[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”

[Support Free Republic]

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

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[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]

Don't forget to watch tonight's PBS Frontline Special Report - "Forbidden Iran."

It promises to be an informative broadcast.

Finally, the long-awaited and anticipated undercover report by Canadian journalist Jane Kokan is set to reach millions of homes across America tomorrow night on PBS Frontline/World program.

This report will expose and investigate many aspects of the Islamic Clerical Regime's human rights abuses and brutality, which it utilizes to remain in power. Lets just say it sounds as thought Jane Kokan takes over where Zahra Kazemi left off, and in a big way.

Please help to get the word out about this revolutionary special tomorrow (Thursday) night at 9pm. You can watch a promo and read more
here:

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran/index.html

Also, starting Monday January 12th, PBS will be providing the whole report via streaming video on their web site.

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

"US needs Iran", Rafsanjani says

Thursday, January 08, 2004 - ©2003
IranMania.com

TEHRAN, Jan 7, (AFP) -- Powerful former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has argued that recent US initiatives towards Iran have shown the superpower needs better relations with the Islamic republic, the official news agency IRNA reported Wednesday.

Rafsanjani, who heads Iran's top political arbitration body, said Iran therefore needed to take its time before eventually reopening dialogue with one of its arch enemies.

"The American proposal to send a high-ranking mission to Iran shows that it is they who need relations with Iran. Therefore we should not rush in seeking relations with them," he was quoted as saying.

He was referring to an offer from Washington to send a top delegation of figures close to US President George W. Bush to follow up on the sending of aid to earthquake victims, an offer Tehran turned down.

"The Americans have to recognise they were wrong about the Islamic revolution," Rafsanjani said.

"They came to the region seeking to overthrow us, but today they need us to stay standing to the east and west," he added, referring to the US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=21403&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

Iran: Reformers Warn They May Boycott February Polls

Tehran, 7 January 2004
(RFE/RL) --

An Iranian politician says pro-reform parties may boycott next month's parliamentary elections if many of their candidates are barred from running by hard-liners.

Iran's Guardians Council is expected to reveal next week how many of the over 8,000 potential candidates for the poll it has disqualified. Many of the hard-line clerics that dominate the constitutional oversight body oppose reformers.

Behzad Nabavi, a deputy parliament speaker, today told a news conference that boycotting the February poll is an option if hard-liners create unfair voting conditions by disqualifying too many candidates.

President Mohammed Khatami has called on the Guardians Council not to veto many candidates.

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2004/01/07012004170417.asp

[tkathy]

I am praying for this every day. If Iran would fall, the Middle East would be changed for the better forever.

[F14 Pilot]

"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.

[DoctorZIn]

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

[DoctorZIn]

Kharrazi Says Tehran Ready to Negotiate with U.S. if Pre-conditions Met

January 08, 2004
Reuters
Reuters.com

TEHRAN -- Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said Tehran was willing to resume dialogue with the United States provided the talks were based on mutual respect, state television reported Thursday.

Kharrazi added that Iran's recent negotiations with European countries over its nuclear program, which culminated in Iran agreeing to snap inspections of nuclear facilities, was an example to Washington of how outstanding problems can be solved.

Speculation has heightened in recent days that the two arch foes may be edging toward some kind of rapprochement after U.S. officials spoke of a willingness to resume a limited dialogue on specific issues and Washington sent humanitarian aid to victims of Iran's devastating December 26 Bam earthquake.

"Iran is ready to negotiate with all countries and America is no exception," Kharrazi told state television.

"If it (Washington) adopts a new approach to Iran and is ready to interact with us based on mutual respect and the principle of equality, the atmosphere will change remarkably."

Washington cut ties with Iran shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution and has labeled it an "axis of evil" member.

Unlike the European Union, 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's second largest oil producer or trading in Iranian oil.

Iran 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 and to abandon efforts to weaken Iran's clerical leadership.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4092022

[DoctorZIn]

Leader: US Policy on Iran Unchanged

January 08, 2004
Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting
IRIB News

Tehran -- Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said here on Thursday that there has been no sign that American officials have softened enmity with Iran's Islamic establishment and nation.

"There has been no sign of reduction in enmity of the US officials against Iran's Islamic establishment and nation because they (Americans) impudently threaten people and the Islamic establishment, while sending (relief) aid to the quake-stricken regions," said Ayatollah Khamenei in an address to a group of people and officials.

