April 12, 2007: The Issue of Nuclear Weapons
Cont'd
The News:
- A
Mosque Raid Sets Off Sunnis in Iraq’s Capital, NYT, Apr 11, 2007
- Bombing
Hits Parliament in Baghdad, NYT -AP,
April 12, 2007
- Steven N. Simon, "After
the Surge: The Case for US Military Disengagement from
Iraq," - NY Council on Foreign
Relations (61 page pdf file).
- 4 Years On,
the Gap Between Iraq Policy and Practice Is Wide, NYT, Apr 12, 2007
- Islamists
Bring Fight to Capital of Algeria, NYT,
Apr 11, 2007
- U.S. Sends
(Another) Warning on Darfur, NYT, Apr
11, 2007
- Announcing a new blog of the Project on Middle
East Democracy (POMED) from Georgetown U - you might also want to look at
intensive web site of the United Nations Development Programme on
Governance in the Arab Region (POGAR). Also take a look at the Doha
Debates site, "Qatar's unique forum for
free speech in the Arab world."
- Abu
Aardvark: Liberal Islam Debate (a long
blog that illustrates the problem of the US trying to influence
Muslim public opinion)
- BBC
summary of Iran nuclear
controversy
From last time :
- Jonathan Jay Pollard spy affair 1986-
(recruited by Israel after CIA prevented Israeli access to
satellite photos of USSR in the wake of Israeli bombing of Osirak
nuclear reactor near Baghdad in 1981)
- Iran's nuclear enrichment program
- The Security Council, in resolution 1747 of
March 24, 2007, has sought to tighten the squeeze on Iran's
nuclear and missile programmes by preventing dealings with the
state Bank Sepah and 28 named people and organisations, many
connected to the elite Revolutionary Guard.
- The council gave Iran 60 days (until 23
May) to comply or face "further appropriate measures" that will
need a new council decision.
- Iran has to stop all enrichment activities,
including the preparation of uranium ore, the installation of
the centrifuges in which a gas from the ore is spun to separate
the richer parts and the insertion of the gas into the
centrifuges. It also has to suspend its work on heavy water
projects, notably the
construction of a heavy water reactor at Arak [link to March 2007 update]. Such a reactor could produce plutonium, an
alternative to uranium for a nuclear device.
- The West says that Iran cannot be trusted
because it hid an enrichment programme for 18 years, which was
discovered in 2003. [just like the Israelis
1958-85!--ch]
- Iran is being offered help by a group of
countries, including the US, to build light-water reactors.
Fuel for these would be made in Russia in a partnership with
Iran. The offer is attached as Annex II to Security Council
resolution 1737 [earlier UN sanctions passed in Dec 2006--ch].
However, as a condition for any talks, Iran has to suspend
enrichment. It does not accept such a pre-condition.
- The IAEA [International Atomic Energy
Authority] has access to Iranian nuclear facilities under a
safeguards agreement, and in February 2007 verified that Iran
had not diverted to illegal use any material it had declared.
However, Iran has not implemented a more intrusive Additional
Protocol it signed in 2003, so the IAEA says it cannot verify
the absence of undeclared nuclear material.
- The latest estimate from the International
Institute for Strategic Studies in London (in its 2007 annual
review) says: "If and when Iran does have 3,000 centrifuges
operating smoothly, the IISS estimates it would take an
additional 9-11 months to produce 25 kg of highly enriched
uranium, enough for one implosion-type weapon. That day is
still 2-3 years away at the earliest." [from your April
10 class news: " The large
industrial plant under construction at Natanz is roughly half
the size of the Pentagon. Inspectors say Iran is constructing
3,000 centrifuges as a first step toward 54,000."- the implicit
but not quite credible comment of the Iranian president was
Iran is already processing on "an industrial scale" - did he
mean all 3,000 centrifuges going full blast?--ch]
- how important is nuclear nonproliferation,
compared to other goals of US foreign policy?
- what are the political consequences of
delaying Iran's nuclear program by destroying it
militarily?
- toward a nuclear-free Middle East?
Background on Iran
- Beirut hostages, 1984-92
- Irangate - arms for hostages: Oct 1986 -
President Reagan's National Security Council (Col. Robert
McFarlane, Admiral John Poindexter)
- Congressional rejection of aid to Nicaragua
Contras (Boland Amendment 1982)
- Oliver North and "The Enterprise" (see part
1 of the video below) - the privatization of US foreign
policy
Video: Secret Government
(Bill Moyers): parts
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6
You may want to visit the CIA and see what
information they can provide for your research projects, such as the
CIA
Fact Book. But mainly you will want to
ponder those "democratic dilemmas" discussed in earlier in this
course. Here is surely a major dilemma between the secrecy that may
sometimes be necessary for the successful conduct of foreign policy
and the open public debate characteristic of democracy. The Global
War On Terror since 911 has seriously compounded the problem. It
seems, "With Patriotism
Renewed," that the New York Times was letting the
story about President Bush's
possible inside trading be tucked back
away - even though it made waves on the BBC and in the British
press.
P.S. Since these lines were written, the James
Risen of the NYT has revealed the unchecked eavesdropping of the
National Security Agency on many US citizens and others in the USA
talking with suspected Al Qaeda contacts abroad. See his
State
of War : The Secret History of the C.I.A. and the Bush
Administration
- Question: in light of what we know about the
Pentagon's (Douglas Feith's offices) manipulation of intelligence
in the prelude to the Iraq war in 2002-03 (recall the Iraq video),
which practices of "Secret Government" were more detrimental to
the national interest: practices under the Reagan or the G.W. Bush
administration?
Main page | classes
| syllabus
April 12, 2007
- Department
of Government, College
of Liberal Arts, University of Texas at
Austin.
- Questions, Comments, and Suggestions to
chenry@mail.utexas.edu