Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iranian Alert -- August 22, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST
The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 8.22.2003 | DoctorZin

Posted on 08/22/2003 12:07:03 AM PDT by DoctorZIn

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movment in Iran from being reported.

From jamming satellite broadcasts, to prohibiting news reporters from covering any demonstrations to shutting down all cell phones and even hiring foreign security to control the population, the regime is doing everything in its power to keep the popular movement from expressing its demand for an end of the regime.

These efforts by the regime, while successful in the short term, do not resolve the fundamental reasons why this regime is crumbling from within.

Iran is a country ready for a regime change. 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.

Please continue to join us here, post your news stories and comments to this thread.

Thanks for all the help.

DoctorZin


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iran; iranianalert; protests; studentmovement
Discover all the news since the protests began on June 19th, go to:


1 posted on 08/22/2003 12:07:03 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

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


2 posted on 08/22/2003 12:08:00 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Khatami says Iranians free to demand he step down

Thursday, August 21, 2003 - ©2003 IranMania.com

TEHRAN, Aug 21 (AFP) - President Mohammed Khatami, who is facing mounting public disillusionment over his failure to bring promised reforms, said people were free to demand that he step down, local media reported Thursday.

He that the people voted into power must keep in mind that the people can sideline him if they want," Khatami told former prisoners of war from the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war in a speech Wednesday.

Last week, conservatives blocked three bills passed by parliament authorizing the government to adopt parts of the 1979 UN convention on women's rights, another convention against torture and one bill on electoral reform.

They were shot down by the Guardians Council, a small conservative-run body that vets all legislation in line with the constitution and Islamic law.

Many saw the bills as a last-ditch attempt to assert Khatami's embattled position in the face of entrenched religious conservatives.

Disillusionment with the deadlock in the Islamic republic led to a series of student demonstrations in June that were violently repressed.

Analysts have raised the likelihood that Khatami will resign if reformers lose their majority in legislative elections slated for February-March 2004, one year ahead of presidential elections.

Some press reports Thursday said government spokesman Abdullah Ramezanzadeh had resigned, but there was no official confirmation of this.

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=17564&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

DoctorZin Note: President Khatami is the Gray Davis of Iran.

3 posted on 08/22/2003 12:13:06 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Khatami says Iranians free to demand he step down

Thursday, August 21, 2003 - ©2003 IranMania.com

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/968433/posts?page=3#3

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
4 posted on 08/22/2003 12:14:17 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
This is another interesting article by Amir Taheri. It isn't discussing Iran directly, but its lessons do apply. -- DoctorZin

THE BEST OF THE U.N.

By AMIR TAHERI

August 21, 2003 -- THIS was to be Sergio Viera de Mello's dream come true: helping a major Arab country become a modern democracy.

Vieira de Mello, the United Nations' special representative in Baghdad, did not live long enough to see his dream come true. On Tuesday a car bomb destroyed the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad. Vieira de Mello was among the 18 people killed.

The Brazilian diplomat, his mood always as sunny as his tanned face, knew that Iraq was a difficult case. It was a society emerging from more than three decades of violence and war under some of the most brutal regimes ever seen in Arab history. Nevertheless, after a two-month spell in Baghdad, he had been totally charmed by the Iraqis.

"These people deserve the best," he told me in a telephone conversation last July. "All that Iraq needs is a decent chance: it now has that chance."

Vieira de Mello had long experience in nation-building - that is, in taking a war-shattered country and transforming it into a working polity.

Vieira de Mello played the central role in Cambodia as it emerged from decades of war and savage rule by the Khmer Rouge gangsters. He did not succeed in turning Cambodia into a modern democracy. But the least that one can say is that Cambodia has been put on the path of democratic development.

Vieira de Mello was also involved in East Timor, a largely Catholic enclave that had suffered from years of violence under Indonesian occupation. Today, the Brazilian is among East Timor's national heroes, thanks to his patient efforts to put down the flames of revenge and focus people's attention on the future.

Had he not been so tragically slain, Vieira de Mello was well in line to succeed Kofi Annan as U.N. secretary-general. He was preparing to take over the position of U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights in just two weeks time.

Vieira de Mello's Iraq mission was already a success. He had managed to establish a personal relationship with Paul Bremer, the U.S.-led coalition's interim administrator for Iraq. It was partly thanks to Vieira de Mello's quiet diplomacy that Bremer agreed to speed up the formation of the Governing Council and to give it extensive powers.

That move, in turn, paved the way for the Security Council resolution that welcomed the formation of the Governing Council, thus bestowing on it a wider measure of legitimacy.

During the past few weeks, many members of he Governing Council had learned to rely on Vieira de Mello to understand their concerns and to exert pressure on the Americans to take the measures needed.

Vieira de Mello also played a key part in distancing the United Nations from a negative stance on Iraq, as urged by some Security Council members, including France and Germany. With exceptional patience he had persuaded senior U.N. officials, including Kofi Annan, that this was no time and Iraq was no place to play the traditional anti-American game for diplomatic effect.

Vieira de Mello understood one crucial fact: The United States must remain in overall charge of Iraq until there is an elected government in Baghdad. He saw the U.N. role as one of providing support and helping improve public services. It was while chairing a session on such practical issues that Vieira de Mello was blown up along with 16 others working for the United Nations.

According to Bremer, Vieira de Mello had been a target for assassination since he first arrived in Iraq last June.

Vieira de Mello is not the first senior U.N. official to be brutally killed. In 1948, Zionist extremists murdered the Swedish Count Bernadotte who represented the U.N. in Palestine. In 1961, Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold was kidnapped and murdered in the Congo.

Who wanted Sergio Viera de Mello Vieira de Mello, a man of peace, to die? Most likely, those who wish to plunge Iraq into chaos, and so prevent the speedy emergence of an Iraqi government, were behind the attack.

After every crime, the key question is: Who will profit from it? In this case, the only groups likely to profit are the nihilists who believe that they can halt the inevitable march of Iraq toward normalization.

Whatever the motives behind the attack, it is unlikely that it will have a lasting impact. On the contrary, it may raise the stakes for the United States, making the Bush administration far more determined to impose its will on Iraq.

One thing is certain: The clock of history will not be turned back in Iraq.

E-mail: amirtaheri@benadorassociates.com

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/3691.htm
5 posted on 08/22/2003 12:20:18 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
This is another interesting article by Amir Taheri. It isn't discussing Iran directly, but its lessons do apply. -- DoctorZin

THE BEST OF THE U.N.

By AMIR TAHERI

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/968433/posts?page=5#5
6 posted on 08/22/2003 12:22:10 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian envoy faces extradition

Scotsman - By John Innes
Aug 22, 2003

An Iranian former diplomat studying in Britain was arrested last night in connection with a terrorist attack in Argentina nine years ago.

Hade Soleimanpour, 47, the Iranian ambassador to Argentina at the time of the bombing, was detained on an extradition warrant at his home in Kepier Court, Durham, Scotland Yard said.

Soleimanpour, a research student at Durham University, is accused of conspiracy to murder in connection with the attack on a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires on 18 July, 1994. He will appear before Bow Street magistrates in London today.

It is understood a formal request was made by Argentine authorities for Soleimanpour to be extradited from Britain.

Nearly 90 people were killed and 200 injured when a blast destroyed the headquarters of the Argentine Jewish Mutual Association and the Delegation of Argentine Jewish Associations. The seven-storey building was the main community centre for Jews in Argentina, which has the largest Jewish population in Latin America.

Argentine and Jewish leaders blamed the Lebanon-based Islamic terrorist group, Hezbollah, and the Iranian government.

Iran’s foreign ministry rejected allegations of Iranian involvement at the time.

Last month, the Argentine president, Nestor Kirchner, said the lack of progress in the investigation of the bombing was a "national disgrace".

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1876.shtml
7 posted on 08/22/2003 12:25:04 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
BTT
8 posted on 08/22/2003 2:27:53 AM PDT by windchime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
"Khatami says Iranians free to demand he step down"

Anyone keeping track of how many times he's said this?


"DoctorZin Note: President Khatami is the Gray Davis of Iran."

Gotta work on the hair.
9 posted on 08/22/2003 4:32:27 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Always such a tragedy to needlessly lose someone who has devoted their life to doing so much good.
10 posted on 08/22/2003 4:39:30 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
About time.
11 posted on 08/22/2003 4:42:54 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert; DoctorZIn; McGavin999; AdmSmith; Valin; RaceBannon; Texas_Dawg; Eala; dixiechick2000; ...
"Iran Travels Down Iraq's Nuclear Path"

Posted by Gary Fitleberg
Friday, August 22, 2003


Why would Iran blazenly and recklessly travel down the same road as Iraq in pursuing a nuclear weapons program? Will it suffer the same destiny as Iraq and Saddam Hussein ultimately for its dangerous and destructive defiance of calls to curtail its activities?

Iran’s development of a nuclear program in the Middle East is a definite threat to security and stability in the region as well as worldwide.

Tehran has approved the second phase of construction of a nuclear plant in defiance of the U.S. and despite efforts by the U.N. Atomic International Energy Agency to curtail future plans to build a nuclear program.

Iran’s dangerous and determined defiance recalls the leadership of its neighbor Iraq.

One of the heads of Iran's atomic energy program announced that the government had approved the implementation of the second stage of plans for constructing a nuclear power plant in the city of Bushehr, Israel Radio reported.

Iran claims that the nuclear power plant in Bushehr will be operational in two years time. Most of the world is of the opinion that the plant will not be used as a power plant, but rather as part of Iran's plan to acquire nuclear weapons.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon did not mention the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities during his meeting with President Bush last month, Israel Radio quoted Israeli officials in Washington as saying.

However, the sources were quoted as saying that the issue of Iran's nuclear capabilities has been on Bush's agenda for a long time and that he shares Israel's view on the matter. Iran is on the radar screen of both the U.S. and Israel regarding potential nuclear capability.

On Wednesday, a senior Washington Post columnist reported that after the latest meeting between Sharon and Bush in Washington, there was mounting concern in the administration that Israel might be planning to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

Columnist Jim Hoagland opened his column on Wednesday by saying: ''A grim warning from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to President Bush that Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than U.S. intelligence believes, has triggered concern here that Israel is seriously considering a preemptive strike against Iran's Busher nuclear reactor.'' According to Hoagland, who quoted U.S. and Israeli sources, Sharon brought Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant, his army liaison officer, ''to shower a worried-looking Bush with photographs and charts from a thick dossier on Iran's covert program.''

Hoagland said Sharon told Bush that Israel believes Iran is much closer to a bomb than American intelligence suspects, and that as far as Israel is concerned, the delivery date of Russian fuel for the Iranian project will be a point of no return. Hoagland noted that Israel deliberately struck the Iraqi reactor in 1982 before it was supplied with nuclear fuel.

The column indicated that Sharon still ''enjoys'' a reputation in Washington as a ''wild card'' or ''rogue,'' a reputation that the prime minister put to good use leading up to the war in Iraq when his semi-veiled threats to take action if Baghdad struck Israel made Washington provide both a defensive umbrella for Israel and a hefty aid package.

But Sharon has been careful not to make explicit threats, lest they be tested one day and meanwhile cause unnecessary escalation. Instead, he has preferred to make vague statements that have left the Arabs, Iranians, and Americans in a worrying fog.

Israel has made no secret that the Iranian nuclear program is the leading risk to its national security. Israeli intelligence believes the point of no return in the Iranian nuclear program is within two to three years, and some elements in Israeli intelligence apparently think it could come sooner.

But attacking Iran's nuclear facilities would be far more complicated than the 1982 strike outside Baghdad. First, Iran's nuclear program is dispersed at several sites, some of which are protected from conventional weapons; the distance to fly is much greater; and perhaps most importantly, the Iranians could respond in a painful manner.

Therefore, Israel would prefer that the United States handle the problem through either diplomatic means or force. There have been recent reports that the CIA has shown some countries, although not Israel, plans for an air and missile attack on the Iranian facilities.

Israel, is naturally a nervous neighbor with a nuclear threat right it in its back yard. Iran appears to be resolved to destroy Israel and test its position internationally as did Iraq.

Iran has recently armed its elite revolutionary guide with ''Shihab'' missiles that can easily reach and strike Israel’s heartland. Iran continues to arm and fund Hezbollah in Lebanon and the recent missile fired from there killed Israeli citizens despite Israel’s withdrawal from this country. This escalation and military provocation is enough. Enough to make Iran the very next target in a preemptive strike just like Iraq. So Iran better beware for a preventative attack!

Iran, unless it changes course, from a dangerous destructive path, is about to learn the hard way that ''History Repeats Itself''!

Gary Fitleberg is a political analyst specializing in international relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs.

http://www.chronwatch.com/featured/contentDisplay.asp?aid=3962
12 posted on 08/22/2003 6:31:21 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
Iran condemns UK following arrest of former ambassador to Argentina

22-08-2003, 14:20

Iran on Friday condemned the recent move by the British police to detain Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpour, stressing that the measure had been politically motivated.

"The measure had been politically motivated and has been carried out under the influence of the Zionists. It is meant to serve the interests of the Zionist regime," said Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi, according to IRIB.

Jewish sources based in Buenos Aires have claimed that Soleimanpour was arrested in a London suburb on Thursday.

Marta Nercellas, the lawyer representing the Amia Jewish Community Center, has claimed that Soleimanpour was among those wanted for the 1994 bombing of the center which left 85 killed and 300 wounded.

Judge Juan Jose Galeano, who is presiding over the case of the bombing, last week issued arrest warrants for eight Iranians for their alleged involvement in the incident.

Asefi said the warrants had been political and lacked judicial grounds.

"We realized this from the very moment that they showed they were not interested in cooperating with Iran to clarify the issue," he said.

"The Islamic Republic will do all it can to retrieve the rights of any of its nationals that are arrested on an unjustifiable basis, and will try to release them."

The foreign ministry spokesman further stressed that Tehran will carry out the required steps in that connection through diplomatic channels to guarantee his rights and freedom.

"We will take necessary measures through any means deemed necessary and in this connection we will hold talks with the British officials, asking them to provide necessary explanations," said Asefi.

He strongly dismissed any sort of Iran's involvement in Amia blast, saying that Argentine should assume responsibility for the judicial and political consequences of such a measure, which runs counter against international regulations.

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=256871&lang=e&dir=news
13 posted on 08/22/2003 7:56:42 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
VW, Ericsson, Statoil Invest in Iran, Undeterred by Tensions

August 22, 2003
Bloomberg.com
Bloomberg

The Fifth Tehran International Auto Fair, a five-day event that closed July 5, drew companies such as Renault SA, PSA Peugeot Citroen, Mazda Motor Corp., DaimlerChrysler AG's Mercedes-Benz, Fiat SpA and Volkswagen AG.

Many foreign companies continue to invest in Iran even though U.S. President George W. Bush described the country as part of an ``Axis of Evil,'' along with Iraq and North Korea.

Some foreign investors, such as Japan, are delaying projects. Yet most of the about 200 companies present in Iran, such as Ericsson AB, the world's largest maker of mobile-phone equipment, and Alcatel SA, the second-biggest producer of telecommunications gear, are staying put though adopting a low profile. Others, like Statoil ASA, Norway's biggest oil company, and Technip SA, Europe's largest provider of oilfield services, state openly that they're in the country for the long term.

``When the political temperatures go up, companies take a low profile,'' said Siamak Namazi, managing director of Tehran-based Atieh Bahar Consulting, an adviser to companies such as BP Plc, HSBC Holdings Plc and Alcatel. ``But we haven't heard of any that have cut their investments.''

As the U.S. raises political pressure on Iran over a suspected nuclear-weapons program, student demonstrators have been calling for more democracy and for the supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei to give up his special powers. Many Iranians are unhappy with the slow pace of political change initiated by President Mohammad Khatami.

Abraham's Talks

U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham was in Europe last week and held separate discussions on Iran with Dutch Economic Affairs Minister Laurens-Jan Brinkhorst and Italian Industry Minister Antonio Marzano, a Department of Energy spokesman said. He declined to disclose details.

``They only talked about Iran in general terms,'' Dutch Economic Affairs Ministry spokeswoman Paula de Jonge said. ``The subject of investments didn't come up.'' Italian officials refused to comment.

``Iran is one of the most resource-rich countries in the world but its political risk is among the highest of any rated sovereign nation,'' said James McCormack, a senior analyst at ratings company Fitch, which rates Iran's foreign debt as B+, on par with Romania and one notch below Azerbaijan.

After years of shunning Western investments, Iran is now actively seeking funds from abroad. In the five-year plan covering 2000-2004, the government is seeking $4.5 billion to $5 billion in direct foreign investment.

VW Project

VW, Europe's biggest automaker, sent its regional manager, Peter Poersch, to Tehran. Kerman Car Manufacturing, Iran's No. 3 car company, said at the fair that it signed a preliminary agreement with VW to produce four models in Iran, according to Iranian state news service IRNA.

If the accord goes ahead, the first model would come off assembly lines in the third quarter of next year with a goal of eventually producing some 200,000 units. Iran has plans to produce 600,000 cars by 2004, primarily to meet domestic demand.

``Nothing has been decided up to now,'' VW spokesman Hans Peter Brechinger said.

Iran has the fifth-largest proven oil reserves, holding about 90 billion barrels, or about 9 percent of the world total. It holds the world's second-largest reserves of natural gas, surpassed only by Russia.

Since 1995, the U.S. has tried to put an economic noose around Iran and slow the development of its energy potential. Then- President Bill Clinton banned U.S. companies and their foreign subsidiaries from conducting business with Iran.

Sanctions

The following year, under the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, the U.S. imposed mandatory and discretionary sanctions on non-U.S. companies investing more than $20 million annually in the Iranian oil and natural-gas sectors.

In the post-Iraq War period, Bush has renewed calls for tough sanctions because of Iran's alleged nuclear plans.

``The international community must come together to make it very clear to Iran that we will not tolerate the construction of nuclear weapons,'' Bush said in June after the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that the country didn't properly report some of its activities as required by the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty. ``Iran would be dangerous if they have a nuclear weapon.''

Low Profile

Iran has denied that it is developing nuclear weapons and says the program is designed to generate electric power to spur the economy. The country has an 18 percent unemployment rate and inflation is 25 percent.

Keeping a low profile is the best strategy for companies dealing with Iran, says Patrick Clawson, deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. ``When companies ask my advice, I've had to tell them candidly that so long as they can keep the investments off the front pages of the newspapers, it's likely that the United States government will do very little,'' he said.

Case in point: General Electric Co. and Halliburton Co. are coming under pressure from pension funds such as those for New York City's police and firefighters that have more than $205 million of investments in GE and $18 million in Halliburton.

New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson Jr., has submitted shareholder resolutions calling for board committees to examine risks posed to the companies by dealings in Iran and Syria. California Public Employees' Retirement System, the U.S.'s largest public retirement fund, has asked Congress and administration officials to identify companies that might unwittingly support terrorism.

`Clear Guidance'

General Electric, the biggest maker of medical-imaging machines and power-generation equipment, is active in Iran through its Canadian subsidiary, while Halliburton, based in Houston, has an office in Iran opened in 2000 by a Cayman Islands subsidiary, Halliburton Products & Services Ltd.

``As we said in our proxy this year, U.S. law, regulation and policy contemplate that U.S. companies will do business in Iran and elsewhere through foreign subsidiaries and provide clear guidance on how those activities are to be conducted,'' said GE spokesman Gary Sheffer.

Some companies are reacting. In May, ThyssenKrupp AG, Germany's largest steelmaker, paid 406 million euros ($473 million) or three times the market price for shares in the company that were owned by Iran to avoid potential U.S. economic penalties. The move reduces Iran's stake in ThyssenKrupp to 4.4 percent from 7.79 percent.

Japanese Retreat

Japan's government was close to an agreement to invest $2.5 billion to develop Iran's biggest oil discovery in 35 years before getting cold feet after the U.S. opposed the investment.

``This would be a particularly unfortunate time to go forward with major new oil and gas deals,'' State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said July 1, in a statement in Washington.

That prompted the Japanese to delay the agreement. ``Suspicion about Iran's nuclear development is not an issue affecting only our country,'' Yasuo Fukuda, Japan's chief cabinet secretary, told reporters in Tokyo last month.

``The U.S. has done its best to prevent the Iranian economy from growing,'' said Tahmasb Mazaheri, Iran's minister of economic affairs and finance who was in London to attend a conference in June as the U.S. put pressure on Japan.

Energy

Still, the Japan incident was a rare victory for the U.S., which since 1998 has seen European and Asian companies such as Eni SpA and Total SA disregard its call for sanctions. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in 1998 granted a waiver to Total and partners OAO Gazprom and Malaysia's Petroliam Nasional Berhad when it became apparent they planned to bypass the U.S. sanctions to help develop the South Pars natural-gas field. Other European and Asian companies have since asked for, and received, waivers.

