Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Gnomemoot 0: Iran - what is the problem? | 194 comments (194 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
Technical evidence? (none / 0)
First evidence:

Informed diplomats said...

Where have I seen that before

More from the second:

The Russian soon found 19 Heinstrasse, a five-storey office and apartment building with a flat, pale green and beige facade in a quiet, slightly down-at-heel neighbourhood in Vienna's north end. Amid the list of Austrian tenants, there was one simple line: "PM/Iran." The Iranians clearly didn't want publicity. An Austrian postman helped him. As the Russian stood by, the postman opened the building door and dropped off the mail. The Russian followed suit; he realised that he could leave his package without actually having to talk to anyone. He slipped through the front door, and hurriedly shoved his envelope through the inner-door slot at the Iranian office.

The Russian fled the mission without being seen. He was deeply relieved that he had made the hand-off without having to come face to face with a real live Iranian.

Gjermund, this is weaker than weak evidence. The rest of the Guardian article is pure speculation.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Feb 18th, 2006 at 04:46:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Technical evidence? (none / 0)
After some digging, I found that the casting argument holds, but it is questionable whether Iran sought it or was it committed nuclear-proliferationist Khan who included them in the 1987 package: no corresponding equipment purchases, or any proof that any Iranian activity (request, further research) was connected to this file.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sat Feb 18th, 2006 at 05:44:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Technical evidence? (none / 0)
 (.....)but it is questionable whether Iran sought it or was it committed nuclear-proliferationist Khan who included them in the 1987 package: no corresponding equipment purchases, or any proof that any Iranian activity (request, further research) was connected to this file.

Well, if you had no ambitions of developing nuclear weapons why not be upfront with this information and hand it over to the IAEA at once and not wait almost a decade before you more or less are forced to admitting having such a document?  

The NPT doesn't only prohibit purchasing equipment for nuclear weapons, but also refrain from what can be seen as seeking the assistance of others in developing such weapons:

Article II

Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

 Whether it was intentionally or unintentionally acquired....well....we have to take the Iranians word for them not actively seeking such knowledge.  

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.
by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Sat Feb 18th, 2006 at 07:32:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Technical evidence? (none / 0)
Informed diplomats said..., Where have I seen that before

If you are going to measure every foreign policy issue in the Middle East to what happened prior to the Iraq invasion in 2003 and automatically dismiss it as propaganda, well then it wouldn't be much point in dealing with the Middle East at all and much less trying to uphold the NPT in that region.  

The IAEA has found Iran's failure to inform of its nuclear program, its admitting of acquiring blueprints on how to cast Uranium metal into nuclear warheads and the failure to disclose the nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak, only admitting it when the secret was disclosed by others, so disturbing that they have found it necessary to report it to the UN Security Council.    

Gjermund, this is weaker than weak evidence. The rest of the Guardian article is pure speculation.

I have to agree that it is certainly no conclusive evidence, but all those incidents but together doesn't paint a to rosy picture of the Iranians intent when it comes to the nuclear question, something which even the IAEA seems to agree with, which was not the case prior to the Iraq invasion in 2003.  That is why their motives have to be scrutinized and treated with utmost suspicion.

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.

by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Sat Feb 18th, 2006 at 06:55:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gnomemoot 0: Iran - what is the problem? | 194 comments (194 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: