Iran warned yesterday that it would enrich uranium on an industrial scale if the country’s nuclear dossier is referred to the U.N. Security Council, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 20).
Top Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Tehran would not, however, withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in protest.
“[But] if the case goes to the Security Council, we’re obliged … to lift all voluntary measures,” he said.
Regarding a compromise proposal put forth by Russia, under which Moscow would enrich uranium on Russian soil on Iran’s behalf, Larijani said “gaps have to be filled.” “We have to see what potential this idea has for being productive,” he said. “There are two issues to be considered: One is Iran’s right to enrichment, and the other is non-diversion [of nuclear material to weapons]. Any solution should be consistent with these two considerations.” Larijani also dismissed demands by Western powers for nuclear warhead assembly instructions Tehran allegedly obtained from former top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. “If you can find anyone in the world who can make a bomb with one and a half pages, we will cover their whole body with gold,” he said. Last January, Iran showed the International Atomic Energy Agency a document received in 1987 on casting enriched uranium into “hemispherical forms.” Iran claims it never requested the document from Khan, the Times reported (Khalaf/Smyth, Financial Times, Jan. 23). Larijani said he would travel to Russia to discuss Moscow’s compromise nuclear proposal, Xinhua reported yesterday (Xinhua/People’s Daily, Jan. 22). Iran reportedly wants China involved in any potential uranium enrichment joint venture, AFP reported on Saturday. Iran has told German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier of its newfound interest in the Russian proposal, Germany’s Der Spiegel weekly quoted top officials as saying. “One of the Iranians’ conditions is that China also be involved in this joint venture,” Der Spiegel reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 21). Meanwhile, the United States plans to send a large official delegation to Vienna ahead of the Feb. 2 emergency IAEA Board meeting but has not put forth a specific strategy on the issue if it is referred to the Security Council, the Washington Post reported yesterday. “That has some countries worried,” said one Western diplomat, who said the U.S. invasion of Iraq is still seen as a potential precedent. “The Iraq experience colors everything about Iran,” said Mark Fitzgerald, a nonproliferation expert at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. “Those who want to give Iran the benefit of the doubt use the Iraq experience as a reason for doing so: The misuse of intelligence, the mistakes in the intelligence and the way the war has progressed.” Iranian diplomats have also been lobbying Board member states, the Post reported. They have emphasized that Iran has not resumed uranium enrichment activities and that they are willing to resume negotiations and consider Moscow’s compromise proposal, officials said (Molly Moore, Washington Post, Jan. 22). A European draft resolution to refer Iran’s case to the Security Council will likely have to be softened to gain Russia’s support, Reuters reported Saturday. A European diplomat said Moscow objected to language suggesting that Iran is a threat to world peace and setting up a vote on a Chapter Seven resolution at the Security Council. Chapter Seven resolutions are binding and enforceable with sanctions or military action, according to Reuters. The diplomat said London and Washington were pushing for a Chapter Seven resolution, but that Russian support was unlikely to be forthcoming. “In order to get the Russians on board we need to get a new draft of the resolution,” the diplomat said (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, Jan. 21). IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei wants to give Iran until March to fully comply with international inspections, diplomats told AFP on Saturday. “He doesn’t want to move the date up all of a sudden. He wouldn’t have the information he needs sooner and also he wants to give the Iranians due process,” said one Western diplomat. A second diplomat said ElBaradei has, however, told Iran “he could not go any further and the international community could not go any further” in tolerating their nuclear program. A diplomat close to the agency said Russia wanted “a nominal referral in February” while giving Iran one month “to deliver on demands to suspend nuclear fuel work and to cooperate with the IAEA.” A second Western diplomat, however, said the United States and the EU “rejected this idea outright.” The first Western diplomat also said ElBaradei would provide a detailed report on his progress with Iran on March 6. “ElBaradei has told the Iranians he’s going to provide a detailed report on the main outstanding issues and if Iran has not complied by then, he is going to report that he is not making progress,” the diplomat said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 20). Elsewhere, Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz warned on Saturday that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would bring disaster to Iran, Reuters reported. “Ahmedinejad, his hallucinatory statements, his criminal actions and his extreme views will bring disaster upon you. Do what you understand needs to be done in order to prevent this,” said Mofaz. Ahmedinejad has said that Israel should be “wiped off the map.” Mofaz said 2006 would be a “year of transition” during which Iran would not yet have a nuclear arsenal. “Israel’s policy is ... to bring this hot potato to the Security Council to impose sanctions and invasive inspections,” he said. He added, however, that Israel would continue preparations to defend itself. “Israel must be capable of protecting itself and ... we are preparing for this,” he said (Ori Lewis, Reuters, Jan. 21). Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said yesterday that his militia would come to Iran’s defense if it is attacked, the Associated Press reported. “If neighboring Islamic countries, including Iran, become the target of attacks, we will support them,” al-Sadr said after meeting with Larijani. “The Mahdi Army is beyond the Iraqi army. It was established to defend Islam.” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, meanwhile, warned that Israel would be making a “fatal mistake” if it chose to take military action against it (Associated Press/CNews, Jan. 22).
