They’re rioting in Africa, they’re starving in Spain.
There’s hurricanes in Florida, and Texas needs rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls.
The French hate the Germans, the Germans hate the Poles.
Italians hate Yugoslavs, South Africans hate the Dutch.
And I don’t like anybody very much!
But we can be tranquil, and thankful, and proud,
For man’s been endowed with a mushroom-shaped cloud.
And we know for certain that some lovely day
Someone will set the spark off, and we will all be blown away.
They’re rioting in Africa, there’s strife in Iran.
What nature doesn’t do to us, will be done by our fellow man.
They’re Rioting in Africa, Lyrics by the Kingston Trio
To the query posed in the title, Iran says “no”, and they have no intention of using nuclear energy for anything other than peaceful energy for the benefit of the Iranian people. The U.S. CIA and intelligence services of Israel say “not yet”, but Iran has every intention of having such weapons and will use them against Israel as soon as they are fully ready. No one except the highest officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the leaders of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran [the AEOI] know for certain whether or not Iran is working on producing weapons of mass destruction; and, if so, how advanced is their progress. Aside from the assertions of the citizens of the world who fear a nuclear holocaust above all else and the self-serving denials of the Iranian regime, there is some objective information available. Even then, we are left with the pessimism expressed by Alfred North Whitehead, “There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays to the devil.”
As recently as the week of September 23-27, 2013, President Obama addressed the United Nations to declare his continuing concern over the activities of the AEOI towards the development and manufacture of nuclear WMDs. The president made broad allusions to the concept that Iran was indeed proceeding with research and development of weapons under a cloak of secrecy that was making Iran a pariah among nations and a threat to the United States and Israel specifically.
On July 6, 2013, Former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw rejected as baseless, the allegation that there may be a military dimension to Iran’s nuclear energy program by emphasizing that there is no evidence for such a claim. He said on the BBC, “There is no evidence, not from the IAEA [the International Atomic Energy Agency], not from the Americans… There is no evidence that they (Iranians) are involved in building a bomb.” He referred to the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that verified Iran was not after nuclear arms. The NIE report–prepared by 16 US intelligence agencies–confirmed with “high confidence” the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. A similar report was also published in 2011.
Straw welcomed the election of Hassan Rohani as Iran’s next president in the June 14, 2013 vote, saying, “What I have been urging the government is that we do our best to reengage with Iranians, because there is a chance now that we can.”
Rohani, who was Iran’s former chief nuclear negotiator from October 2003 to August 2005, won Iran’s 11th presidential election. Straw was adamant that the U.S., Israel, and some of their allies, falsely claim that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program, with Washington and the European Union using the unfounded claim as a pretext to impose illegal sanctions on Iran.
In the New York Times, on August 1, 2013, Rick Gladstone wrote an article entitled, Sending Message to Iran, House Approves Tougher Sanctions. He said, “The House overwhelmingly approved legislation on Wednesday that would impose the toughest sanctions yet on Iran, calling the measure a critical step to cripple the country’s disputed nuclear program.” On July 26, 2013, writing as an Op-Ed Guest Columnist, Jonathan Tepperman, for the Times, entitled an article, Israel vs. Iran, Again. He said, “Earlier this month, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel went on American television to remind the world–in case anyone had forgotten–that the threat from Iran remains very much alive. Speaking on Face the Nation, Netanyahu warned that the Islamic Republic is once again approaching a nuclear redline, and hinted that if the United States doesn’t take action soon, he will…Netanyahu won’t–and shouldn’t–get the kind of response he’s hoping for. Simply put, that’s because both his language and Israel’s behavior make it harder and harder to take his warnings seriously…Now, let me be clear: I’m not trying to argue that Israel doesn’t have any reason to worry about Iran. Given Israel’s size and location, the Obama administration’s current preoccupation with Egypt and Syria, and Washington’s seeming willingness to engage Iran’s new president in yet another round of talks, Netanyahu’s anxiety is understandable (if excessive).”
Tehran strongly rejects the allegations regarding its nuclear energy activities, maintaining that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. According to Wikipedia, “Iran is not known to currently possess weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and has signed treaties repudiating the possession of weapons of mass destruction including the Biological Weapons Convention, the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).”
Wikipedia listed a timeline of U.S. announcements and actions related to its contention that Iran was maintaining a stubborn secrecy about its nuclear program which makes the program highly suspect:
- “In 2005, the United States stated that Iran has violated both Article III and Article II of the NPT. The IAEA Board of Governors, in a rare divided vote, found Iran in noncompliance with its NPT safeguards agreement for a 1985–2003 “policy of concealment” regarding its efforts to develop enrichment and reprocessing technologies. The United States, the IAEA, and others consider these technologies to be of particular concern because they can be used to produce fissile material for use in nuclear weapons.
- The United States has argued that Iran’s concealment of efforts to develop sensitive nuclear technology is prima facie evidence of Iran’s intention to develop nuclear weapons–or at a minimum–to develop a latent nuclear weapons capability. Others have noted that while possession of the technology “contributes to the latency of non-nuclear weapon states in their potential to acquire nuclear weapons” but that such latency is not necessarily evidence of intent to proceed toward the acquisition of nuclear weapons, since “intent is in the eye of the beholder”.