Addressing the audience on the anniversary of the historical uprising of a group of clerics in holy city of Qom against former monarchical regime, the Supreme Leader insisted that humanitarian relief aid has nothing to do with relations between the two countries.

Ayatollah Khamenei said with through such measures the Iranian people would never forget the constant and strong hostility of the arrogant regime of the US towards them and their national interests.

Ayatollah Khamenei said the US should know that it must stop hatching plots and exerting different sorts of pressures on the Islamic system, stop opposing the interests of the Iranian people, cease supporting the usurper and criminal regime of Israel, halt doing injustice against the Iraqi and Afghan nations and discontinue blocking the financial and vital assets of Iran.

The Iranian nation, said Ayatollah Khamenei, is a distinguished nation that would not bow to any bullying. The Iranian nation will instead welcome those who deal with it peacefully and friendly, added the Supreme Leader.

Ayatollah Khamenei praised the Iranian nation for rushing assistance to their quake-stricken compatriots in southeastern city of Bam, saying the "great political move" carried a message to the ill-wishers of the Iranian nation. The Iranian nation is highly interested in its national and Islamic identity, while strongly hating any bullying, threat, humiliation and false gestures, added the Supreme Leader.

The great show of solidarity and trust would definitely make international analysts and enemies of the Iranian nation come to the point that it will not be so easy to harm Iran and its nation and system, Ayatollah Khamenei said.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Ayatollah Khamenei advised the survivors of the quake disaster to lay their trust in God Almighty and be patient.

The Supreme Leader also instructed officials in charge to adopt measures to make buildings resistant to quake, considering the fact that Iran is situated in a quake-prone region.

He said no mistake and blunder in that regard would be forgiven.

Switching to 7th Majlis elections, slated for February 20, Ayatollah Khamenei called on the Iranian people at large to have a high turnout in the decisive event.

http://www.iribnews.com/Full_en.asp?news_id=196079

[DoctorZIn]

There are much more pro-Israel people in Iran than here in Europe!

Surprisingly, there are much more pro-Israel people in Iran than here in Europe!

you guess why?

because 25-years long of anti-Semite propaganda alongside with torture, harassment and killings have provoked a strong pro-Israel sentiment while at the same time rejecting to embrace the Palestinian cause. As far as I know, the Iranians have a long history of friendship with the Jews..

Unlike the ancient Romans, which were those who killed Jesus ( and not the Jews) and then persecuted the Jews, the ancient Persians never harmed the Jews and the people of the Middle East as well.

But, in return of this, today's Arabs are doing to the Iranians the same as they did when they invaded Persia. Too much harm. The Jews, instead, never harmed the Persians / Iranians.

Before the Islamic Inquisition / the Second Islamic Invasion of Iran, the Jews lived in thousands in Iran and had good relationships with the other Iranians..

Everything has changed since 1979. But what is changed is the regime. The Iranian people did not change. Despite some far-leftist groups and some few Islamists, the Iranians always respected and appreciated the Jews.

This is something that cannot to be ignored.

Stefania L.
Member of the Association "Radicali Sardi" and Italian Activist and Supporter of the Iranian cause for
Democracy and Secularism.

http://sarbaz.org/Articles/English/pro-Israel.htm

[DoctorZIn]

Man Pulled Alive from Iran Quake Rubble, Now in Coma

By REUTERS
Published: January 8, 2004
Filed at 6:12 a.m. ET

BAM, Iran (Reuters) - A 56-year-old man was rescued alive after spending 13 days beneath the rubble of the earthquake-razed Iranian city of Bam, but he then slipped into a coma and doctors said Thursday they feared for his life.

The man was found by rescue workers Wednesday afternoon trapped beneath a wardrobe which had apparently saved his life.

``It seems he had some water because around him was wet,'' said medic Mehdi Shadnoush, part of a Ukrainian-Iranian team treating the man at a field hospital in Bam.

``When he arrived at the hospital his signs of life were very weak. He was frozen and now he is in a coma,'' Shadnoush told Reuters.

The man lay on a hospital bed covered by a white blanket and had an oxygen mask over his mouth and nose. He looked very thin and had a white-and-black beard.

``We are following his status minute by minute but we don't hold out too much hope,'' Shadnoush said.

State radio had originally reported the man's age as 57. But doctors said that when he was first brought to the hospital he had been able to give his first name, Jalil, and his age, 56. He slipped into a coma overnight.