``Over 200 publicly traded companies are doing business in Iran,'' said Roger Robinson, chief executive of Conflict Securities Advisory Group, based in Washington, which provides research reports on companies dealing with potentially hostile regimes. ``The bulk of them are in energy.''

In testimony to a subcommittee of the U.S. House International Relations Committee in June, Robinson said 41 companies have invested more than $20 million each in Iranian energy projects.

Jobs

Around 80 percent of Iran's total export earnings and as much as half of the government budget is based on oil exports. Still despite the high oil revenues Iran needs to attract investment in areas other than energy to ease the high unemployment, said Fitch's McCormack,

``The oil industry creates foreign currency but doesn't create jobs,'' McCormack said.

Total of France in 1995 became the first foreign company to sign a petroleum development agreement with Iran since the Islamic Revolution 16 years earlier. Two years later it signed another contract for South Pars, the Persian Gulf's biggest gas field, which holds about 6 percent of the world's supply. Total executives declined to comment.

Royal Dutch/Shell Group, the biggest gasoline retailer in the U.S., won a contract in 1999 to develop the Soroosh-Nowruz offshore oilfields, pledging to invest $800 million.

`Long-Term Strategy'

Italy's Eni, Statoil and Russia's Gazprom are also developing oil and gas fields. Statoil is seeking to boost its $300 million investment in Iran.

``We will continue to monitor the political situation closely, but our long-term strategy is to increase our business in the country,'' said Inge Hansen, Statoil's chief financial officer.

``Iran is keen to make more deals and the oil companies are interested to put more money in,'' said Caroline Cook, an analyst at Deutsche Bank AG and one of the authors of a report on Iran. ``The American oil companies are the ones losing out.''

BP, Europe's second-biggest oil company, is negotiating to develop the Bangestan fields, which hold more than a billion barrels of oil.

Still, BP, the largest natural-gas producer in the U.S., is eager not to antagonize the U.S., says Cook.

With good reason. A subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee in June asked a panel of experts how the U.S. could bolster the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act and stop granting waivers to European and Asian companies.

Risks

``Taking risks is a price of doing business in the Middle East,'' said Sylvie Hallemans, spokeswoman for Technip, Europe's top provider of oilfield services.

Technip, which has been trading with Iran for 25 years, is building the largest ethylene plant, with an output of 1.4 million tons a year, at a cost of 300 million euros.

If the financing is there, Technip said it has no problems providing engineering services in Iran.

``We are not very nervous people. About 70 percent of our work is outside of the quiet regions of Europe and America,'' Hallemans said. ``We know how to handle risk, otherwise we'd be nervous every day.''

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=aEwGuFdDPUVs&refer=germany
14 posted on 08/22/2003 8:23:57 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
VW, Ericsson, Statoil Invest in Iran, Undeterred by Tensions

August 22, 2003
Bloomberg.com
Bloomberg

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/968433/posts?page=14#14

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
15 posted on 08/22/2003 8:25:23 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran Says Britain's Arrest of its Former Envoy Illegal

August 22, 2003
AFP
IranMania

TEHRAN -- Iran reacted angrily Friday to Britain's arrest of its former envoy to Argentina, saying international arrest warrants issued by a Buenos Aires court over the 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural centre were illegal.

"Argentina should be held politically and legally responsible for this action, which is not in line with international rules," foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi told AFP.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran will follow up the case through the necessary channels to free its citizen, and we will talk to the British and ask them for the necessary explanations," he said.

Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpur, was arrested Thursday by police in Durham, northeast England, where he was attending university.

He was one of eight Iranian diplomats wanted by Argentina on charges they plotted the July 1994 car bombing which killed 85 people and wounded 300 others.

International arrest warrants were issued on August 13.

"The Argentine court decision (to issue the warrants) is a political measure with political incentives under the influence of the Zionist regime in order to do it a service," Asefi said, reiterating Iran's longstanding denial of any involvement in the bombing.

Soleimanpur, 47, has been in Britain on a student visa since February last year. Magistrates were to decide later Friday whether to extradite him to Argentina to face trial, police said.

Last month, Argentine President Nestor Kirchner said the lack of progress in the investigation of the bombing of the Israeli-Argentine Mutual Association building was a "national disgrace".

Argentine authorities, who have long believed Iran was behind the attack, have previously issued arrest warrants for other Iranian diplomats they believe were involved in the bombing.

Tehran has repeatedly denied the charges.

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=17568&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs
16 posted on 08/22/2003 8:27:03 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; AdmSmith; nuconvert; McGavin999; Valin; RaceBannon
Iran ex-diplomat faces terror hearing

A former Iranian diplomat has appeared at a London court in connection with claims that he was involved in a terrorist attack which killed 85 people and wounded 200.
The Argentine Government wants Hade Soleimanpour extradited to face charges that he was part of the conspiracy to bomb a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires in 1994.

Mr Soleimanpour, 47, spoke only to confirm his name when he appeared before Bow Street Magistrates' Court, and was remanded in custody until 29 August.

The former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, who is now a research assistant at the University of Durham, denied the charges when he was arrested by police on Thursday.

'Politically motivated'

The Argentine intelligence service has long believed Iran was behind the car bombing and Mr Soleimanpour's arrest follows a fresh investigation.

Iran has strongly denied involvement and has described Mr Soleimanpour's extradition warrant as politically motivated.

On Friday, foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi condemned the arrest as illegal, saying it had been carried out under the influence of a Zionist regime.

He said the Islamic Republic would do everything possible to secure Mr Soleimanpour's release, adding that Iran's foreign ministry would be seeking answers from British diplomats in Tehran.

Mr Soleimanpour made no comment as the conspiracy charge was read to him on Thursday.

But Detective Sergeant Keith Richardson, from Scotland Yard's extradition unit, said he had told officers "it is false" when it was put to him during his arrest.

DS Richardson told the court that Argentine authorities believed the former ambassador had been involved in planning and commissioning the bombing.

They also claim that he provided information about the location and timing of the attack.

Mr Soleimanpour's lawyer, Michel Massih QC, said: "He has always publicly and strenuously denied these allegations.

"There is a political vendetta here and political points being scored against the country and against him."

'National disgrace'

The extradition warrant for Mr Soleimanpour was one of eight issued by an Argentine judge, Juan Jose Galeano, against Iranian citizens last week.

Similar warrants issued in March against four Iranian diplomats caused tension between Buenos Aires and Tehran, and resulted in the recall of the Iranian ambassador.

Last month, Argentine President Nestor Kirchner said the lack of progress in the case was a "national disgrace", and vowed to bring those responsible to justice.

Argentina's 300,000-strong Jewish community is the largest in Latin America, and has been the target of other attacks.

A 1992 bomb attack on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires in which 29 people were killed also remains unsolved.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3174625.stm
17 posted on 08/22/2003 9:59:57 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; nuconvert; AdmSmith; McGavin999; dixiechick2000
8/22/03
Iran President says Iran honors others' security

President Mohammad Khatami said in Tehran on Friday that Iran calls for guaranteeing her security while respecting others' security, IRNA reported.

President Khatami told a group of Information Ministry officials that Iran calls for a democratic government tailor-made to its religious and national values.

He said that while trying to build up its power on different scenes, Iran asks the world to officially recognize its standpoint.

He added that dialogue among civilizations had been aimed to settle acute clashes among civilizations in terms of their fundamentals and it does not at all mean political talks.

The president pointed to the incidents that followed the September 11 terror attacks, saying that campaign against terrorism and restoration of freedom and democracy have turned into the most important pretexts for the US to justify its hegemony.

He stressed that the Iranian people advocate independence, progress and freedom in line with their cultural norms.

"If efforts by the great Iranian nation in establishing religious democracy proceed, the move can serve as a lesson for other Muslim nations, who are fed up with the isms and violence in the world of Islam," said President Khatami.

He said the West is concerned with extremism in the world of Islam, adding that the Islamic Republic, too, opposes those who chant the slogan that "anybody who is not with us is against us" or to those who chant "anybody who is not with us is an atheist."

The President said Iran is not an extremist and that what is mirrored by the path of the late Imam Khomeini, people and Constitution, is conformity with freedom and democracy in accordance with local beliefs.

He asked the Information Ministry officials to identify the plans that try to distort he pure image of the late Imam Khomeini or tarnish achievements of the Iranian nation.

http://www.payvand.com/news/03/aug/1127.html
18 posted on 08/22/2003 10:04:59 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: DoctorZIn
Will Lebanon's Horror Become Iraq's?

August 22, 2003
The Washington Post
Robert Baer

As soon as I heard about the truck bombing of U.N. headquarters in Baghdad on Tuesday, my first thought was, oh, no, here we go again, the nightmare of Beirut, 1983.

The U.N. bombing has all the markings of a professional terrorist attack, the same expertise we saw in Lebanon during the '80s, even the same delivery system that was used to kill 241 U.S. servicemen in their Beirut barracks on Oct. 22, 1983 -- the strike that brought U.S. policy in Lebanon to a halt and altered the course of Middle East politics.

Like the one in Beirut, the U.N. truck bomb was expertly placed. It wasn't just designed to do massive damage -- although it did. It was apparently intended to hit the office of Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. secretary general's special representative to Iraq. Using a suicide bomber ensured that the bomb went exactly where it was supposed to go. The attack may even have been timed to coincide with a news conference underway inside the building so that the bomb would kill as many people as possible.

The truck was packed with enough explosives (more than a thousand pounds of military munitions) to blast through a twelve-foot wall. Although the FBI says the bomb itself wasn't particularly sophisticated, I know from experience how difficult it is to string explosives together and make all or most of them detonate at the same time. And remember: This was the second successful bombing in just 13 days. Combine this well-coordinated attack with the car bombing of the Jordanian embassy, which killed 17, and it is starting to look like we are up against a lot more than the "remnants" of Saddam Hussein's regime.

One bomb is an outrage. Two bombs are a campaign. Anybody who was dealing with the Middle East in the early '80s can tell you exactly when things began to change: April 18, 1983, the day a suicide bomber drove a beat-up GMC pick-up truck through the front door of the U.S. embassy in Beirut and detonated it. Seventeen Americans and 32 Lebanese died in the blast.

I was working for the CIA in the Middle East at the time. As best we were able to figure out, the target of the attack was Ambassador Philip Habib, the president's special representative to the Middle East. Habib, who was trying to help negotiate a truce between Lebanon and Israel, was not in the embassy when the bomb went off. But the bombing had a larger goal than killing Habib: As we later realized, it was the opening shot in a well-coordinated and well-financed effort that eventually drove the United States out of Lebanon. After the second suicide bombing at the barracks, President Reagan ordered the Marines "re-deployed" off shore. With the official American presence gone, the terrorist campaign switched to kidnapping. Most Americans soon left Lebanon.