- The United States has also provided information to the IAEA on Iranian studies related to weapons design, activities, including a the intention of diverting a civilian nuclear energy program to the manufacture of weapons, based on a laptop computer reportedly linked to Iranian weapons programs. The United States has pointed to other information reported by the IAEA, including the “Green Salt” project, the possession of a document on manufacturing uranium metal hemispheres, and other links between Iran’s military and its nuclear program, as further indications of a military intent to Iran’s nuclear program. The IAEA has said U.S. intelligence provided to it through 2007 has proven inaccurate or not led to significant discoveries inside Iran;however, the U.S., and others have recently provided more intelligence to the agency.
- The United States acknowledges Iran’s right to nuclear power, and has joined with the EU-3, Russia, and China in offering nuclear and other economic and technological cooperation with Iran if it suspends uranium enrichment. This cooperation would include an assured supply of fuel for Iran’s nuclear reactors.
- A potential reason behind U.S. resistance to an Iranian nuclear program lies in Middle-Eastern geopolitics. In essence, the U.S. feels that it must guard against even the possibility of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons capability. Some nuclear technology is dual-use; i.e. it can be used for peaceful energy generation and to develop nuclear weapons, a situation that resulted in India‘s nuclear weapons program in the 1960s. A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically change the balance of power in the Middle-East, weakening U.S. influence. It could also encourage other Middle-Eastern nations to develop nuclear weapons of their own further reducing U.S. influence in a critical region.
- In 2003, the United States insisted that Tehran be “held accountable” for seeking to build nuclear arms in violation of its agreements. In June 2005, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice required former IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei to either “toughen his stance on Iran” or fail to be chosen for a third term as IAEA head. The IAEA has on some occasions criticised the stance of the U.S. on Iran’s program. The United States denounced Iran’s successful enrichment of uranium to fuel grade in April 2006, with spokesman Scott McClellan saying, they “continue to show that Iran is moving in the wrong direction”. In November 2006, Seymour Hersh described a classified draft assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency “challenging the White House’s assumptions about how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb. He continued, “The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency,” adding that a current senior intelligence official confirmed the assessment.
- In March 2006, the U.S. State Department opened an Office of Iranian Affairs (OIA) overseen by Elizabeth Cheney, the daughter of Vice-President Dick Cheney. The office’s mission was reportedly to promote a democratic transition in Iran and to help “defeat” the Iranian regime. Iran argued the office was tasked with drawing up plans to overthrow its government. One Iranian reformer said after the office opened that many “partners are simply too afraid to work with us anymore”, and that the office had “a chilling effect”. The U.S. Congress has reportedly appropriated more than $120 million to fund the project. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh further revealed in July 2008 that Congress also agreed to a $400-million funding request for a major escalation in covert operations inside Iran.
China, Russia, and Kazachstan have all been accused of supplying enriched uranium ore to Iran, and all of them—including Iran–deny the allegations as well as denying any seismic evidence of nuclear testing. There is ample and undisputed evidence that Iran has sufficient delivery missiles to accommodate a nuclear arsenal. There is also well-established evidence that Iran has deeply secret facilities in several areas that are related to nuclear energy production. It is argued that there would be no real need for such secrecy for plants intent on pursuing peaceful energy production. There have been unverified reports that Iranian scientists and military officers have served as clandestine whistle-blowers to inform the outside world that Iran, indeed, has a nuclear weapons program. The IAEA has expressed concerns that Iran has the capability to produce either peaceful uranium or weapons grade enriched uranium and could decide to build weapons. Furthermore, it is well established that Iran worked closely with A.Q Khan, the father of the Pakistan nuclear bomb.
The evidence for an Iranian nuclear weapon program is not there or is, at most, subject to considerable conjecture by parties that are not disinterested. The present novel is fiction and is significantly attuned to the conjecture. The Iranians have established a closed society rife with secrets which does not contribute to a sense of well-being in a nuclear attack conscious outside world. The outlandish statements by immediate past-president, Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader, Khamenei have certainly done nothing to instill confidence in a jittery world. The polemic rantings of hatred of Jews, of Israel, of the United States, and of the West in general, accompanied by grossly inflammatory claims that they wish to annihilate those who differ in opinion and practice from their extremely intolerant religious views–including the very concept of democracy—raise defensive hackles among most people who follow the issues. The Iranian senior government officials sound like some combination of Maximillian Robespierre, Genghis Khan, Adolf Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, and Popes Urban II and Alexander VI with their threats of mass destruction of enemies and world dominance gained through war (or in the case of the Iranians, Jihad). The Iranian tirades suggest to common people that–despite evidence to the contrary–Iran does have nuclear weapon ambitions and an entrenched desire to destroy Israel despite the fact that they have to know that mutually assured destruction would be the result. Most people–including this author–distrust religious fanatics, particularly those who fantasize that their God wills them to wreak destruction on their opponents which will assure their dominance in the post-apocalyptic world. I am a chicken when it comes to nuclear conflict; so, this author will reserve judgment as history and the news informs him.
-THE END-
Those who play with the devil’s toys will be brought by degrees to wield his sword.
–R. Buckminster Fuller