French President Jacques Chirac’s warning last week that Paris is prepared to launch a nuclear strike in response to any terrorist attack on French soil may signal an assertion of nuclear independence from the United States, analysts said on Friday (see GSN, Jan. 19). Chirac’s warning was intended to show that “one does not leave the monopoly of deterrence to the Americans,” Dominique Moisi of the French Institute of International Relations told Agence France-Presse. “It was a Gaullist-inspired speech aimed at giving renewed legitimacy to France’s deterrent arsenal, within the context of Europe,” said Moisi. Jean-Pierre Maulny, deputy director of the Institute of International and Strategic Relations, also said the message was aimed at the European Union. “Jacques Chirac wants to give credibility to the European Union’s strategic autonomy,” Maulny said. Maulny, however, questioned the strategic wisdom of Chirac’s warning. “The doctrine of deterrence is all the more effective when it stays vague,” he said. “Under (former presidents Charles) De Gaulle and (Francois) Mitterrand, the doctrine was simply to say, ‘I have nuclear weapons and I will not hesitate to use them’” (Agence France-Presse/Daily Times, Jan. 20). Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht expressed support for Chirac’s speech, Belgium’s De Standaard daily reported on Saturday. “If we want an integrated European defense system, it is logical that it would integrate existing nuclear arsenals,” said De Gucht. “A strong European branch will increase the equilibrium within NATO. The integration of existing nuclear arsenals in this system will also boost Europe’s political clout,” he said. “We cannot be in favor of a European defense system and act as if the French and British nuclear arsenals do not exist,” he added (De Standaard (Belgium), Jan. 21). Germany, meanwhile, reacted cautiously to Chirac’s remarks, AFP reported. Berlin did not see “any reason to believe that France’s (nuclear) policy has changed or will change in the future,” spokesman Thomas Steg said on Friday (Agence France-Presse I/Daily Times, Jan. 22). Although Chirac did not name any country in his speech, he was widely seen as referring to Iran, experts told AFP (Agence France-Presse, Jan. 20). Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi called Chirac’s comments as “unacceptable and unjustifiable,” AFP reported yesterday. “These statements redouble public concern in countries of the world which face those countries in possession of nuclear weapons,” said Asefi (Agence France-Presse II/Yahoo!News, Jan. 22).
