake above 7 on the Richter scale hitting Tehran in the next 10 years currently stands at around 65 percent. That's according to the head of the International Seismographic Research Center of Iran's Ministry of Science.

Bahram Akasheh, a professor of geophysics at Tehran University, also agrees that the probability of a strong earthquake hitting Tehran in the near future is high. "Based on the earthquakes that have occurred in the region of Greater Tehran, and also based on historical earthquakes we've had in this region, I have estimated that the possibility of an earthquake measuring more than 6 on the Richter scale occurring now in Tehran is about 90 percent, and the possibility of an earthquake measuring more than 7 is about 60 percent," Akasheh said. "But these are mathematical estimates, and the complications of geology and seismology do not let us exactly know whether these estimates are correct or not."

Tehran would be devastated by a major earthquake. According to a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency, 80 percent of the buildings in some of Tehran's districts would be destroyed. According to Iranian newspapers, the destruction would likely include most public buildings.

Another newspaper, "Aftabe Yazd," cites the Health Ministry as estimating that an earthquake measuring 7 on the Richter scale would destroy 90 percent of the city's hospitals.

Berberian, the seismologist, compares an earthquake in Tehran with the catastrophic earthquake that struck the city of Tangshan in northern China on 26 July 1976. In the 1976 earthquake in Tangshan, approximately half a million people were killed, he says. "For Tehran, with 12 million-plus population, heaven knows. It's easy to guess, but it is scary," he said. "I don't want to think about that."

Professor Akasheh also says a major earthquake in Tehran would have tragic consequences. "Because the buildings are not [earthquake] resistant, the human and financial costs [of earthquakes in Iran] are very heavy," he said. "Regarding Tehran, because the population of Greater Tehran is more than 15 million, and all the buildings are built on unstable ground, we have to expect heavy destruction from an earthquake measuring 7 on the Richter scale -- devastation that would be irreparable."

He continued, "If a similar earthquake [to the one in Bam] happens in the Tehran region, the city itself will probably top the death toll list [of earthquakes] in the world."

While experts agree on the danger, they differ on how to respond to it.

Iran's Supreme National Security Council and some members of parliament are in favor of moving the city to safer ground. Countries have moved their capitals before. After reunification, Germany moved its capital from Bonn to Berlin. In the late 1990s, Kazakhstan moved its capital from Almaty to Astana, in part because of its location in an earthquake-prone area.

But other officials, such as the mayor of Tehran, disagree, saying that moving the capital, at least quickly, would only secure the safety of top officials.

Professor Akasheh says he's written to President Mohammad Khatami, recommending the capital be moved to a safer place, such as the city of Isfahan in central Iran, which was the capital until the late 18th century. Even if the process is long and costly, he feels it's the best solution.

But Berberian disagrees, pointing to the earthquake risk in Iran's other major cities. "I doubt it because, first of all, it's very difficult and expensive," he said. "And second is that, what about the other cities -- provincial capitals like Tabriz, Mashahd, Shiraz, and so forth? I mean, the whole country is seismic."

Berberian says engineering codes should be enforced and buildings, especially public buildings, should be made safe.

Akasheh, however, says it's impossible to make all of Tehran's buildings earthquake-resistant. "In my opinion, making buildings in Tehran resistant is impossible," he said. "First of all, we have to make the buildings of the leadership resistant, then the government buildings, then the museums, the hospitals -- and this process [for a city such as Tehran] is impossible. How do we want to do it in streets with widths of only 5 meters, and where there are buildings with several floors?"

Berberian maintains that since Iran is prone to earthquakes, it should learn how to prevent such disasters, as Japan and the United States have done. "It's not easy and it's not cheap, but moving cities will not resolve the issue," he said. "We have this problem [of frequent earthquakes]. We know the sources of seismicity, which are the earthquake faults. We have to learn how to live with earthquakes. That's the only thing we haven't learned yet."