Those of us who lived through the Lebanon horror will be asking if Beirut 1983 might not be a template for what's happening in Iraq. While Iraq isn't Lebanon, there are enough similarities that we should be worried. Starting with the obvious, neither Lebanon then nor Baghdad now has a functioning government. At the start of the Lebanese civil war in 1975, that country's government collapsed. By 1983, there was no army or police to protect our embassy, let alone an effective internal intelligence service to warn us of possible attacks.

Iraq today is probably worse off than Lebanon was in 1983. There is not even the skeleton of an army or a police force. Members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council now claim they warned us of a bombing, possibly aimed at the United Nations. But don't forget the council includes some of the same people who were telling us that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction, deployed and ready for his orders. The only intelligence in Iraq that we can count on is our own.

Both Iraq and Lebanon are fractured societies, divided by deep ethnic and religious differences. Foreigners have tended to get caught up in these conflicts, inevitably paying a price in blood. In 1983, Lebanon's Christian Maronites, who once ruled Lebanon, were fighting for their survival, while Lebanese Muslims were fighting to take their place. Because the Muslims thought the United States was propping up the Maronites, we became the Muslims' target.

When Baghdad fell on April 9, we hurled ourselves into the middle of the same sort of violent social conflict. By invading Iraq and removing Saddam, the United States in effect deposed the ruling Sunni minority, about 20 percent of Iraq's population. In case there was any doubt about the end to Sunni power, the coalition made it final when it dissolved the Baath Party on May 16 and the army on May 23 -- the two organizations through which the Sunnis had ruled. Having destroyed Iraq's social and political balance, we can pretty much count on taking casualties.

So why was the U.N. headquarters hit rather than an American target? After all, the group behind the U.N. bombing could have easily run the same truck into an American patrol, killing dozens of soldiers. Again, I go back to Lebanon, 1983. The objective of the terrorists then was to create a sense of complete hopelessness in Washington. The terrorists wanted to show the Americans that no amount of military might, money or international assistance would help -- that U.S. deaths would be in vain and that the only logical response was to pull out.

If the people behind the U.N. bombing are the same ones who are responsible for last week's sabotage of Baghdad's water main and the oil pipeline to Turkey, this may very well be their plan. By attacking the U.N. and other indirect targets, they are probably attempting to drive away any potential international investment. They want the Bush administration to feel isolated. As for the common Iraqi who has been taking the brunt of their campaign, the terrorists believe it is worth it. They think in the long term.

If things go from bad to worse in Iraq, Washington will want to blame outside agitators. It will find it difficult to admit that the Iraqi population has turned against the occupation. We saw this happen in Lebanon: The Reagan administration convinced itself that Syria was behind the attacks on the embassy and the Marines. It came close to fighting a real war when a U.S. battleship shelled Syrian-controlled positions in the mountains outside Beirut. As it turned out, it was the Lebanese (with Iranian financial backing) who had carried out the bombings against us.

It is still too early to tell how much outsiders are involved in Iraq. With the Lebanon template in mind, I tried to get a sense of this earlier this year, in the weeks running up to the war. I was on contract with ABC News at the time. My first meeting was with Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, the Lebanese Shiite cleric accused of issuing a fatwa that encouraged the Beirut embassy bombing. We met at his Sitt Zaynab mosque office, outside Damascus. One reason Fadlallah kept an office there was to court support with Iraqi Shiite exiles, who also had offices in the area. I thought Fadlallah might have a good idea of what was going on in Iraq.

My first question was whether he or other Islamic leaders would declare a jihad against the United States if it invaded Iraq. "We don't need to," he said. "The Iraqi people will spontaneously rise in opposition to a U.S. invasion." When I pressed him about whether he thought fighters from other countries would come to Iraq, he said some would -- but in the end, it would be Iraqis themselves who would expel the coalition forces.

I also talked to Munir Makdah, a member of PLO leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement and a key leader of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon -- the same resistance that forced Israel to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000. Makdah was less guarded than Fadlallah. He said he intended to send fighters into Iraq, and if the coalition managed to occupy the country, a relentless jihad would ensue, drawing believers from everywhere. To make his point, Makdah handed me a document circulating on the Internet that called for a jihad against the United States.

Whether you believe Fadlallah or Makdah, or even the theory that "remnants" of the regime are behind the latest attacks, my sense is that we are in for a rougher time in Iraq.

One of the lucky ones to survive Tuesday's bombing, Ghassan Salame, shares this view. Salame, my professor at the Sorbonne years ago and a minister in the Lebanese government until this year, was working for the U.N. mission and had left Vieira de Mello's office minutes before the bomb went off.

When we talked in March, he declined to predict how the war would go, but he was convinced the United States would end up in the middle of a violent social upheaval in Iraq. By removing Saddam, he said, we would disenfranchise the Sunnis. Smashing a fractured society like Iraq could only lead to sustained violence, he warned, at least until a new balance is found.

"But you know," Salame said, as best as I can recall the conversation, "you can't just get up and walk away from Iraq like you did Lebanon. No matter how bad it gets. If Iraq turns into anarchy, it's likely to spill into the rest of the Gulf. It would be a catastrophe."

Salame is right. Leaving Iraq now, in a state of anarchy, would lead to civil war. And then almost anything could happen, from pulling in Iran to spreading chaos to the Arab states of the Gulf -- which, by the way, control something like 60 percent of the world's oil reserves. No matter how tough things get in Iraq, we cannot leave until it is mended.

Robert Baer is a former CIA officer who served in the Middle East for 21 years, leaving the agency in 1997. His new book, "Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude" (Crown), was published last month.

http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2003&m=08&d=22&a=8
20 posted on 08/22/2003 7:06:17 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Russian Government Approves Draft Agreement with Iran on Nuclear Fuel

August 22, 2003
The Associated Press
Steve Gutterman

MOSCOW -- The Russian Cabinet has approved a draft agreement requiring Iran to return to Russia all spent nuclear fuel from a reactor it is helping build in Iran, the Interfax news agency reported Friday.

Russia, which faces criticism from the United States over its nuclear cooperation with Iran, has said it will not ship any fuel for the reactor in the Persian Gulf city of Bushehr until an agreement stipulating that Russia must return spent fuel is in place.

Russia has been negotiating with Iran, with the goal of signing the agreement -- making it enforceable.

U.S. officials have said the agreement -- aimed at ensuring that Iran would not be able to get plutonium, which can be derived from reprocessing spent fuel from reactors -- would reduce Washington's concerns about Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Russian officials have been saying for months that they are close to signing the agreement. Iran's ambassador to Russia said in early June that Iran was ready to sign the agreement but that Russia needed to sort out internal obstacles linked to its environmental protection legislation.

U.S. officials have worried for years that Russia's $800 deal to build the reactor could help Iran develop nuclear weapons. Russian officials have said the fears are unfounded, but have showed signs recently that they may be becoming more cooperative with the United States on the issue.

Russia has urged Iran to sign a document allowing closer inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency in order to ease concerns that may be seeking to develop nuclear weapons, it has not linked Iran's signing of the document to completion of the Bushehr plant.

http://www.nj.com/newsflash/international/index.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?a0657_BC_Russia-Iran&&news&newsflash-international
21 posted on 08/22/2003 7:07:56 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
U.S. Wants U.N. Security Council to Deal with Iran

August 22, 2003
Reuters
Carol Giacomo

WASHINGTON -- The United States, convinced Iran is deceiving the world about its nuclear ambitions, has launched a campaign to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council, including a top official's trip next week to Moscow.

Undersecretary of State John Bolton, the Bush administration's senior non-proliferation official, will urge Russia and other countries to lay the Iranian nuclear issues at the feet of the international community's premier body, U.S. officials told Reuters on Friday.

One official said Russia, under U.S. pressure to halt cooperation on Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant, has postponed delivery of critical reactor fuel until spring 2004.

He dismissed a report by the official IRNA news agency on Friday that Iran was ready to sign a protocol to return nuclear waste to Russia. Such a move could undercut U.S. charges that Tehran is bent on producing nuclear weapons.

"The Iranians have been 'ready' to sign a spent-fuel take-back agreement for over a year," he said.

Bolton, a leading hard-liner, will be in Moscow when the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, is expected to issue its second report on Iran's nuclear activities.

His visit also coincides with the launch of six-party talks in Beijing on North Korea's nuclear program.

While Bolton's Moscow discussions likely will include North Korea, Iran is the main focus. The IAEA governing board plans to meet in Vienna on Sept. 8 to consider next steps on Iran.

Experts say Iran could be one to three years from having nuclear arms.

COOPERATION LACKING

In its first report last June, the IAEA rapped Tehran for failing to comply with nuclear safeguards.

Since then, U.N. inspectors have found enriched uranium in environmental samples taken in Iran. This could mean Tehran has enriched uranium without telling the IAEA, heightening suspicions of nuclear arms activity despite Iran's denials.

The second report is expected to "show a continuing lack of cooperation by Iran (with the IAEA) and shifting stories on what they did or didn't do," a U.S. official told Reuters.

Iran has offered no proof of its claim that its nuclear activities support a civilian power program, he said.

Also, Tehran still refuses to sign the "additional protocol" that would allow the IAEA to make more intrusive snap inspections. It told Britain, Germany and France in a recent letter that certain conditions were required first, he said.

President Bush in June declared he "will not tolerate the construction of a nuclear weapon" in Iran.

Although Iran let IAEA inspectors check various sites, U.S. officials insist cooperation has been very grudging.

"It's a pattern of behavior and deception that is entirely consistent with the idea that they are trying to conceal a nuclear weapons program. That's why we think its time to move the issue from the IAEA board of governors to the Security Council," which could impose sanctions, a U.S. official said.

Although Russia and key European allies increasingly have come to share U.S. concerns, U.S. officials said it is unclear if they are ready join Washington in elevating the Iran nuclear issue to the Security Council.

"But we think the circumstances and the timing and the urgency of the matter are such that we are making a major effort," the U.S. official said.

Despite pressuring Iran not to develop nuclear weapons, Russia continues to work on Bushehr and lay plans for possible future contracts to build other nuclear facilities for Iran.

