Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

Iran must invoke "UNSCR-984" and take US-UK-France to Security Council ...

2 views

Skip to first unread message

Arash

unread,

Jun 23, 2006, 4:46:33 PM6/23/06

AntiWar
June 17, 2006

Nuke-Free Zone

Dr. James Gordon Prather
Nuclear weapons physicist
Former Nuclear bomb tester at Lawrence Livermore
Former Technical director of nuclear bomb testings at Sandia
Former Chief scientist of the U.S. Army
U.S. Navy veteran

The Neo-Crazies, in cahoots with the Anti-Nuclear-Whatever crazies, have managed to get Western politicians from across the political spectrum to view-with-alarm the Iranian nuclear weapons "threat". Of course, as those politicians know, there is no evidence whatsoever that Iran is now a nuke threat.

Know, because until March of this year Iran had VOLUNTARILY [beyond its obligations under NPT] cooperated with Director-General ElBaradei and staff of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as if an unratified "Additional Protocol" [1] [Iran's parliament has not ratified the 'Additional Protocol', so Iran has no obligation to it] to their 1974 "Safeguards Agreement" [2] was actually in force.

After more than 3 years, comprising 1700 man-days of inspections, the IAEA found "no indication" there were "undeclared source or special nuclear materials" in Iran. Furthermore, they found no indication that any declared source or special nuclear materials had been diverted to military purpose.

As for Iran comprising a nuke threat, the IAEA inspectors didn’t even find trace amounts of almost pure Uranium-235, much less the hundreds of pounds that would be needed to make a few first-generation nukes.

But the almost certain knowledge that there is no Iranian nuke threat doesn’t faze Western politicians.

Nor does the knowledge appear to faze them that if George Bush nukes Iran – as he and his henchmen keep threatening – we are all going to be in a heap of trouble.

What’s more puzzling is why the Western media elite do not challenge the oft repeated assertions by Western politicians and government officials that we have "no choice" but to remove the Iranian nuke "threat", by force "if necessary".

The Western media elite also repeatedly report that Iran’s alleged nuke program – if not actually on the agenda – is a hotly debated sideline topic at recent meetings of the Arab League, the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC), the China-Arab Cooperation Forum, the Non-Aligned Movement’s (NAM) Ministerial Meeting, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the upcoming meeting of the Group of Eight.

But it’s not hotly debated.

On the contrary, Iran is acknowledged to be a principal defender of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons (NPT) [3] and a principal advocate of a "nuclear-weapon-free" zone in the Middle East.

Most notably at the 2005 NPT Review Conference [4] (made disastrous by Condi’s quasi-boycott), but also at the "high-level event" (savaged by Bonkers Bolton) that immediately preceded last year’s 60th Session of the UN General Assembly [5], by the address of their new President before the General Assembly last September[6], and in addresses made by high-level Iranian officials [7] at quarterly meetings of the IAEA Board of Governors.

In fact, virtually all meetings of all these organizations end with expressions of strong support for the NPT (and implicitly, Iran) and its "three pillars":

(1) non-proliferation,
(2) disarmament and
(3) the inalienable right to peacefully use nuclear technology.

Note that for the anti-nuclear-whatever crazies, that third NPT pillar is bad.

And for the neo-crazies, that second NPT pillar is really bad.

Nevertheless, soon after taking office, with the Cold War won, President Clinton began taking positive steps towards compliance with the NPT disarmament provisions (the 13-Steps). [8]

By 1995 Clinton had gotten all signatories to agree to extend the life of NPT – originally requiring renewal every five years – indefinitely [9].

The first Review Conference (REVCON) to assess NPT effectiveness – held in 2000 [10] – was considered by the disarmament crowd to be a great success, in spite of the fact that in 1998 both India and Pakistan (neither country an NPT signatory) had detonated their homegrown nukes for the first time.

Why a success?

Because Clinton committed the United States to "an unequivocal undertaking" to accomplish "the total elimination" of our nuke arsenal, as well as to "a reaffirmation" of the commitment in UN Security Council resolution 984 (UNSCR-984) [11] to "give security assurances against the use of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear-weapon States that are Parties" to the NPT.

Wait a minute.

Haven’t the Iranians been insisting that Bush resume taking those steps towards early nuke disarmament agreed to at the 2000 NPT Review Conference?