He was the first survivor to emerge alive from the ruins of the ancient Silk Road City 1000 km (625 miles) southeast of Tehran since a woman in her 90s was rescued on January 3.

The December 26 earthquake, which measured 6.8 on the Richter scale, struck just before dawn, destroying 90 percent of the city's buildings and killing more than 30,000 people.

Experts say it is very rare for people to survive for more than 72 hours in such conditions. Temperatures have fallen to around freezing most nights since the earthquake struck.

Aid workers said the rescued man had traveled from a nearby village to Bam for medical treatment and was staying with his sister when the earthquake struck.

``We have sent people to his village to bring his wife to the hospital,'' said Iranian aid worker Mohammad Reza Tahmasbi.

Rescue workers were prompted to look for the man after a woman from the neighborhood noticed his body had not yet been recovered.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-quake-iran-survivor.html

[DoctorZIn]

Iran's al-Qaeda Confusion

January 08, 2004
DEBKAfile
DEBKAfile's Intelligence Sources

Iran announced prematurely this week that it had renewed full diplomatic relations with Egypt. It added, as a sweetener, that a street in Tehran had been renamed Intifada street from Khaled Islambuli street, after the Egyptian who assassinated Anwar Sadat in 1981.

Egypt denied that ties had yet been resumed, but agreed that contacts between the two countries were continuing. DEBKAfile reports on these contacts, which hinge on the extradition of the Egyptian terrorists that Iran says it is holding.

In May 2003, a month after the fall of Baghdad, Iran requested that an Egyptian delegation should come to Tehran to discuss renewing relations. The delegation went, and since then three or four senior Egyptian diplomats and intelligence people have been stationed in Tehran.

The Iranians, as a gesture of goodwill, told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal, a senior operative of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda, who was responsible for organizing the May 12 2003 attack on Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital, was in Iran. They later said that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the head of Islamic Jihad and Osama’s bin Laden’s deputy, was also in Iran. They also named Showqi Islambuli , the brother of President Sadat’s assassin, and gave Egypt a list of some 60 Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives.

The Egyptians want some of these men extradited, and Iran appeared to be carrying out similar negotiations with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and the US. Jordan wants the extradition of Abu Mus’ab Lal-Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative whom the Turks accuse of being responsible for attacks on Jewish and British buildings in Istanbul in November 2003. Iran apparently agreed that the named men should be extradited to their country of citizenship.

But what is totally unclear is whether all or any of these men are actually detained by the Iranian authorities or are just known to have passed through Iranian territory. Their presence is said to be known to the Iranian authorities and they appear to have been, or are being, kept under surveillance. But does it go beyond this? In fact, the muddle goes even deeper.

The Iranians eventually told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal , who had presented an Egyptian passport, was now presenting a Kuwaiti one. Even more confusingly, they said that al-Zawahiri’s name was on the list by mistake. It appeared that forged passports, perhaps originating in Bahrain, were around the place. Kuwait and Bahrain then told Iran that they had no such citizens and were not interested in extradition.

On July 22 2003 Egypt made its position clear. General Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence minister, arrived on a secret visit to Tehran with a message from President Hosni Mubarak to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei : “ Either you extradite the Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives that you have said you have or diplomatic ties will not be resumed.” DEBKAfile sources report that Suleiman waited all August in Tehran without getting a clear answer from Iran, and eventually returned empty-handed. This remains Egypt’s position.

The latest twist in the story was reported by DEBKA-Net-Weekly on January 2 2004.

On December 29 Iran surprised Egypt and the US by saying it had arrested Ahmad Khasan al-Nadush Khayer (nom de guerre Siyasiya), the operation chief of Islamic Jihad’s and al-Qaeda’s special forces. Khayer, an Egyptian whose real name is Abdullah Muhammad Ragab, is a close associate of al-Zawahiri.

A senior official told DEBKAfile that US counter-terrorist authorities would like nothing better than to speak with Khayer: “If anyone in al-Qaeda knows when and where the fundamentalist terrorists mean to strike in the coming days or hours, Siyasiya is that man. But we have to be realistic. After all, we are dealing with the Iranians and aside from their claim to have arrested him. We may not hear a word of him ever again.”

The very fact that Iran reported that it was holding Khayer shows that it is renewing its efforts to achieve ties with Egypt. But the history of evasions and contradictions makes Egypt ultra-cautious. Egypt’s foreign minister, Ahmed Maher, said on January 7th that the two countries are discussing the possibility of renewing their relations. This, in effect, is a repetition of Omar Suleiman’s message last summer: ”Extradite wanted Egyptian terrorists and we will resume diplomatic relations. Otherwise not.”

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=762

[DoctorZIn]

Pakistan's Nuclear Metastasis: How Widespread is the Cancer?

The time has come to find out how much damage Pakistan's nuclear program has done--and how many rogue countries are closing in on the bomb.

WeeklyStandard.com
by Mansoor Ijaz
01/08/2004 12:00:00 AM

INDIA'S PRIME MINISTER, Atal Behari Vajpayee, met Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, in Islamabad on Monday on the sidelines of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation summit. The two erstwhile enemies shook hands and then agreed to hold formal talks starting next month. The bilateral effort will be aimed at finally settling a dispute that has long ranked as one of the world's most dangerous nuclear flashpoints--Kashmir.

But the much-anticipated meeting took place at an awkward moment for Pakistan, one that could define its future as a nation in moral, diplomatic, and economic terms more starkly than any other issue. The conduct of the Pakistani state, ruled for over half its existence by military governments, is under a microscope as nuclear watchdogs try to unravel the extent of damage done by Pakistani nuclear scientists assisting rogue regimes from Tripoli to Tehran to Pyongyang in building sophisticated uranium enrichment facilities.

Questions raised by Pakistan's nuclear conduct relegate the future of Kashmir to the sidelines. The burning question is whether Pakistan has morphed into a rogue nuclear state, or is the unwitting victim of a handful of deranged army generals, intelligence officers, and mad nuclear scientists run amok.

RECENT REVELATIONS about the extent to which Islamabad proliferated its nuclear technology during the past two decades paint a deeply troubling picture of not just what was happening without detection of international nuclear monitors, but what may still be going on--and what must now be stopped if the civilized world is to prevent tyrannical regimes from
developing the capacity to build and deliver nuclear weapons into the hands of terrorists.

The Bush and Blair successes in coercing Libya and Iran, and perhaps soon North Korea, into nuclear compliance may signal near-term progress in counter-proliferation efforts. But these victories have come at the price of negligently looking the other way while Islamabad continued an aggressive program to spread its nuclear expertise to Muslim countries.

With Pakistan's nuclear genie out of the bottle, Bush administration officials need to focus on getting Musharraf to quickly identify the extent of the metastasis, to fully disclose it, and to prosecute those officials involved no matter who they are or how high they are in the system. Musharraf must then agree to put verifiable measures in place to insure there is no possibility Pakistani nuclear technology will show up next in Jakarta, Riyadh, Cairo, or Beirut.

Chronicling the Evidence

The evidence of Pakistan's complicity in spreading its nuclear know-how is increasingly undeniable. Saif al-Islam Ghaddafi, son of Libyan strongman Muammar Ghaddafi, almost gleefully admitted to London's Sunday Times this weekend that Tripoli had paid $40 million (western intelligence believes the number could be as high as $100 million) to middlemen for a "full bomb dossier" from Pakistan detailing how to build an atomic weapon. Libya's candor comes as part of its deal with the United States and Britain to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons in return for readmission to the community of nations, and western promises to help rebuild its decrepit oil industry. Intercepting a German-registered ship in October with thousands of parts for uranium centrifuges also helped bring the Libyan leader to his senses about his ongoing nuclear cooperation with Pakistan.

To add to Islamabad's woes, the New York Times this Sunday posted on its website a sales brochure for nuclear components available to qualified buyers from Pakistan's top-secret A.Q. Khan Research Laboratories (named for the so-called father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program). The technologies offered were critical for building high quality uranium enrichment facilities, and the glossy brochure presented Pakistan's best nuclear wares with Madison Avenue pizzazz.

The same lab stands accused of providing gas centrifuges to Iranian scientists through a vast network of secret procurement channels, largely run through the Middle East port of Dubai. Those centrifuges, when tested by International Atomic Energy Agency scientists visiting Iran's key nuclear installations last summer, were found to have traces of bomb-grade enriched uranium identical to that known to have originated from Pakistani centrifuges. The findings made it all but impossible for the parts to have come from anywhere else.