Earlier this year, Bolton queried the Russians on their intentions and was told "it was just a broad political decision -- there's not decision to sign anything." But in view of fresh reports of Russia-Iran dealmaking, Bolton is expected to raise the issue again when he is in Moscow, U.S. officials said.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=3324570
22 posted on 08/22/2003 7:09:28 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
U.S. Wants U.N. Security Council to Deal with Iran

August 22, 2003
Reuters
Carol Giacomo

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/968433/posts?page=22#22

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
23 posted on 08/22/2003 7:10:46 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iranian Officials Raped Reporter, Then Killed Her

August 22, 2003
NY Sun
Adan Daifallah

WASHINGTON — Iranian officials raped Canadian-Iranian journalist Zahra Kazemi before she died and put chemicals in her body to speed up its decomposition, according to a lawyer who recently visited Iran and an opposition group.

A Toronto-based lawyer, Hamid Mojtahedi, told Radio Farda, the American-funded radio station beamed into Iran, that Kazemi was raped by intelligence agents who worked with Tehran prosecutor Said Mortazavi, a man referred to as the “Butcher of the Press” by Iranian dissidents.

Mr. Mojtahedi, who traveled to Iran last month with a delegation from the Canadian chapter of the group Lawyers Without Borders, also told the radio station that a forensic autopsy of Kazemi’s body might be impossible since Iranian authorities injected it with chemicals to speed its decomposition.

The Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran, a dissident organization based in Dallas, made same claims in a report yesterday.

The Canadian government, Kazemi’s mother and son have demanded answers from Tehran about what really happened to the journalist, and these latest claims throw Iran’s previous explanations into further question. Requests to have her body exhumed and sent back to Canada have been refused; Canada recalled its ambassador from Tehran in protest.

Kazemi, an Iranian-born photojournalist who lived in Montreal, died in a Tehran hospital July 14 after being arrested and branded a spy by police after being caught taking pictures outside of a prison in northern Iran on June 23.

The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran’s official news outlet, originally claimed she died of a “brain stroke”; days later, a presidentially appointed investigating committee of Cabinet ministers said she was beaten and died from a fractured skull, and then Iran’s vice president, Mohammad Ali Abtahi, said, “The murder was caused by brain hemorrhage due to a blow inflicted on her.”

France Bureau, a spokeswoman for the Canadian foreign minister, Bill Graham, told The New York Sun that the Canadian government is “looking into” the new claims. Canada had unsuccessfully requested to be a part of the investigation into Kazemi’s death.

“We asked to participate or help in the investigation but they’re doing it on their own. We’ll see what the report says when it comes out,” said Ms. Bureau, the spokeswoman.

Calls to Kazemi’s son, Stephan Hachemi, who lives in Montreal, were not returned yesterday.

The handling of the Kazemi case has angered Iranian democracy activists who say the Canadian government is being too deferential to Iran.The Islamic Republic is conducting an investigation of the journalist’s death without the involvement of Canadian or international authorities.

“Letting Iran investigate this crime is like allowing a murderer to be his own judge and jury,” said Manouchehr Ganji, a long-time opponent of the mullahs. “They’ve been doing this all these years.The whole world has been watching as a passive observer.”

Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi, an Iranian dissident whose father, Iranian journalist Siamak Pourzand, is in jail in Tehran, said that it is unfortunate it took someone with dual nationality like Kazemi to die before the Western world realized the way the “axis of evil” regime treats artists and journalists.

“On top of their disregard for journalists, they do not legitimately accept dual nationality. Someone with a dual nationality has to be killed for the free world to notice,” Ms. Zand-Bonazzi said.

Meanwhile, Agence France Presse reported that Iran’s former ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpour, was arrested in northeast England in conjunction with the 1994 bombing of a Buenos Aires Jewish community center that killed 85 people.

Mr. Soleimanpour will appear before magistrates today at a central London court, Scotland Yard said in a press statement.

http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2003&m=08&d=22&a=11
24 posted on 08/22/2003 7:11:48 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran, player or rogue?

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists - By David Albright & Corey Hinderstein
Aug 22, 2003

The deadline is now. Will Iran come clean about its nuclear doings?

Iran has been secretly developing the capability to make nuclear weapons—in particular, developing the wherewithal to produce separated plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU).

Since they first learned of Iran’s secret activities last year, officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been concerned that Iran has been violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and they have struggled to convince the country to make its nuclear activities more transparent. Citing Iran’s failure to disclose various nuclear materials, facilities, and activities, on June 19 a “Chairwoman’s Statement” summing up the meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors criticized Iran for its failure to fulfill its safeguards obligations under the NPT.

Worries about Iranian nuclear activities were heightened in early July after Iran conducted a successful test of the Shahab-3 missile, which can carry a 2,200-pound payload as far as 1,500 kilometers. The timing of Iran’s announcement about the Shahab-3 and the size of its payload suggest that the missile is intended to carry a nuclear warhead.

Although the IAEA acknowledged that Iran has taken some cooperative steps since its facilities at Natanz were first revealed a year ago, it called upon Iran to take additional steps, including answering additional questions about alleged undeclared uranium enrichment activities, uranium conversion work, and programs involving heavy water.

As for whether Iran will comply, Mohammed El Baradei, the IAEA’s director general, said after the board meeting, “the jury is still out.” He expressed the hope that by the next IAEA Board of Governors meeting in September, the agency would be in a “much better position to make a judgment” about it.

The board wants Iran to “promptly and unconditionally” implement an additional protocol to its safeguards agreement. Unless the protocol is implemented, the IAEA said in a safeguards implementation report, it will have limited ability to provide credible assurances that Iran’s nuclear program does not include a secret nuclear weapons component.
In an unusual move, the chair’s statement encouraged Iran to delay introducing nuclear material into the Natanz pilot uranium enrichment plant, calling the delay a “confidence-building measure.”

Although the statement did not call on Iran to end the program, there is growing support for the view that acceptance of the protocol may not be enough to resolve the nuclear issue. Iran may need to abandon or sharply limit its construction or operation of facilities that can be used to produce separated plutonium or HEU. Unless it is stopped, Iran will eventually be able to rapidly break out of the NPT, creating an even more dangerous situation in the Middle East.

Iran’s reaction

Iran’s immediate reaction was to reject the notion that it had a nuclear weapons program. It intends, Iranian officials said, to install some 7,000 megawatts of nuclear electrical generating capacity over the next 20 years, which will require a substantial investment in a wide range of peaceful nuclear activities. Iran described its level of transparency as typical, and reiterated that it had been cooperating fully with the IAEA and would continue to do so.

Iran rejected the request to implement the additional protocol without a quid pro quo. On June 29, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi told the Associated Press, “When Iran signs the protocol, others should take positive steps,” including providing nuclear assistance. Iranian officials want additional power reactors, or at least a U.S. commitment to stop its attempts to block Iran’s acquisition of nuclear power reactors from Russia or elsewhere. Some Iranian officials have implied that more reactors may not be enough, that Iran wants access to all peaceful technology, including sensitive fuel-cycle facilities like enrichment plants and plutonium separation facilities.

In late February, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO), told the Boston Globe’s Elizabeth Neuffer that Iran wanted Germany to fulfill its prior obligation to provide low-enriched uranium fuel, part of the deal when Germany was building the Bushehr power reactor. Germany decided over a decade ago not to finish the reactor, but Aghazadeh complained that Iran now has to pay to get the fuel from Russia.

Truth and consequences

Although the United States did not succeed in its attempt to convince other nations that Iran had violated the NPT sufficiently to warrant a harsh international response, the chair’s June statement represents a dramatic international rejection of Iran’s demand to receive something in return for signing the protocol. Most nations resisted taking action based on the U.S. evidence, which they viewed as circumstantial. They were particularly hesitant given the widespread skepticism about U.S. intelligence information about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. But the United States did manage to gain support for putting additional pressure on Iran to be fully transparent, with an implicit deadline of the September board of governors meeting.

Russia, Japan, and the European Union have historically rejected the U.S. policy of isolating Iran, choosing engagement instead. But they are now all firm in demanding that Iran sign the protocol and fully answer the IAEA’s questions.

Before the recent crisis, the EU had a policy of engagement with Iran known as “conditional dialogue,” which aimed at improving trade and cooperation, provided Iran made improvements in the areas of nonproliferation, terrorism, and cooperation with the Middle East peace process. However, EU foreign ministers emphasized in a statement on June 16 that Iran must cooperate fully with the IAEA and “implement urgently and unconditionally” the additional protocol, declaring that trade talks and the nuclear issue were “interdependent.” British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw traveled to Tehran in late June with a message that unless Iran implements the protocol unconditionally and quickly, “confidence will not be improved, and the international community will be profoundly reluctant to lift the sanctions.”

Russia has been Iran’s main nuclear supplier, selling Iran the $800 million Bushehr reactor, which is scheduled for completion in 2005. Russia is expected to start sending fuel for the first loading in mid-2004, after it has obtained an agreement from Iran to send spent fuel back to Russia. Russia, embarrassed by all the revelations of secret nuclear activities, has also urged Iran to be more transparent.

In May and June, President Vladimir Putin was reported to have told the United States and Britain that Russia would not provide fuel for Bushehr unless Iran implemented the safeguards protocol. Although subsequent messages from senior Russian officials appeared to contradict Putin’s statement, the overall message from Russia is that Iran must be significantly more transparent.

One Western official pointed out that Russia could hesitate to finalize its spent fuel agreement with Iran, and without it, not send fuel for Bushehr. Or, he said, Russia could delay the shipments, permitting it to exert pressure on Iran without formally conditioning the completion of Bushehr on Iran signing the protocol.

Japan is also putting pressure on Iran. Senior foreign ministry officials visited Tehran in mid-July to convey the message. Media reports did not indicate any significant breakthroughs. Japan has so far resisted U.S. pressure to link Iran’s signing of the protocol with its current negotiations with Iran to develop the large Azadegan oil field in southwest Iran. Japan fears that if it makes such a linkage, Russia or China will win the contract instead, undermining Japan’s objective of securing long-term oil supplies. Still, lack of progress on transparency may lead Japan to slow down negotiations or take other actions.

Although U.S. efforts did not convince its allies to cut off economic or nuclear assistance, if Iran refuses to address the IAEA’s concerns by the end of summer, in September the board of governors may refer the issue to the U.N. Security Council. The Security Council could then decide to impose economic sanctions. Many states would feel compelled to reduce trade with Iran or halt joint energy projects.

The latest safeguards report

At the heart of the current dispute is the IAEA’s report on Iran’s implementation of safeguards, issued publicly in June 2003. The IAEA describes a series of developments and concerns that were the basis of the board’s finding that Iran had failed to meet its obligations. This report also provides the most detailed publicly available information about Iran’s extensive nuclear activities.