Haven’t the Iranians been insisting that Bush reaffirm the commitment made as a signatory to the NPT to "cooperate" in contributing to the "applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes", especially "in non-nuclear-weapons States"?

Finally, haven’t the Iranians been asking the Brits-French-Germans to hold Bush to the U.S. commitment to never nuke a non-nuclear-weapons State?

Well, maybe there’s hope. The Russians and Chinese – who already have oil, gas and nuclear energy co-development projects in Iran – will join the Brits-French-Germans in the next round of negotiations. Maybe they can explain to Dubya (or McCain or Hillary) why nuking those CO-development projects wouldn’t be a good idea.

Notes:
---------
[1] IAEA's "Additional Protocol" to the "Safeguards Agreement"
http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/sg_protocol.html

[2] IAEA's "Safeguards Agreement"
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Factsheets/
Iran’s Safeguards Agreement
The text of the agreement between Iran and the Agency for the application of safeguards in connection with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (December 13, 1974)
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc214.pdf [PDF-80KB]

[3] Text of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons (NPT)
http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/npttreaty.html
IAEA Statute
http://www.iaea.org/About/statute_text.html
Iran's Inalienable Right to all aspects of nuclear technology is guaranteed under Article IV of the NPT
(1). Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.
(2). All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

[4] 2005 NPT Review Conference (7th REVCON)
http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/
Iran statement at REVCON 2005
http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/statements03may.html
Bonker Bolton's underling Stephen Rademaker statement at REVCON 2005
http://www.un.int/usa/05_089.htm

[5] The 2005 World Summit:
High-level Plenary Meeting of the 60th Session of the UN General Assembly
His Excellency President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (September 14, 2005)
http://www.un.org/webcast/summit2005/statements/ira050914eng.pdf [PDF-220KB]

[6] Address by His Excellency Dr. Mahmood Ahmadinejad President of Iran before the 60th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, New York (September 17, 2005)
http://www.un.org/webcast/ga/60/statements/iran050917eng.pdf [PDF-35KB]

[7] Quarterly meetings of the IAEA Board of Governors
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/Meetings2006.asp

[8] NPT disarmament provisions: "13 practical steps" toward TOTAL GLOBAL nuclear disarmament
The 13 Practical Steps for the implementation of "Article VI" adopted by the 2000 NPT Review Conference to nuclear disarmament. In light of the rules of treaty interpretation set forth in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the Practical Steps lay down criteria, principles, and measures for compliance with Article VI. They constitute subsequent agreement and practice authoritatively applying and interpreting Article VI. Accordingly, to implement the Practical Steps is to move towards complete fulfillment of the legal obligations set forth in Article VI. To fail to do so in essential respects is to demonstrate a lack of good faith and to breach the Article VI obligations.
http://disarmament.un.org/wmd/npt/nptrevdocuments.html
http://www.lcnp.org/disarmament/npt/13stepspaper.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_steps

[9] 1995 NPT Review Conference (5th REVCON)
http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/npt/1995dec.html

[10] 2000 NPT Review Conference (6th REVCON)
http://disarmament2.un.org/wmd/npt/nptrevhome.html
http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/NPT/2000revcon/finaltext.htm

[11] United Nations Security Council resolution 984 (UNSCR-984)
UNSCR-984 is a security assurancefor non-nuclear-weapon states parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Among other things, UNSCR 984 "RECOGNIZES" that "in case of aggression with nuclear weapons or the threat of such aggression against a non-nuclear-weapon State Party" to the NPT, "the nuclear-weapon State permanent members of the Security Council will bring the matter immediately to the attention of the Council and seek Council action to provide, in accordance with the Charter, the necessary assistance to the State victim".
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/resolutions/SC95/984SC95.html

In other words, U.S., Britain and France who have openly and officially threatened to use nuclear weapons against Iran, would REQUIRE U.S., Britain and France to be referred to UN Security Council (UNSC) for violating the UNSCR-984.