U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said last week that some obstacles must still be removed before finalizing a nuclear technology sharing agreement between the United States and India, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Jan. 19). “There is no question that we've made some progress over the last six months but that much further progress has to be made and that there are some difficulties ahead of us,” he said. Burns said the United States is working to have the agreement in place before U.S. President George W. Bush visits India in March. “Our goal is to have an agreement before President Bush arrives,” he said. However, Burns said that any agreement must be detailed to be approved by Congress. “For any agreement to be credible with the U.S. Congress and the Nuclear Suppliers Group, it will have to be a detailed agreement, a substantial agreement,” he said. “It is a unique agreement. It has not been done before. India is a unique country,” Burns added. Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said he was hopeful that the deal would be approved by U.S. lawmakers. “Whatever interaction we have had so far leads us to believe that there is a lot of goodwill,” he said. “There is a pervasive feeling of bipartisan support for India-U.S. relations” (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 20). The White House has signaled that India must provide a plan to separate nuclear reactors for civilian use and use by the military, the New York Times reported today. “We expect that India will propose a civil-military separation plan that is credible, transparent, and defensible from a nonproliferation standpoint,” administration officials said in response to questions from Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). Also at issue is India’s stance on Iran. The United States wants India to back Iran’s referral to the U.N. Security Council. Indian leaders have refused to commit to a position on the matter. Lawmakers said India’s stance on Iran could influence their position on the sharing agreement. “It is extremely important that we know India will stand united with us in that effort,” said Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.). Indian lawmakers have also raised concerns about their country’s stance on Iran. Leftist parties have threatened to cripple the government if Prime Minister Prime Minister Manmohan Singh takes Washington’s position on the matter. Also problematic has been how many Indian reactors would be operated under safeguards, and the length of time these safeguards would apply. A senior Indian official said that reactors would be separated in a manner deemed by the government to be “necessary for our strategic program” (Somini Sengupta, New York Times, Jan. 23). Iran, meanwhile, has accused the United States of giving preferential treatment to India, Agence France-Presse reported. “Countries that produce nuclear weapons are neither members of the International Atomic Energy Agency nor signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani reportedly said. According to Indian notes, Larijani specifically mentioned India in an interview with CNN. “Americans say (to Iran) 'we doubt and we suspect your intentions, you may in future develop nuclear weapons,' while IAEA reports say that Iran is 10 years away from being capable of developing weapons,” he reportedly said. Burns dismissed Larijani’s comments. “We have seen the comments. They are outrageous,” he said. “How is it possible to compare India with Iran? India has been very careful with its nuclear program,” Burns added (Agence France-Presse II/IranMania.com, Jan. 20).
U.S. Treasury officials are in South Korea to discuss North Korea’s alleged counterfeiting and money laundering, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Jan. 20). U.S. Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary for terrorist financing and financial crimes Daniel Glaser met with officials at South Korea’s Foreign Ministry, officials said. Washington in September 2005 accused Macau-based Banco Delta Asia of fronting for North Korea’s illicit financial efforts. The following month, the Treasury Department sanctioned eight North Korean entities as the result of its investigation. Glaser visited Hong Kong, Macau and Beijing last week and is expected to be in Seoul through tomorrow, according to the agency (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 23). Glaser called on Macau to clamp down on money laundering, AFP reported on Friday. “Macau is beginning to take steps to strengthen its anti-money laundering and terrorist financing controls,” he said in Hong Kong last week. Glaser said Washington would assist Macau in developing controls that “can adequately protect its financial system from illicit conduct of all kinds.” He also praised Hong Kong’s efforts against illegal financial activity, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Jan. 20).
Russian and Ukrainian officials met this weekend to discuss a new deal for Russia to provide uranium to the former Soviet state for the next five years, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Jan. 16). Sergei Kiriyenko, chief of the Russian atomic energy agency, met with Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuriy Yekhanurov to discuss the agreement. “The experts are working well, they are achieving an optimal balance,” said Kiriyenko. Earlier this month, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said his country was considering enriching its own uranium to increase Ukraine’s energy independence. Right now, Ukraine purchases enriched uranium fuel for its nuclear power plants from Russia. Yushchenko said the Ukraine has no interest in developing nuclear weapons. The country renounced the arms after the Soviet Union collapsed and since has transferred more than 1,300 weapons back to Russia to be disarmed (Associated Press, Jan. 21).
Former leaders from the United States and Australia said evidence that al-Qaeda is planning a nuclear attack on a Western city is growing, the Australian reported today (see GSN, Jan. 17). “The nightmare scenario is a real one — the threat is very real,” said Pete Wilson, former Republican governor of California. ''There is no question al-Qaeda has been trying to obtain fissile material for a number of years.” Bob Carr, Australia’s former NSW premier, agreed with Wilson. “I have reached the conclusion that what all Western cities need now is comprehensive evacuation plans,” said Carr. These plans should include communication procedures to get information on topics like evacuation routes out to the public, he said. Wilson added that Hurricane Katrina showed that communication after a disaster can be difficult. He said that “local authorities were overwhelmed” (Geoff Elliott, Australian, Jan. 23).
| 
Back to top