Iran has built significant parts of its nuclear program in secret over the last decade. Aghazadeh has said that Iran accelerated its uranium enrichment and heavy-water production programs in about 1998.

Iran revealed many of its activities to the IAEA only after they were revealed publicly in the last half of 2002, and the IAEA suspects that Iran may have additional undeclared nuclear activities or facilities. As a result, the inspectors have asked Iran for considerably more information and access than they normally do without a protocol in effect. But they have not yet asked formally to make a “special inspection” at any site, preferring to seek voluntary cooperation instead.

Gas centrifuges

The most important unresolved issue centers on Iran’s gas centrifuge uranium enrichment program, which El Baradei characterized as “sophisticated” when he visited Natanz in February. Following that visit, the IAEA asked for details about the program.

The IAEA has been trying to understand the centrifuge program’s history—the experiments Iran conducted to prove its centrifuges, and the sources of its technology, including foreign procurement. Iran has provided written information, permitted inspectors wide access at the Natanz facilities, and allowed the IAEA to take environmental samples at Natanz and other centrifuge-

related locations. These samples are critical to modern inspections because they can detect minute traces of enriched uranium and plutonium. The results of the environmental samples were not available by the June board meeting, but on July 18 and 19 the media reported that an environmental sample taken at Natanz in the winter or spring contained traces of enriched uranium. The enriched uranium was probably brought to the site inadvertently on equipment or tools from elsewhere, perhaps from an overseas supplier or from an undeclared Iranian facility. Other samples from Natanz have also been found to contain enriched uranium. Results from other sites have shown no enriched uranium.

Iran had told the IAEA it had not enriched any uranium, despite having installed a large number of centrifuges in a cascade at the Natanz pilot plant. Normally, a program would operate single-centrifuge “test stands” that would enrich small amounts of uranium to test and optimize centrifuge designs. Iran declared that although it began research and development about five years ago, it depended on extensive modeling and simulation, including tests of centrifuge rotors with and without inert gases. These tests were conducted at several locations, including Amir Khabir University and the IAEO in Tehran, without using any nuclear material. Iran said it intended to start single-machine tests with uranium at the Natanz pilot plant this summer.

This approach is very unusual, and the IAEA doubts that Iran could be so far along in the development process without enriching any uranium. Absent considerably more detail—possibly including the extent of information and expertise gained from abroad—the IAEA will have a difficult time accepting Iran’s statement.

Based on open source information about possible enrichment activities at the Kalaya Electric Company in Tehran, the IAEA asked to visit it in February and take environmental samples to determine if any enriched uranium was produced at the site. Iran responded that the facility is a watch factory, but that it also makes certain centrifuge components. It initially denied the inspectors’ requests, claiming that it did not have to allow access until it implemented the protocol.

Iran subsequently reconsidered and allowed the IAEA limited access in March and full access in May, but it refused to permit environmental sampling. Iran still refused to allow sampling during El Baradei’s visit in July.

In March, the IAEA was denied access to two rooms or workshops. A senior Western official interviewed in late March worried that Iran had denied access to allow time to clear out any evidence of uranium enrichment. He suspected that the rooms had held centrifuges, perhaps in a cascade, and had enriched uranium. According to U.S. media and experts quoting Bush administration officials, satellite images showed trucks going in and out of the site, implying that the rooms had been sanitized. The images, however, were inconclusive upon close scrutiny, according to a member of the media who asked senior officials about them. Because of all the suspicions, environmental sampling may be the only way to determine conclusively whether the site has enriched uranium.

The IAEA has asked to visit additional sites, some of which were selected based on information provided in May by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, an opposition group. The group identified two sites west of Tehran that it said were related to small-scale gas centrifuge development work, which, when finished, could serve as alternative locations for cascades. According to a senior Western official, two of the people listed by the opposition group as involved at these sites are known to be involved in Iran’s gas centrifuge program. Commercial satellite images show that at least one of the sites has extensive physical security.

Iran has told the IAEA that the sites are related to its nuclear organization, but are involved in agricultural and medical work—a description at odds with the high security seen at the sites. By mid-July, the inspectors had not visited or obtained sufficient information to make any judgments about their purpose.

Questions have also been raised about the uranium conversion facility that Iran is building at Esfahan. This plant is designed to make large quantities of uranium hexafluoride in addition to uranium dioxide and uranium tetrafluoride. Iran claims not to have operated any laboratory or pilot facilities before building this major plant. Because learning to make uranium hexafluoride, the feedstock for a gas centrifuge plant, is not easy, some believe that Iran must have an undeclared pilot plant or have operated one in the past.

Additional issues

The safeguards report laid out other developments that contributed to the board’s finding that Iran failed to meet its safeguards obligations. These include:

An undeclared uranium import. In response to an IAEA request, Iran recently acknowledged that in 1991 it received from China 1,000 kilograms of natural uranium hexafluoride, 400 kilograms of uranium tetrafluoride, and 400 kilograms of uranium dioxide. This material was stored at the previously undeclared Jabr Ibn Hayam Multipurpose Laboratories (JHL), located at the Tehran Research Center.

Iran said it did not have to report the import of a relatively small amount of natural uranium. The IAEA, however, said reporting was required for the material, its subsequent processing, and the locations where it was received, processed, and stored. Iran had provided none of this information until the IAEA asked for it. To make matters worse, China provided the IAEA with information about its export only after repeated inquiries.

Undeclared uranium metal production. Iran stated that it converted almost all of the uranium tetrafluoride into uranium metal at JHL. The production of uranium metal is unusual and can indicate a nuclear weapons effort that uses metallic forms of natural uranium or highly enriched uranium. The IAEA has asked Iran about its planned use for the material. Iranian officials have stated that the purpose of the uranium metal is as shielding against radiation in containers that store irradiated fuel or materials. Such a use is suspect, however, because the uranium metal appears too refined for shielding material.

Natural uranium target production. Iran said that it had used some of the uranium oxide to make targets for irradiation in the Tehran research reactor. The targets were then sent to another Tehran facility to separate iodine 131 in a lead-shielded cell. Such an activity is legitimate; iodine is useful in medical and civilian research applications, and the Iranians involved in this work have published their results in open technical reports.

The question is whether plutonium was also separated from these targets, or whether other undeclared targets were produced, irradiated, and processed to obtain separated plutonium. Such activities would allow Iran to learn to separate plutonium, a necessary step in using plutonium in nuclear weapons.

Missing uranium hexafluoride. Iran stated that it did not process any of its imported uranium hexafluoride, and specifically, that it did not use any in gas centrifuge testing. However, nearly 2 kilograms are missing from the storage cylinders. Iran claimed that the material had leaked out of the cylinders more than a year earlier.

The IAEA is still investigating this claim. A small centrifuge testing program would be expected to use about 10–15 kilograms of uranium hexafluoride, but it could get by on 1–2 kilograms. And the fact that Iran used much of its imported uranium dioxide and tetrafluoride makes it harder to accept the possibility that it did not use any of the hexafluoride.

A heavy-water reactor. In May, Iran told the IAEA for the first time that it intended to build a 40-megawatt-thermal heavy-water reactor at Arak. This is the site of the heavy-water production facility whose existence was first revealed publicly by an Iranian opposition group in August 2002. According to a senior Western official, reactor construction is expected to start next year. Iran also announced that it intends to begin building a fuel-fabrication plant for the reactor at Esfahan later this year.

Iran has said that this reactor is part of a long-term program to manufacture heavy-water power reactors. But long before any such plan might be realized, the reactor at Arak would produce 8–10 kilograms of plutonium annually, or enough for about two nuclear weapons each year. Before it could use any of the plutonium in a nuclear weapon, however, it would first have to separate the plutonium from the irradiated fuel. Although Iran is not reported to have stated that it has conducted any plutonium separation activities, the irradiation and processing of natural uranium targets increases suspicion that Iran is researching plutonium separation.

The Natanz enrichment plant

The IAEA report includes new information about Iran’s gas centrifuge program at Natanz. This site houses a pilot gas centrifuge plant and a much larger, production-scale centrifuge facility.

The pilot plant is slated to hold about 1,000 centrifuges by the end of 2003. In February, it had about 160 centrifuges operating without uranium. Iran said it planned to introduce uranium in June. Despite the board’s request, Iran introduced uranium into single test centrifuges soon after the board meeting. Initially, at least, Iran planned to use another safeguarded source of uranium hexafluoride in these early tests—a small stock that has been maintained under safeguards, acquired years ago from a European country.

The imminent operation of this plant alarmed the board of governors and led to the request that Iran delay the use of uranium. The IAEA had not had sufficient time to implement a safeguards plan for this important facility, another reason why it asked for a delay.

According to senior Western officials, the current Iranian centrifuge has a separative capacity, or ability to enrich uranium, of about 2 separative work units (swu) per year, per centrifuge. Media reports of significantly higher capacities are erroneous, according to these knowledgeable officials.

Because the centrifuge uses an aluminum rotor with a diameter of about 100 millimeters, this capacity would be consistent with a supercritical, optimized aluminum-rotor machine of the “G2-type.” Gernot Zippe was involved in building this type of machine in Germany in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It is composed of two almost 50-centimeter-long aluminum rotor tubes connected by a bellows.

Media reports state that Iran got design assistance from Pakistan or from individual Pakistanis more than a decade ago. Iran’s centrifuge design is similar to the type that Pakistan obtained secretly in the mid-1970s from Urenco facilities in the Netherlands. The G2 and its predecessor G1-type aluminum machines, developed by Zippe and his colleagues, were not very efficient. Zippe’s G1-type machine had a capacity of about 0.6 swu per year, implying an output of 1.2 swu per year for the G2 design. Iran is believed to have optimized or otherwise increased capacity to about 2 swu per year.

Although the pilot plant is relatively small, it could produce as much as 10–12 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium a year, depending on the “tails assay” (the fraction of uranium 235 remaining in the waste) and the manner in which the centrifuges are organized into cascades. Because centrifuges are flexible, even if the cascades are arranged to produce only low-enriched uranium, weapon-grade uranium can be produced by “batch recycling” the end product back into the feed point of the cascade until the desired level of enrichment is reached. Thus, by the end of 2005, this plant could produce 15–20 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium, enough for a nuclear weapon.

According to the IAEA safeguards report, Iran plans to start installing centrifuges in the main enrichment halls of the Natanz facility in 2005, after testing and confirming its centrifuge design in the pilot plant. Eventually, these cascade halls will hold 50,000 centrifuges, according to the report. No project completion date was provided, but indications are that it would take five to 10 years to install this number of centrifuges.