British Defense Minister Geoffrey Hoon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Hoon) at Nottingham University said that he will launch nuclear attack on Iran without hesitation (November 2004).
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/221104blastiran.htm
http://www.new-frontiers.org/newsarchives/display.aspx?n=733

French President Jacques Chirac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Chirac) on January 19, 2006 threatened to launch nuclear attack on Iran. http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,396191,00.html

* Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy implementing official for national security-related technical matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also served as legislative assistant for national security affairs to U.S. Senator Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. --ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (http://www.llnl.gov) in California and Sandia National Laboratory (http://www.sandia.gov) in New Mexico. http://www.antiwar.com/prather

Interviews with nuclear weapons physicist Dr. James Gordon Prather:
September 17, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather6.mp3
July 23, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather5.mp3
May 7, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather4.mp3
April 9, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather3.mp3
February 5, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather2.mp3
December 4, 2004
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather.mp3

West has kept billions of Iran's EURODIF investments for 30 years In 1975, Iran took a very costly 10% financial participation in EURODIF uranium enrichment plant being built in France. Iran paid $1 billion towards the purchase of a 10% share of ownership in EURODIF and agreed to buy a quota from the new plant. But after the Iranian revolution in 1979, neither was Iran given any enriched uranium nor did it get back its investment from EURODIF. The U.S. was also paid to deliver new fuel and upgrade its power in accordance with a contract signed before the revolution. U.S. gave neither the fuel nor the billions of dollars it had received for it. Germany was paid for in full, billions of dollars for the two nuclear facilities in Busher, but after three decades, Germany has refused to export any equipments or refund the money.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/0540800f7314f7b0

Nuclear program of Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

IAEA and Iran
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/index.shtml

Setting the Record Straight about Iran's Nuclear Program
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/a19f89b941a33707

U.S. endorsed Iranian plans to build massive nuclear energy industry
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/9b0a04b1107d7171

Washington: The Biggest NPT Violator
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/e2233bcb812ca246

IAEA Chief Invalidates the NPT
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/3e2365eddc3bd0ff

Time to shut-down the UN
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/50134d0a62fb448f

Even threatening to use nuclear weapons is a violation of international law
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/5bd9a41bf89f3f1d

More Condi diplomacy?

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/8f9036be580f2151

Hijacked by the Neocrazies
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/030051c0a5a88c65

Iranian crisis resolved

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/d23242f3f62d3746

Kudos to Congress From Israel

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/2edc97abd03b99e4

The best U.S. Congress money can buy
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/585faaf4d2e9eb74

Another 'Coalition of the Willing'?

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/f696f2a3a401850f

Judy-Baby vs TIME
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/2080d3c61b904992

Iran was not ordered to Stop Enrichment
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/f4731d785c554085

Western-Style Democracy – No!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/466cae8cbc38307d

Media liars exposed
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/7f34f4e6346a9bb5

Dolts – or liars?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/7eb4595173cae97d

Joubin Houshyar

unread,

Jun 23, 2006, 7:06:51 PM6/23/06

> Dr. James Gordon Prather
> Nuclear weapons physicist
> Former Nuclear bomb tester at Lawrence Livermore
> Former Technical director of nuclear bomb testings at Sandia
> Former Chief scientist of the U.S. Army
> U.S. Navy veteran

[snip]

> Because Clinton committed the United States to "an unequivocal undertaking" to accomplish "the total elimination" of our nuke arsenal, as well as to "a reaffirmation" of the commitment in UN Security Council resolution 984 (UNSCR-984) [11] to "give security assurances against the use of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear-weapon States that are Parties" to the NPT.

> Wait a minute.

Indeed, Dr:

-- begin recall from Memory Hole --

-- begin fragments of the Proposal --
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GH13Ak01.html

item 4(a) [EU declares right to Nuclear First Strike against a
non-nuclear nation -- and here you thought only "neo-cons" in USA had
adopted such a new 'doctrine' ..]

The United Kingdom and the French republic would reaffirm to Iran that
they will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states
parties to the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons
except in the case of an invasion or any attack on them, their
dependent territories, their armed forces or other troops, their allies

or on a state toward which they have a security commitment.

-- end --

> Well, maybe there's hope. The Russians and Chinese - who already have oil, gas and nuclear energy co-development projects in Iran - will join the Brits-French-Germans in the next round of negotiations. Maybe they can explain to Dubya (or McCain or Hillary) why nuking those CO-development projects wouldn't be a good idea.

The good Dr. seems to have misplaced the facts, or perhaps UNSCR-984 is
not sufficiently broad to cover Item 4(a) of the EU-3 (aka the rotten
proxy heads of Sissy Pirate Merachants of Europe) "proposal" (aka
ultimatum) to Iran.

Perhaps Arash will write to the good Dr. and get us further
clarification regarding this new found "hope[s]"?

/& Salaam!

Message has been deleted

0 new messages