Iran says some steps have already been taken, such as securing natural-gas pipeline networks. But a government spokesman, Abdollah Ramezanzadeh, said there's "still a long way to go to make Tehran a safe place to live."

Meanwhile, the head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Hassan Rowhani, says the council will update its 1991 proposal on moving the capital and submit it for consideration by March.

http://www.truthnews.net/month/2004010030.htm

TV REVIEW | 'FORBIDDEN IRAN'

A Clandestine Trip to Iran in Search of Dissident Voices
By ALESSANDRA STANLEY
Published: January 8, 2004

n angry crowd of Iranian protesters is an image seared into the memories of most Americans over 35. The students who are the subject of "Forbidden Iran," a "Frontline" documentary on PBS tonight, are not demanding the death of American hostages. They are pro-Western dissidents defying their country's Muslim theocracy.

"These are the children of the Islamic revolution," the Canadian journalist Jane Kokan says. "But now they want religion out of their lives."

At a moment when the world is gripped by images of the devastating earthquake that struck Iran late last month and the American government is preoccupied with more menacing forms of Islamic fundamentalism, focusing on the oppression of Iran's pro-democracy movement seems almost an indulgence. And that makes this "Frontline" segment all the more inconveniently timely.

The documentary is Ms. Kokan's video diary of her trip last fall to Iran, which she visited by pretending to be an archaeologist on a group tour. Her goal was to interview pro-democracy Iranian students and expose the torture and killings of dissidents in jail. Her inspiration was the death of Zahra Kazemi, an Iranian-born Canadian journalist who died in an Iranian prison last July after being arrested while reporting on the underground pro-democracy movement.

The interviews Ms. Kokan manages to obtain, at considerable risk, are fascinating mostly because they are so hard to get. At one point a dissident with the nom de guerre of Arzhang arranges for Ms. Kokan to have a telephone interview with a prominent student leader, Amir Fahravar, in jail. As Arzhang drives her around Tehran, Ms. Kokan tries to conduct her interview over her cellphone. The language barrier obliges her to hand it to the driver, who acts as interpreter. "Will you, the students, win?" she asks.

The piece is personal, quixotic and odd — both affecting and affected. Ms. Kokan, while unquestionably brave, spends a lot of time on her own perils: we see her walking around and donning Muslim dress and sneaking out of her hotel to send coded e-mail messages from an Internet cafe. In her first-person narrative, she never says "we" or explains that a colleague came along, disguised as a teacher, to film her every step and to record interviews.

Still, perhaps because it is so jagged, the piece is a sharp reminder of the injustice that goes on, almost unnoticed, in Iran. According to the documentary, Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian human rights lawyer who in 2003 became the first Muslim woman ever to win the Nobel Peace Prize, has agreed to investigate the death of Ms. Kazemi. The documentary works best as a tribute to Ms. Kazemi and to the story she never had a chance to finish reporting.

FRONTLINE

Forbidden Iran

On most PBS stations tonight (check local listings)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/08/arts/television/08FRON.html

IAEA Investigation Of Iran Shows Major Role And Support By Pakistan

Gary Fitleberg, 01/07/04

Pakistan was a top suspect in the development of Iran’s nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency investigation has confirmed the suspicions.

While Pakistan and its nationals are believed to have played the major role in helping Iran's nuclear program, more than a half-dozen other countries are now under United Nations scrutiny, according to arms experts and diplomats.

They say a month long probe by the International Atomic Energy Agency has traced the origins of Iran's program to the late 1980s, when Iran was supplied with the first drawings on centrifuge technology, its main way of enriching uranium - leading to suspicions it was developing nuclear weapons.

The investigations have widened "well beyond" Pakistan, Russia and China to include companies in Germany, Switzerland, Austria and other West European countries, according to one diplomat.

One of those talking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity also linked Pakistan to North Korea's weapons program, saying U.S. intelligence had "pretty convincing" evidence of such a connection.

Iran and North Korea are the key concerns of the Vienna-based UN atomic agency, whose main task is to curb weapons proliferation through inspections and monitoring of countries that have ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

North Korea withdrew from that treaty after the Bush administration revealed the existence of its nuclear weapons program late last year.

After months of intense international pressure, Iran now is cooperating with IAEA efforts to unravel nearly two decades of covert activities that the United States and other countries say point to a weapons program.

Iran insists its nuclear activities are peaceful. But suspicions have heightened with revelations that it was enriching uranium, and the discovery of traces of weapons-grade enriched uranium on some of its centrifuge equipment.

A diplomat told the AP that the agency was following up on three to four different samples of highly enriched uranium - beyond the two whose existence had been previously revealed.

The agency is trying to trace the origins of the equipment to test Iranian claims that Tehran did not enrich uranium to weapons grade and that the highly enriched traces were inadvertently "imported" on the components. Neither Iran nor the IAEA have revealed the countries of origin, but diplomats had previously told the AP that Pakistan, China and Russia were among the probable suppliers.

Russia has acknowledged signing a contract with Iran in the mid-1990s to deliver equipment that could be used for laser enrichment of uranium but officials in Moscow say the contract was canceled several years later in response to U.S. pressure in the initial stages of the program.

Pakistan, itself a nuclear power, acknowledged that several of its nuclear scientists may had shared sensitive technology with Iran, but insisted the government never authorized it. Officials said information provided by the IAEA prompted the questioning of some scientists.

The White House says Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, an important U.S. ally in the war on terrorism, has assured Washington that his country is not offering to export technology related to weapons of mass destruction. But David Albright, a former Iraq weapons inspector who runs the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, suggests things were different before Musharraf seized power in 1999.

"It defies belief that the senior leadership of the Pakistani government, particularly its intelligence operations, did not know about the activities of these Pakistani scientists," he said. "The U.S. had come to them about this several times."

Pakistan has long been suspected of proliferation during its 30-year effort to build nuclear weapons - of sending nuclear technology to North Korea in exchange for missiles or helping Libya and Iraq. A middleman claiming to represent Pakistan's top nuclear scientist offered Saddam Hussein help in building an atomic bomb on the eve of the 1991 Gulf War, according to UN documents shown to The Associated Press last year.

Pakistan strongly denies the allegations.

But last month Pakistan started investigating several scientists at its top nuclear facility, the Khan Research Laboratories. Mohammad Farooq, the lab's former director general, is in detention.

Pakistani officials say among those being questioned was the founder of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan - a 1990 winner of Pakistan's "Man of the Nation Award."

Khan is believed to have traveled to Iran several times in the late 1980s and early 1990s, said a nuclear expert who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

A few years earlier, before international attention began focusing on the dangers of proliferation, some Pakistani scientists handed out brochures at trade shows in Germany and elsewhere "that implied that they were willing to sell sensitive centrifuge know-how or items of equipment," he said.

German intelligence is now investigating, he said.

The Dutch-British-German consortium Urenco has been frequently named in connection with Iran's centrifuge program but company spokesmen have denied supplying components. A diplomat said one likely explanation for the link to Urenco was the fact that several West European companies that sold components to Urenco apparently also sold them to the Iranians, who then assembled them domestically.

Gary is a Political Analyst specializing in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs. His articles have been published in numerous publications including La Prensa (Managua, Nicaragua equivalent to the L.A. Times), Pakistan Today, The Kashmir Telegraph, The Iranian and many more.

http://www.americandaily.com/item/4231

IIPF's Mohammad Reza Khatami: Iran's February 20 election to reinforce Islamic Republic

Payvand's Iran News ...
1/7/04

Vice-Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Reza Khatami said on Wednesday that the seventh parliamentary election slated for February 20 will serve to reinforce the Islamic Republic and national solidarity, IRNA reported from Tehran.

He said, "Election has its own law and we only want the law to be respected and nothing else."

He told reporters that the seventh parliamentary election will be an acid test for those who advocate religious democracy. "It is the right time to give an example of religious democracy."

Khatami, who is also the secretary general of Islamic Iran Participation Front (IIPF), said, "We are determined to resist any illegal action. We will not accept any violation in the run-up to the election. We will not yield to any pressure." "If rejection of eligibility of the candidates gets an extent to which we could not defend legitimacy of the election, we will not give a list for candidates," IIPF secretary general said.

"We have already announced that as a political party we don't like to boycott the election, because, we believe in using every opportunity to advance democratic agenda," he said.

"The more candidates are disqualified, the less legitimate the election will be and certainly public participation will drop and the political parties will lose their motives, which will ultimately damage the government's legitimacy," he said.

Asked whether he had a message for the Guardian Council, Khatami said that different pillars of the system -- the government, parliament and heads of the two branches of power have objections to the current trend of vetting and view it as illegal.

"The idea that several dignitaries come together and decide what attitudes should be confirmed and what should not, will damage the status of the constitutional body rather than the dignitaries themselves and will damage the legitimacy of the system as well," Mohammad Reza Khatami said.

Asked whether the reform camp will post a joint list of candidates for the seventh parliamentary elections, he said, "We have decided to form coalition on the basis of majority, but, our criteria will be eligibility and platforms of candidates."

A reporter asked about his views on Iran-Egypt relations, the IIPF secretary general said that improved relations between the two countries would be a positive step in the history of Iran's diplomacy since the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

"Egypt is one of the pillars of the Arab and Muslim world and has a special status in the modern world. Unfortunately. we had not diplomatic relations with Egypt for certain reasons and we had a vacuum in diplomatic interaction with foreign countries."

"Fortunately, we will witness resumption of diplomatic relations with Egypt thanks to the political resolve of the leaders of the two countries," he said, adding that Iran-Egypt relations will have direct impacts on the Middle East developments.

Tehran-Cairo relations will help international peace and will contribute to the international campaign against terrorism and in the meantime will benefit the two countries, the Middle East and the Arab and Muslim world, he said.

Answering a question about positive signals being exchanged between Iran and the United States, Mohammad-Reza Khatami said that the reality is that the United States plays a role in the region and Iran also has a major part to play. "If we make our roles serve the same goal and and if we define the national interests of the two nations on the same direction, then there will be room for us to patch up our differences," he said.

"Of course, Iran-US problems are immense and we don't expect them to be resolved overnight. But, we believe that any goodwill shown and positive step taken by one side, they should be reciprocated by the other side."

http://www.payvand.com/news/04/jan/1038.html

Regime Change in Iran

January 08, 2004
The Washington Times
Roger D. Carstens

In the wake of Iran's deadly earthquake last week, diplomats and pundits alike began to speak of "Earthquake Diplomacy" — an effort to capitalize on the goodwill generated by U.S. efforts to alleviate Iranian suffering. But the nature of the Iranian regime makes these thoughts both dangerous and wrong-headed. A more reasonable policy would be one of regime change, as Iranian support of terror, its aggressive pursuit of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and its horrific human rights record make it a suitable candidate for our next campaign in the war on terror.

President Bush stated in his September 2002 national security Strategy that America's war on terror is with those who conduct terrorist acts and with those who support terrorists. Iran, as many experts will tell you, does both.

The Islamic Republic funds and at times directs two of the most effective terror groups: Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad. These two Shi'ite terror groups have a long history of military and economic linkages with Sunni terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, the Palestine Liberation Organization and others. By providing funding, communicationstrainingand direction to these organizations, Iran has long been seen as the center of gravity of the international terror network. Evidence suggests that Iran has gone so far as to use its diplomatic pouches and intelligence services to facilitate terrorist communiques and the transfer of lethal material.

Additionally, there is ample proof that Iran is supporting efforts to disrupt our progress in both Afghanistan and Iraq. From allowing al Qaeda and the Taliban safe refuge after their defeat in Afghanistan to sending foreign jihadists into Iraq to attack coalition troops, Iran has seemingly made it unofficial policy to see our stability and democratization efforts fail. Changing Iran's regime would go a long way toward taking pressure off our troops and diplomats as they attempt to rebuild Afghanistan and Iraq.

There is also credible information that Osama bin Laden has made Iran his new home and that the Iranian government has warmly received him. By welcoming al Qaeda infrastructure and senior leadership, one comes to the clear conclusion that Iran is not just supporting terror, but generating it as well.

But supporting terror is just one part of the equation. What makes Iranian ties to terror even more frightening is the fact that it is aggressively trying to obtain WMD. Most disturbing is Iran's recent admission to the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency it has been secretly developing nuclear capabilities for more than 18 years — in direct violation of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran admitted, among other things, to having covert efforts to enrich and process uranium and plutonium, necessary events in the creation of nuclear weapons.

But never mind the covert program. It has also been reported in the past months that Iran's supposedly legitimate efforts to obtain nuclear energy will soon result in a capacity to develop WMD. The concern is that Iran could enrich uranium for the purpose of power generation, while funneling excess enriched uranium to its weapons program.

At current rates of development, experts believe that Iran's secret and overt efforts will likely result in it becoming a nuclear power between 2006 and 2010.

Lastly, Iran's poor record on human rights alone makes it a strong candidate for regime change. The Iranian government has not only run its economy into the ground with its mismanagement and corruption, but it also jailed, tortured and murdered those secular and religious leaders who have called for economic and political freedom. Massive popular demonstrations in the past year have shown that the Iranian people are hungry for freedom, but their cries for democracy and citizenship have been beaten down by an oppressive regime bent on denying them the most basic human rights.

Considering Iran's support for terror, its pursuit of WMD and its record of human rights abuses, the policy of the United States should be one of regime change — not by way of military invasion but by supporting internal change. The United States should increase the moral pressure against the Islamic Republic, clearly restating and condemning its evil nature. We should also offer support to opposition groups in terms of money, communications and training. We should also praise the opposition in both the international community and on U.S-sponsored Iranian radio broadcasts.Likethoseformerly oppressed in Poland, Serbia and Georgia, the people on the ground must know that America recognizes their plight and is ready to offer moral and financial support.

Iran is in desperate need of another revolution — this time a velvet one.

Roger D. Carstens is a member of the Council for Emerging National Security Affairs.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040107-084211-7155r.htm

"IRON FIST IN A SILK GLOVE" - Khamenei

Yahoo!News
Jan 08, 2004

Tehran- Jan 8th, In his speech, broadcast on state television, Khamenei said Washington had used the Bam quake as "an opportunity ... to pursue their political goals."

"They hide their iron fist in a silk glove," he said.

Khamenei frequently undercuts efforts by reformist officials to improve ties with Washington and in the past has even forbidden any talk in Iran about restoring ties with the United States, arguing it would be a betrayal of the Islamic revolution.

Unlike the European Union (news - web sites), which has held a policy of "critical engagement" with Iran for the last few years, Washington has largely shunned Iranian officials.

But Kharrazi said Iran's negotiations with Britain, France and Germany, which led to Tehran's agreement last October to cooperate fully with U.N. inspectors, was a better approach.

"Our recent experience with Europe on the nuclear issue proved that problems can be solved by negotiation," he said.

While adopting a softer tone in recent days both Tehran and Washington have set pre-conditions for improving relations.

Washington wants Tehran to hand over detained al Qaeda suspects, abandon its nuclear program and stop backing Palestinian militant groups that attack Israel.

Iran has called on Washington to lift economic sanctions imposed in 1995, which among other things prevent U.S. companies from investing in OPEC (news - web sites)'s second largest oil producer or trading in Iranian oil.

Tehran also wants Washington to hand over members of the armed Iranian opposition group the People's Mujahideen being held by U.S. forces in Iraq (news - web sites) and to abandon efforts to weaken Iran's clerical leadership.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=586&e=3&u=/nm/20040108/wl_nm/iran_usa_dc
-------
This Government doesn't deserve any help.

Nuclear Resolution

January 08, 2004
The Washington Post
Jim Hoagland

As if to emphasize that new years bring new hopes, Libya, Iran, North Korea and Pakistan have in recent weeks altered their defiant or deceitful behavior on nuclear weapons. Pushing these four atomic miscreants to clean up their acts should be a top American priority in 2004.

It is too early to proclaim that things are spinning into control on the nonproliferation front. But visible progress has been made through international pressure that relies on both multilateral diplomacy and the shadow of U.S. power abroad. It would be a mistake to underestimate the force of either of those factors in what has happened and in what is still to come.

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq seems to have sobered up some states that had concluded they could, without risk, secretly acquire nuclear weapons in defiance of international agreements. Unilateralists will trumpet that undeniable development.

But the clandestine drive toward nuclear weapons has also been slowed and shaped by global nonproliferation accords, U.N. inspections, world opinion and the kind of neighborly pressure that China has recently exerted on North Korea.

Imperfect as these outside influences are, they are important in denying legitimacy and protection to a state that covets a nuclear arsenal as an attribute of sovereignty or for other purposes. These guardrails should be strengthened, not abandoned, as part of a new balance in the efforts to halt the spread of nuclear and other unconventional weapons.

Exposure is important. Key to the recent progress has been a new official U.S. willingness to identify, publicize and deal with Pakistan as the world's most determined proliferator of illegal nuclear weapons technology and design. Pakistani help has been instrumental to the ambitions of Libya and Iran to acquire such weapons and in North Korea's development of them.

Washington has long known this but has been reluctant to confront Islamabad. When I wrote in 1995 about the evidence that U.S. intelligence had gathered of Pakistan's help to Iran, a State Department spokesman denied that account. As recently as a few months ago, Pakistani spokesmen were denouncing columns here spotlighting the North Korean connection. The blanket denials have stopped, and U.S. officials speaking on background are now spelling out details of Pakistan's involvement in Iran, North Korea and Libya.

President Pervez Musharraf's regime has reluctantly begun an "investigation" into whether Pakistani scientists did what Musharraf has always denied happened. This "rogue scientist" version ignores the official help that the nuclear transfers needed and received from Pakistan's military and intelligence services. The Bush administration must not buy into a new coverup from Islamabad out of a misplaced sense of loyalty to Musharraf.

Pakistan continues to be the most dangerous place on Earth because of its mix of nuclear weapons, unstable politics, religious fanaticism and the involvement of senior military and intelligence officials in terrorist networks, including al Qaeda and the Taliban. Two recent assassination attempts against Musharraf underline the fragility of his rule.

It is unclear whether Musharraf is acting out of a sense of internal strength or weakness in moving to account for Pakistan's terrible record on proliferation and to improve relations with India by promising to stop terrorism in Kashmir, as he did this week. If he pursues these efforts seriously, he will provoke the showdown at home that he has long sought to avoid but that must come if Pakistan is to cease its international criminality.

In this quartet of infamy only Libya seems to have decided to come clean and make a fresh start without weapons of mass destruction. North Korea and Iran, while holding out promises of nuclear reprocessing freezes, leave the impression of buying time until attention turns elsewhere and they can get on with developing nuclear arsenals.

Past interviews with Libya's erratic ruler, Moammar Gaddafi, suggest to me that we are unlikely ever to know fully why he decided to reveal at this moment that he was much closer to a nuclear weapon than the world's intelligence and inspection agencies realized. The colonel did not strike me as a linear thinker or talker.

British-U.S. diplomacy and Operation Iraqi Freedom were no doubt factors in Gaddafi's announced decision to defang himself through verifiable and intrusive inspections. I would guess that his desire to pass on power to his son in the next few years -- and the need to obtain international support for that succession -- also played a role.

Wars change the strategic landscape. It is then up to the politicians and diplomats to seize opportunities. They have made a good start in Libya, and will have their hands full in Pakistan in this brand new year.

jimhoagland@washpost.com

http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=01&d=08&a=3

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.