Separative capacity of later centrifuges would probably increase, but Iran may not succeed in installing all 50,000. In any case, based on the current plan, we project that the Natanz facility will eventually have a capacity of at least 100,000 swu per year. This is roughly the capacity to provide annual reloads of one Bushehr reactor, but far short of the enriched uranium needed to provide fuel for all the nuclear power reactors Iran plans to build over the next 20 years.

The same capacity would be sufficient to produce about 500 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium annually. At 15–20 kilograms per weapon, that would be enough for roughly 25–30 nuclear weapons per year.

If Iran operated Natanz to make low-enriched uranium fuel until it decided to make weapon-grade uranium, it would be able to rapidly enrich the low-enriched material to weapon-grade. For example, if Natanz was operating at full capacity and recycled low-enriched uranium (5 percent uranium 235) as “feed,” the facility could produce enough weapon-grade uranium for a nuclear weapon in a few days.

What should be done

In the worst case, Iran could have a nuclear weapon by the end of 2005. Under many scenarios, it could obtain and significantly expand its nuclear arsenal in the second half of the decade by producing both HEU and plutonium. Although some would argue that a solution to the Iranian nuclear problem can be delayed, the longer the wait for a solution, the more extensive Iran’s program will become and the harder, politically, for Iran to reverse itself.

The international community is justified in demanding that Iran become fully transparent as soon as possible. No one can dispute Iran’s growing capabilities to make nuclear weapons. Certainly, increased nuclear transparency, including answering the questions raised by the IAEA in its June safeguards report and implementing the protocol, is both important and necessary. In addition, Iran’s implementation of the protocol would severely complicate any effort to conduct clandestine nuclear fuel-cycle activities and could act as a deterrent against significant clandestine activities.

Toward those goals, El Baradei met in Tehran with senior Iranian officials on July 9. He was armed with results from IAEA environmental sampling of various locations in Iran.

Although Iranian officials promised cooperation and reported positively about their meetings with El Baradei, he left without gaining a commitment from Iran to sign the protocol or to resolve the remaining safeguards issues. Senior safeguards officials who remained were also unsuccessful in achieving any major breakthroughs and returned to Vienna earlier than scheduled.

Nonetheless, the IAEA received a pledge from the senior leadership of the Iranian government that it would reach a decision by the end of July on whether it would agree to the IAEA’s proposed actions and a schedule for resolving each major safeguards issue. These issues center on Iran’s uranium enrichment activities, allegations of undeclared enrichment of uranium, the ability to take environmental samples at Kalaya Electric and elsewhere, the role of uranium metal in Iran’s nuclear fuel cycle, and its heavy-water production and reactor programs. The IAEA needs Iran’s full and prompt cooperation so that it can finish its work and send a positive report to the board of governors in late August.

The IAEA has also told Iran that it must sign and at least provisionally implement the protocol soon.

If Iran does not meet the IAEA’s conditions, the board of governors will be under intense pressure to send the issue to the U.N. Security Council. That step could result in the imposition of punitive measures, including economic sanctions by key nations or the Security Council. These actions might well lead Iran to reconsider and accept the IAEA’s conditions.

But assuming Iran agrees to all of the IAEA’s major conditions—which remains highly uncertain at the time of this writing—the controversy will not be over. The protocol is unlikely to be sufficient by itself to stop an emerging Iranian nuclear threat that could manifest itself if Iran renounced the NPT at some point in the future and began rapidly acquiring nuclear weapons. Because of the complex and dangerous security situation in the Middle East, an Iran perpetually on the brink of building nuclear weapons, even with advanced safeguards, poses too great a threat to regional and international security. Such a situation is likely to provoke its neighbors to seek nuclear weapons or improve their existing arsenals, significantly increase their conventional armaments, or obtain chemical or biological weapons. Predicting the outcome of such buildups is very difficult.

Iran cannot be expected to cancel its fuel-cycle programs unconditionally, though. Many nations would oppose any demand that it do so, and Iran can argue that having such facilities, if they are fully inspected, is completely legal under the NPT.

Coercive, unilateral options are undesirable and could be counterproductive, regardless of Iran’s choices. Military strikes against nuclear sites are unlikely to succeed, given the dispersed and advanced nature of the Iranian program. Such strikes would only serve to accelerate and expand Iran’s efforts to obtain a nuclear arsenal. In addition, a strategy of regime change may be unsuccessful, or could easily lead to a new government that also seeks nuclear weapons. The United States should decouple any proposed solution to the nuclear problem from regime change efforts and preventive military strikes.

The United States, in cooperation with its allies—particularly the EU, Japan, and Russia—needs to develop a set of incentives to entice Iran away from developing nuclear weapons capabilities. There are a wide variety of items that could be put into an incentive package—lifting economic sanctions, high-tech assistance, assurances of a nuclear fuel supply for the Bushehr nuclear reactor, and other energy or economic assistance.

Iran’s motivations for seeking nuclear weapons should be taken into account. Discussions should be considerably easier now, given the downfall of the regime of Saddam Hussein. Such discussions could contribute to achieving a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. International efforts should focus on both preventing countries in the region from obtaining nuclear weapons capabilities, and seeking ways to eliminate such capabilities where they already exist. Inevitably, restraints on Israel’s nuclear capabilities make sense.

To achieve such a goal, the United States and its allies should seek to restart the Middle East regional arms control discussions that have been moribund since the mid-1990s. These discussions may have a greater chance of success with the inclusion of Iran and Iraq, two countries excluded from earlier talks.

Behind these inducements, the United States, the EU, Russia, and Japan must be willing to exert concerted and tough diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran. Former Defense Secretary William Perry has called such efforts “coercive diplomacy” in the context of North Korea, but a similar strategy can be applied to Iran. Perry was quoted in a July 15, 2003 Washington Post article: “You have to offer something, but you have to have an iron fist behind your offer.”

With the protocol in place, a package of economic and political incentives, and reduced tensions with the United States and its neighbors, Iran would have no need or excuse to maintain a nuclear weapons capability. Because Iran has many motives to reduce its international isolation, it would have a difficult time resisting such a package.

David Albright is the president of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) in Washington, D.C. Corey Hinderstein is a senior analyst at ISIS.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_1884.shtml

25 posted on 08/22/2003 8:24:16 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; ...
Iran, player or rogue?

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists - By David Albright & Corey Hinderstein
Aug 22, 2003

The deadline is now. Will Iran come clean about its nuclear doings?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/968433/posts?page=25#25

DoctorZin Note: Sorry this post is a large one, but important.

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”
26 posted on 08/22/2003 8:28:54 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; piasa; Valin; nuconvert; Texas_Dawg; kattracks; RaceBannon; seamole; ..
US: Terrorists Entering Iraq From Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran
VOA News

22 Aug 2003, 23:33 UTC

A top U.S. diplomat says Washington is greatly concerned by the infiltration of foreign terrorists into Iraq from Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran.

Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage made the comment in a Friday interview with the Arab language Al-Jazeera television network.

Mr. Armitage made it clear the United States is not saying the governments of Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran are responsible for the infiltration. But he also said the terrorists are not being stopped at the borders.

U.S. officials have long suspected some terrorists have come through Syria and Iran, and have warned both countries against interference in Iraq. Saudi Arabia has not been previously singled out.

On Friday, U.S. General John Abizaid, the top U.S. military commander for the Persian Gulf region, said terrorism is becoming the number one security threat in Iraq. The general called Iraq "the center of the global war on terrorism."

General Abizaid also said a revived terrorist group, Ansar Al-Islam, is now firmly established in Baghdad. The group has been linked to the Al-Qaida network.

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=C81E700D-0950-4F7D-AD033050450025AD
27 posted on 08/22/2003 9:43:47 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: All
IS CUBA ABOUT DIVORCING IRANIAN AYATOLLAHS FOR BUSH?

WASHINGTON 21 Aug. (IPS) The Islamic Republic of Iran might lose one of his very few friends in the world, namely the Marxist regime of Cuba which, according to American officials, has officially informed them that Iranian embassy in Havana was the source of jamming programs by the US-based Iranian radio and television stations that are beamed to mainland Iran.

The jamming of Telstar-12, a commercial communications satellite orbiting at 15 degrees west, 22,000 miles above the Atlantic that carries programs from .....

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2003/Aug-2003/satellite_jamming_21803.html
28 posted on 08/22/2003 9:50:23 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; AdmSmith; dixiechick2000; nuconvert; Valin; Tamsey; ...
Bail denied to ex-Iranian diplomat implicated in Argentine bombing