Unfortunately, the plethora of revelations about Pakistan's activities is only the tip of the iceberg of a decade-long clandestine effort by unregulated elements within the country's nuclear, intelligence and military establishments to sell the "Islamic bomb" to other Muslim nations. At the heart of the effort was a dangerously motivated clique of former Pakistani intelligence chiefs, corrupt politicians, and Islamized Pakistani scientists, including Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who believed it was their moral duty to offer weapons of mass destruction to embattled Muslim states in the global Ummah (community of Islamic nations).

Their activities, in various stages of planning and implementation since the late 1980s, reached a
zenith in the months leading up to the September 11 attacks. Key military and intelligence officials in Islamabad, later fired or laterally moved to less sensitive posts by Musharraf at Washington's urging, had come to the conclusion that the West, led by the United States, was hell-bent on the economic destruction of Pakistan for its robust nuclear weapons program, lack of democracy, military support for militants in Kashmir, and supply lines to the extremist Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

These ambitious Islamists (wrongly) perceived that spreading Pakistan's nuclear wealth throughout the Ummah would secure both its economic future and place in history as the hub of the Muslim world's intellectual and scientific power. Their vision had multiple dimensions, including the sharing of knowledge, materials, and technologies to build ultra-sophisticated research facilities in other countries, and that is precisely what they repeatedly and aggressively did for over 15 years.

Spreading the Cancer to other Muslim Countries

The evidence is now compelling that they succeeded in Iran and North Korea, and were far enough along in Libya to show their fingerprints. But where else was Pakistan's nuclear brain trust plying its trade and for what purpose?

Nuclear cooperation with Iran was initially intended during the Cold War to provide strategic depth in military planning against arch-nemesis and former Soviet ally, India (now a key ally of both Iran and Afghanistan). But the strategy evolved early on into a derivative assistance plan that would enable Iranian-backed Hezbollah guerrillas based in Lebanon to eventually obtain tactical nuclear weapons from Tehran--weapons that could be deployed in the Bekaa Valley once Iran's nuclear fuel cycles had been established. Israel's reaction time to launch strikes or counterstrikes would drop to zero.

Pakistan would maintain plausible deniability of any involvement in Middle East affairs (no one would believe Shia Iran was depending on Sunni Pakistan for nuclear assistance), but its proxy play to clandestinely help equalize the playing field with nuclear Israel would give it deep respect, and lots of free oil, from the Arab world.

Saudi Arabia toyed with the idea of obtaining Pakistani nuclear weapons as well. But Islamabad's intelligence mavens vetoed the effort because of the heavy American military presence at that time, fearing their larger designs to spread Pakistani expertise and technology might get exposed. The alternative put up for consideration was building a secret facility in one of the sheikdoms bordering Saudi Arabia--as long as the money, or enough free oil, was there for Pakistan's benefit, and the sheikdom agreed to provide regional cover in the event of any Israeli, or even Iranian, malfeasance.

To this day, the March 1999 visit by Saudi Arabia's Defense Minister, Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, to Pakistan's nuclear facilities at Kahuta remains unexplained. It is the only non-Pakistani entry ever allowed inside the top-secret installation. Similarly unexplained are the "retirement" activities of Dr. A. Q. Khan, now living in Dubai where the Iranian and Libyan technology transfers allegedly changed hands. He's ostensibly building schools for disaffected Muslim youth there, but one wonders what else is being built underneath those desert sands. The magnitude of Khan's hypocrisy in using the Muslim world's forlorn as props to camouflage his unholy war to spread nuclear weapons into the hands of the very regimes that suppressed their people into oblivion is incomprehensible.

Even Malaysia's Mahathir Mohamed was considered a hero of sorts in extremist Pakistani circles, having built a modern society with a vibrant open-market economy while never compromising the Islam phobias (anti-Semitism, etc.) that made him anathema to Western leaders in his waning years. It appears Mahathir never accepted the open invitation to join the Muslim nuclear club, but Malaysia played the game at the fringes. Components of Libya's nascent uranium enrichment facilities, for example, were manufactured in Malaysia as recently as 2001.

Leading the Drive for Transparency in Pakistan's Nuclear Affairs

What to do? Simply interrogating a handful of senior nuclear scientists resident at Kahuta Labs cannot stop the quest by ungovernable elements in Pakistan's military-intelligence establishment from spreading the country's nuclear know-how. Even questioning Dr. A. Q. Khan himself, as Musharraf recently allowed under intense international pressure, will not be enough. Disinformation that insured the success of Khan's clandestine effort to build Pakistan's bomb, after all, was the hallmark of his entire tenure as Islamabad's nuclear chief.

Nor will it be sufficient that another Muslim country "outs" Pakistan's nuclear complicity when faced with irrefutable evidence, as Iran and Libya have apparently done. Waiting for admissions of guilt in matters of nuclear commerce after the fact is a dangerous policy for preventing proliferation in unstable, autocratic regimes that dominate the Muslim world's political landscape.

The conscientious objectors in Pakistan's scientific, military, and intelligence establishments have a moral responsibility to come clean about what has been done, wittingly or not, to assist other nations in developing to whatever extent they could meaningful nuclear weapons research programs. Sooner or later, the evidence will emerge. But the world cannot wait until that evidence is a rogue state's North Korean-made missile armed with a Chinese-made nuclear device assembled in Islamabad's nuclear labs whose fuel came from gas centrifuges sold by Pakistan's rogue Islamists.

Musharraf has to publicly and verifiably put an end to the speculation that Pakistan's nuclear assets are for sale to nations rich enough to buy from or barter with his scientists. This means, among other things, taking steps to offer more transparency in independently monitoring Pakistan's nuclear sites, and keeping track of the movements of Pakistan's scientists in ways that neither humiliate the country nor compromise its sovereignty.

As a first step, President George W. Bush needs to ascertain that Musharraf had no knowledge of the transactions in question. Bush White House officials have indicated that at least in the Libyan case, where the transfers of technology took place largely after the September 11 terrorist attacks, Musharraf appears to have had no knowledge of the transfers. If he genuinely did not, President Bush needs to help distance the Pakistani president in the minds of the American public from the crazies who want to destroy Pakistan by sharing its nuclear secrets with rogue states.

By building such a political argument at home, Bush can take important legislative steps that will free up technology to assist Musharraf in holding his scientists and military-intelligence complex accountable for future actions. The previous U.S. policy of economic and military sanctions is outdated and irrelevant in the context of Pakistan's cooperation on post 9/11 terrorism issues.

Since 1990, U.S. sanctions have blocked technologies from being sent to Pakistan that could improve nuclear security there. These sanctions, along with U.S. export license controls and, where needed, global non-proliferation regime compliance rules, should be waived to insure Islamabad gets the needed technology to protect its nuclear labs, weapons and materials from unauthorized use.

Pakistan: Model Nuclear Citizen or Loose Atomic Cannon?

There is another reason for pursuing this course. Having come dangerously close to falling under the U.S. definition of a "rogue" state, Pakistan could now become a beacon for how to responsibly deal with rogue elements inside the state without compromising its sovereignty or dealing a blow to an important cornerstone of the national psyche. Other states (Georgia, for example) with nuclear weapons programs that may also be in the market for selling their secrets might take notice and change course.

To emphasize U.S. concerns, the president (and Congress) should condition all U.S. aid to Pakistan on Islamabad's acceptance of nuclear safekeeping vaults, sensors, alarms, closed-circuit cameras, and other technologies that give Musharraf and his like-minded aides the ability to internally monitor and track Pakistan's nuclear technologies. Simply excusing leakage as the work of "greedy" individuals with their own agendas, as Pakistan's foreign ministry spokesman did when the Iranian revelations were made, is neither believable nor an acceptable risk to the safety and security of civilized nations.

Furthermore, a new formula for giving U.S. aid should be devised that is inversely proportional to Pakistan's spending on military and nuclear budgets. The less Islamabad spends of its national wealth on building nuclear bombs that protect no one, the more America should spend on helping Pakistan build schools and hospitals that educate and protect the masses.

Pakistan has the right to maintain its nuclear arsenal for deterrence against regional threats, and perhaps as importantly, for its national dignity. It does not have the right, whether sanctioned officially or not, to assist in the creation of nuclear monsters that seek Armageddon itself. Nor does it have the right to misappropriate American taxpayer dollars in support of actions by the very elements that seek our death and destruction on their misguided path to eternity.

Mansoor Ijaz, a New York financier and chairman of Crescent Investment Management, jointly authored the blueprint for the cease-fire of hostilities between Muslim militants and Indian security forces in Kashmir in July 2000. He also negotiated Sudan's offer of counter-terrorism assistance on al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden to the Clinton administration in 1996 and 1997. His personal views, expressed here, are based on firsthand accounts from meetings, private discussions and correspondences with Pakistani nuclear scientists as well as senior military and intelligence officials over the past decade. His father, Dr. Mujaddid Ijaz (deceased), a nuclear physicist who retired Professor Emeritus at Virginia Tech, brought over 100 students from Pakistan and other parts of the Muslim world to the United States during his 26 year tenure for training and degree programs at U.S. colleges and universities. Some of those students now run sensitive parts of Pakistan's top-secret nuclear facilities.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/575nerhn.asp

[DoctorZIn]

Getting Nicer?

January 08, 2004
The Economist
The Economist Print Edition

Folowing the quake that levelled Iran's south-eastern town of Bam two weeks ago, it would have taken another seismic shift for Iran to accept the high-level delegation that President George Bush proposed to send to his stricken foe.

On January 3rd came Iran's response: not now, maybe later. Too warm a welcome from normal Iranians would have belied the official Iranian fallacy: that the people loathe the “Great Satan”.

The Americans are keeping open their offer to dispatch a senator and an unidentified member of the Bush family. And Iran has until April to enjoy less hazardous fruits of American compassion: a three-month lifting of various economic sanctions, including the ban on sending American funds to Iran. This “90-day opportunity” has stirred up much excitement.

An opportunity for what? The Americans say their measures are solely humanitarian. But Iran has long portrayed the lifting of sanctions as a precursor to the reopening of relations that were cut in 1979, when the late Ayatollah Khomeini came to power. On New Year's Day, Mr Bush listed three tasks that Iran must fulfil to win more favours: abandon its nuclear programme; extradite the (roughly 350) suspected al-Qaeda members in its custody; and “listen to the voices of those who long for freedom”.

On the nuclear issue, Iran has already climbed down. Prevented by international pressure from getting the technology to build a bomb, Iran seems to have put its programme into cold storage. That impression will need endorsing by UN monitors before America stops menacing Iran with the prospect of referral to the UN's Security Council. But the Americans sound cautiously optimistic that the Iranians' nuclear disavowal is genuine.

Whether or not they entered the country with the connivance of Iran's militant Revolutionary Guards, the al-Qaeda detainees have become an embarrassment to their hosts. Some big fish, including the organisation's number three, may be among them. If they are deported to their home countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Iran fears it will face reprisals by al-Qaeda.

Last month, America ruled out an obvious quid pro quo by vetoing a decision by Iraq's American-appointed Governing Council to hand over 3,800 members of the People's Mujahideen, an Iranian opposition group that had been based in Iraq, to the Iranian authorities. Many may now get asylum in third countries.

Iran is making diplomatic waves elsewhere. It is on the verge of restoring full relations with Egypt. This week the Tehran municipality changed the name of a street called after the assassin of Egypt's Anwar Sadat, the first Arab leader to make a formal peace with Israel. Some dissident Egyptians in Iran may also be extradited.

Ali Tajerniya, a member of the Iranian parliament's foreign-affairs committee, senses a coming “strategic realignment”. By steadily improving relations with Turkey and hobnobbing with Jordan's King Abdullah, Iran's rulers seem to be quietly ending its castigation of Muslim countries that do business with Israel. On that score, says Mr Tajerniya, Syria stands to lose. Iran's indispensable ally when both countries were threatened by Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Syria is now squirming under American scrutiny.

Iran's new pragmatism has been forced upon it by the pressure that has built up since Mr Bush included it in his “axis of evil”. Progress would be quicker were it not for the poisonous rivalry between President Muhammad Khatami's reform-minded government and the conservative clerics gathered around the “supreme leader”, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

After his election in 1997, Mr Khatami tried to bring Iran closer to the Americans. Invoking revolutionary ideology, powerful conservatives stymied his effort. The conservatives' rhetoric remains unpleasant, with one of their newspapers calling Mr Bush's partial lifting of sanctions a “deceitful” gesture. But conservatives may well make further concessions simply to keep themselves off Mr Bush's hit-list.

It was the clerical establishment, after all, that guided Iran's nuclear climb-down, despite vetoing Mr Khatami's earlier efforts to make concessions. The same is true of the rapprochement with Egypt. “The reformists are upset”, says one conservative, “that we can do things that they cannot.”

Only on Mr Bush's third demand, that Iran become more pluralistic, are the conservatives likely to demur. They plan to use their unaccountable powers to ensure that when Mr Khatami, a genuine democrat, steps down next year, his place is taken by a pragmatic conservative. Their model is another semi-dictatorship, Pakistan, where an alliance with the United States has been based not on shared ideals but on old-fashioned realpolitik.

http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=01&d=08&a=8