Saturday, August 23, 2003
LONDON

A British court on Friday refused bail to a former Iranian diplomat sought in Argentina on charges of conspiring to murder 85 people killed in the bombing of a Jewish community center in 1994.
.
Hade Soleimanpour, 47-year-old former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, made a first, brief court appearance a day after he was arrested in Durham, northern England, where he is a student.
.
The Iranian government has several times denied any responsibility in the 1994 bombing.
.
Soleimanpour, casually dressed in khaki trousers and a white polo shirt, spoke only to confirm his name and age at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court during the start of proceedings for his extradition to Argentina.
.
Judge Timothy Workman ordered him held without bail until his next appearance at Bow Street, Aug. 29. He said the suspect’s lack of ties in Britain was part of the reason for rejecting bail.
.
Soleimanpour has lived in Durham, northeast England, since 2002 on a student visa, police said. His wife and two small children are in Iran, where they went for a vacation.
.
London’s Metropolitan Police said the extradition warrant alleged that on or before July 18, 1994, Soleimanpour conspired with others to murder persons at the Asociacion Mutua Israelita Argentina — the Jewish Community Center AMIA.
.
‘‘The Argentine authorities have alleged he was involved in the planning and commission of the bombing and that he provided information about the place and the timing of the attack,’’ Detective Sgt. Keith Richardson of the police extradition unit told the court.
.
Richardson said there had been a new investigation into the bombing since the change of government in Argentina in May and said that Soleimanpour had been interviewed by police in Britain three times.
.
He said that when police made the arrest, the charge was read out to Soleimanpour and he replied, ‘‘It is false.’’
.
The suspect’s lawyer, Michel Massih, called the charge ‘‘a political vendetta,’’ and said, ‘‘there are political points being scored against the country and against him.’’
.
Massih said Soleimanpour was studying in Durham for a graduate degree in environmental science, and that his wife is a senior university biologist.
.
Argentine federal judge Juan Jose Galeano, who is investigating the terrorist attack in which more than 200 were wounded, had requested the arrest of Soleimanpour, who was ambassador to Argentina at the time of the explosion.
.
Iran on Friday criticized Soleimanpour’s arrest and said the Argentinian warrant lacked a judicial basis.
.
‘‘The measure has been politically motivated and has been carried out under the influence of the Zionists,’’ Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in a statement posted on the web site of the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
.
‘‘We will hold talks with the British officials, asking them to provide necessary explanations,’’ Asefi added.
.
In Buenos Aires, leaders of the Jewish community center said they hoped the arrest was a breakthrough that would now move the investigation forward.
.
Abraham Kaul, president of the AMIA, lauded the arrest as a sign of the seriousness with which countries around the world are now tackling terrorism.
.
‘‘This shows that terrorism is an issue that concerns countries around the world,’’ he said in an interview with Associated Press Television,
.
He also noted that new President Nestor Kirchner has made a priority of strengthening Argentina’s judicial system and that his recent moves to open intelligence files and compel former agents to testify could help the case.
.
‘‘Justice is much more possible today than it has been in the last nine years. Today a a door has been opened,’’ he said. LONDON A British court on Friday refused bail to a former Iranian diplomat sought in Argentina on charges of conspiring to murder 85 people killed in the bombing of a Jewish community center in 1994.
.
Hade Soleimanpour, 47-year-old former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, made a first, brief court appearance a day after he was arrested in Durham, northern England, where he is a student.
.
The Iranian government has several times denied any responsibility in the 1994 bombing.
.
Soleimanpour, casually dressed in khaki trousers and a white polo shirt, spoke only to confirm his name and age at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court during the start of proceedings for his extradition to Argentina.
.
Judge Timothy Workman ordered him held without bail until his next appearance at Bow Street, Aug. 29. He said the suspect’s lack of ties in Britain was part of the reason for rejecting bail.
.
Soleimanpour has lived in Durham, northeast England, since 2002 on a student visa, police said. His wife and two small children are in Iran, where they went for a vacation.
.
London’s Metropolitan Police said the extradition warrant alleged that on or before July 18, 1994, Soleimanpour conspired with others to murder persons at the Asociacion Mutua Israelita Argentina — the Jewish Community Center AMIA.
.
‘‘The Argentine authorities have alleged he was involved in the planning and commission of the bombing and that he provided information about the place and the timing of the attack,’’ Detective Sgt. Keith Richardson of the police extradition unit told the court.
.
Richardson said there had been a new investigation into the bombing since the change of government in Argentina in May and said that Soleimanpour had been interviewed by police in Britain three times.
.
He said that when police made the arrest, the charge was read out to Soleimanpour and he replied, ‘‘It is false.’’
.
The suspect’s lawyer, Michel Massih, called the charge ‘‘a political vendetta,’’ and said, ‘‘there are political points being scored against the country and against him.’’
.
Massih said Soleimanpour was studying in Durham for a graduate degree in environmental science, and that his wife is a senior university biologist.
.
Argentine federal judge Juan Jose Galeano, who is investigating the terrorist attack in which more than 200 were wounded, had requested the arrest of Soleimanpour, who was ambassador to Argentina at the time of the explosion.
.
Iran on Friday criticized Soleimanpour’s arrest and said the Argentinian warrant lacked a judicial basis.
.
‘‘The measure has been politically motivated and has been carried out under the influence of the Zionists,’’ Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in a statement posted on the web site of the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
.
‘‘We will hold talks with the British officials, asking them to provide necessary explanations,’’ Asefi added.
.
In Buenos Aires, leaders of the Jewish community center said they hoped the arrest was a breakthrough that would now move the investigation forward.
.
Abraham Kaul, president of the AMIA, lauded the arrest as a sign of the seriousness with which countries around the world are now tackling terrorism.
.
‘‘This shows that terrorism is an issue that concerns countries around the world,’’ he said in an interview with Associated Press Television,
.
He also noted that new President Nestor Kirchner has made a priority of strengthening Argentina’s judicial system and that his recent moves to open intelligence files and compel former agents to testify could help the case.
.
‘‘Justice is much more possible today than it has been in the last nine years. Today a a door has been opened,’’ he said. LONDON A British court on Friday refused bail to a former Iranian diplomat sought in Argentina on charges of conspiring to murder 85 people killed in the bombing of a Jewish community center in 1994.
.
Hade Soleimanpour, 47-year-old former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, made a first, brief court appearance a day after he was arrested in Durham, northern England, where he is a student.
.
The Iranian government has several times denied any responsibility in the 1994 bombing.
.
Soleimanpour, casually dressed in khaki trousers and a white polo shirt, spoke only to confirm his name and age at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court during the start of proceedings for his extradition to Argentina.
.
Judge Timothy Workman ordered him held without bail until his next appearance at Bow Street, Aug. 29. He said the suspect’s lack of ties in Britain was part of the reason for rejecting bail.
.
Soleimanpour has lived in Durham, northeast England, since 2002 on a student visa, police said. His wife and two small children are in Iran, where they went for a vacation.
.
London’s Metropolitan Police said the extradition warrant alleged that on or before July 18, 1994, Soleimanpour conspired with others to murder persons at the Asociacion Mutua Israelita Argentina — the Jewish Community Center AMIA.
.
‘‘The Argentine authorities have alleged he was involved in the planning and commission of the bombing and that he provided information about the place and the timing of the attack,’’ Detective Sgt. Keith Richardson of the police extradition unit told the court.
.
Richardson said there had been a new investigation into the bombing since the change of government in Argentina in May and said that Soleimanpour had been interviewed by police in Britain three times.
.
He said that when police made the arrest, the charge was read out to Soleimanpour and he replied, ‘‘It is false.’’
.
The suspect’s lawyer, Michel Massih, called the charge ‘‘a political vendetta,’’ and said, ‘‘there are political points being scored against the country and against him.’’
.
Massih said Soleimanpour was studying in Durham for a graduate degree in environmental science, and that his wife is a senior university biologist.
.
Argentine federal judge Juan Jose Galeano, who is investigating the terrorist attack in which more than 200 were wounded, had requested the arrest of Soleimanpour, who was ambassador to Argentina at the time of the explosion.
.
Iran on Friday criticized Soleimanpour’s arrest and said the Argentinian warrant lacked a judicial basis.
.
‘‘The measure has been politically motivated and has been carried out under the influence of the Zionists,’’ Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in a statement posted on the web site of the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
.
‘‘We will hold talks with the British officials, asking them to provide necessary explanations,’’ Asefi added.
.
In Buenos Aires, leaders of the Jewish community center said they hoped the arrest was a breakthrough that would now move the investigation forward.
.
Abraham Kaul, president of the AMIA, lauded the arrest as a sign of the seriousness with which countries around the world are now tackling terrorism.
.
‘‘This shows that terrorism is an issue that concerns countries around the world,’’ he said in an interview with Associated Press Television,
.
He also noted that new President Nestor Kirchner has made a priority of strengthening Argentina’s judicial system and that his recent moves to open intelligence files and compel former agents to testify could help the case.
.
‘‘Justice is much more possible today than it has been in the last nine years. Today a a door has been opened,’’ he said.

http://www.iht.com/articles/107460.html
29 posted on 08/22/2003 9:59:34 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Diplomatic row over UK arrest of Iranian

Telegraph
By Robin Gedye, Foreign Affairs Writer
(Filed: 23/08/2003)

A diplomatic row erupted yesterday between Teheran and London after the former Iranian ambassador to Argentina was arrested in connection with the bombing of a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires, in which 84 people died.

Iran accused Britain of being part of a "Zionist plot" after Hadi Soleimanpour, 47, was held in Durham on an international warrant for his arrest issued by Argentina.

Years of painstaking diplomacy to restore Anglo-Iranian relations appeared jeopardised as Soleimanpour appeared at Bow Street Magistrate's Court yesterday to face extradition proccedings.

Mr Soleimanpour, ambassador to Buenos Aires at the time of the bombing, had been living in the North-East since February when he became a research student on an environment course.

Mr Soleimanpour spoke in court only to confirm his name and was remanded in custody until Aug 29. Det Sgt Keith Richardson said he told officers that the Argentine accusation was "false."

The court was told that Argentine authorities alleged that Mr Soleimanpour was involved in planning and commissioning the bombing in 1994 and that he provided information about the location and timing of the attack.

Argentine authorities are seeking the arrest of seven other Iranians.

Kamal Kharazi, Iran's foreign minister, tried to protest to Jack Straw yesterday but was unable to reach him in New York where the Foreign Secretary was visiting the United Nations.

Morteza Sarmadi, Iran's ambassador to London, called the Foreign Office to voice his government's anger and Iran's state radio spoke of a "new plot against Iran by the triangle of America, Britain and Israel with the co-operation of Argentina".

Hamid Reza Asefi, an Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said: "The rulings lack judicial and legal basis and are politically motivated . . . under the influence of the Zionist regime."

Formal diplomatic relations with Teheran were restored only four years ago after 20 years of strain following the Islamic revolution. They reached breaking point in 1989 when Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against the author Salman Rushdie.

Home and Foreign Office officials insisted yesterday that the "judicial process" in respect of the extradition request would follow its "proper course" and could not be interfered with.

"In the same way that we could do nothing to alter the course of law in the case of Spain's extradition request for [the former Chilean dictator Augusto] Pinochet, so we cannot intervene here," one official said.

The Home Office said the extradition would be a "long drawn-out procedure".

Argentina's decision to reopen the Jewish Community bombing case is part of a wider move by leaders in Argentina, Brazil and Chile to expose the killings and abuse of thousands of their countrymen by Right-wing dictators from the 1960s to the 1980s.

America and Israel have long said they suspected Iran was behind the car-bomb attack, described last month by President Nestor Kirchner, on its anniversary, as "Argentina's Twin Towers".

Eight years of investigation produced few results and newspapers have alleged that the former president Carlos Menem accepted a £7 million bribe from Iran to cover up its involvement in the attack. Mr Menem has denied this.

Last month Mr Kirchner revoked amnesty laws passed in 1986 and 1987 that had protected members of the former Right-wing regimes from prosecution and ordered the arrest of 46 former officials.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/08/23/warg23.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/08/23/ixworld.html
30 posted on 08/22/2003 10:10:07 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Thanks again for some excellent and enlightening posts!

You post articles which cut thru the media fog. You are much appreciated!
31 posted on 08/22/2003 11:05:37 PM PDT by onyx (Name an honest democrat? I can't either!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
This thread is now closed.

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

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


32 posted on 08/23/2003 12:05:17 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson