Coastal Post Online








(415)868-1600 - (415)868-0502(fax) - P.O. Box 31, Bolinas, CA, 94924

October, 2006

Nuclear Jazz At The UN
By Edward W. Miller, MD

"Some countries create problems for other countries and make the impression that these are problems for the entire international community… Actually, they are making problems for themselves. "
Ahmedinejad, speaking at the Shanghai Cooperative Organization

During his recent speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 19th, President Bush spoke briefly and directly to the Iranian people saying that he wanted a "diplomatic solution" to the impasse over their country's nuclear activities. Bush accompanied this statement by a warning that their leaders "were obstructing progress" by both financing terrorism and pursuing nuclear weapons (Washington Post, 20 Sept. ). Toward the end of his speech Bush criticized Syrian government for its support of both Hamas and Hezbullah. Bush received moderate applause from an auditorium filled with UN Ambassadors representing over 180 countries, many increasingly hostile to the US attempts at hegemony in the Mideast.
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking some hours after Bush, took aim at the UN Security Council itself, saying the United States' permanent inclusion on the Council undermines its effectiveness and credibility. "As long as the council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective," Iran's president stated. Ahmadinejad had particularly harsh words for what he called the Council's inaction in Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian territories. "It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine…"

"That apparently does not violate human rights," Ahmadinejad added, criticizing the "blanketed and unwarranted support" for Israel ...

"For 33 long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and bombs, and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced," Ahmadinejad continued, "Meanwhile, some members of the Security Council practically chose a path that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its objectives militarily." The Security Council "was practically incapacitated by certain powers to even call for a cease-fire."

Referring to Israel directly, Ahmadinejad said, "That regime has been a constant source of threat and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries…" "Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom can the people of Iraq seek justice?" he asked. How can the Security Council act "when the occupiers themselves are permanent members of the council?" He called on the UN General Assembly "to rescue the Security Council from its current state" by including envoys from Africa, the Middle East and the Non-Aligned Movement. Ahmadinejad added that his country's nuclear program was conducted "under the watchful eye of International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors." The applause was generous.

Some months after his election on June 24th, 2005 as Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had notified the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency ) that Iran was resuming its research into nuclear fuel, (Assoc. Press, 10 Jan. 2006) removing its seals on its nuclear research facilities, and allowing work to resume despite warnings from some Western countries re: "nuclear ambitions." The seals were removed in the presence of IAEA inspectors.

In February, 2005 Russia and Iran had signed an agreement to supply fuel to Iran's new nuclear reactor in Bushehr. Under the deal Iran was to return spent nuclear fuel rods from the reactor, designed and built by the Russians, an arrangement made to satisfy the demands of the IAEA, which had been under tremendous pressure from the US and Israel to prevent Iran from recycling its own atomic fuel.

Despite these assurances, all hell had broken out in paranoid Washington and Tel Aviv. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Iran had "crossed the threshold."

"I would hope that seeing the very powerful reaction of the international community, Iran would now take a step back and look at the isolation that it is about to experience." Writer Gordon Prather characterized Washington's response thus: " Condi and the neo-crazies all running around in circles of diminishing radius screaming something about the IAEA Board having found Iran to be in non-compliance. "nonsense."

( 10/1/2005)

Peddling the "anti-Iran" message, Washington's boys got into trouble this January in India. (New Delhi | January 29, 2006 ) "Taking strong umbrage at American envoy David Mulford's statement that India must vote against Iran on the nuclear issue, the Samajwadi Party today demanded his immediate recall by the Bush administration, saying the remarks were ''a slight on India's sovereignty and unacceptable to the people." In a resolution, passed unanimously at the SP's Parliamentary Board meeting here, the party also decided to give a ''befitting'' reply to US President George Bush during his coming visit to India.

Last year, of the EU countries, Germany alone offered tacit support for the Bush position. Speaking in a joint press conference with conservative German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President George W Bush had said a nuclear Iran was unacceptable and singled out Israel for special US concern."

As Patrick J. Buchanan put it (18 Jan 2006) : " Meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Bush employed the same grim terms he used before invading Iraq: " If Iran goes forward with nuclear enrichment, said Bush, it could pose a grave threat to the security of the world." Since the Bush-Merkel meeting, however, Germany's position, seems to have changed . On June 29th, 2006 The Daily Star reported: "Germany accepts Iranian nuclear work, provided IAEA rules out arms research... Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium for power generation provided there is close monitoring by UN inspectors to ensure that it is not trying to develop atomic weapons, Germany's defense minister stated."

Just as our Congress, during the Clinton years, voted money to support the US AID organization in a campaign to undermine Yugoslavia's government prior to bombing that country, just so Washington is at it again in Iran: As Glenn Kessler noted in the Washington Post ( February 16, 2006); Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked Congress yesterday to provide $75 million in emergency funding to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including expanding radio and television broadcasts into Iran and promoting internal opposition to the rule of religious leaders. Thus boosting the $10 million already devoted to confronting Iran and signaling "a new effort by the Bush administration to persuade other nations to join the United States in a coalition to bolster Iranian activists, halt Iran's funding of terrorism and stem its nuclear ambitions," as our State Department officials said.

Not content with undermining Iran's political organizations, Bush is now attacking the Iranian's economic support system: As reported in the 9 Sept., 2006 SF Chronicle: "The Bush administration moved to sever the largest state-owned bank in Iran from the US financial system. Stuart Levy, the Treasury Department's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence said "the governments action was against Bank Saderat which the US says is used to transfer money to terrorist groups such as Hezbullah."

As expected, the Zionists represent much of the energy behind Washington's anti-Iranian campaign. On June 7, 2006 ... Carol Giacomo, Washington-based Diplomatic Correspondent for Reuters reported: "As the Bush administration pursues sensitive diplomacy, the influential US pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC has sent out a fundraising letter seeking support for a tough US line against Iran's nuclear program... requesting contributions to build support for a proposed law tightening US sanctions on Iran."

Pro-Israel organizations in the US have been lobbying for a more hard-line position against Tehran. These include The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the American Jewish Congress the American Jewish Committee, The Brooking Institution -- whose Middle East program is increasingly pro-Israel, The Saban Centre on Middle East Policy, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, an offshoot of AIPAC advised by former US Middle East Envoy Dennis Ross.

During the recent September discussions amongst the Security Council members, the political rug was tugged, not-too-gently, out from under Bush' and his anti-Iran agenda. Both China and Russia, who have helped construct Iran's nuclear facilities and trained its engineers, signaled they might veto any Resolution aimed at an embargo against Iran, while France's President Chirac, in an apparent about-face, insisted on continuing Iran-EU negotiations over the nuclear issue.

Iran's basic intent to reprocess its own atomic fuel represents an intelligent economic approach to its energy needs. As the radioactive rods decay and are removed from the reactor, over 85% of their active fusion materials remains and that UR235 can be reprocessed and returned to the reactor. The waste is discarded. Paying someone else to do this may not be cost-effective.

A bit of history might be of interest. Thirty years ago, during Nixon's administration, our Zionist bullfrog, Kissinger, then Secretary of State, met with Iran's minister, Hushang Ansary in March, 1975 and signed a $15 Billion economic agreement which included the construction of eight large nuclear power plants which were to provide Iran with some eight thousand megawatts of electricity. ( see: THE EAGLE AND THE LION BY James A. Bill pg. 204). I spoke recently with my friend J.A. Bill. He thinks both the Japanese and Soviets assisted with the construction and that only two of the plants eventually reached their megawatt output.

Our economists' crystal balls foretell increased competition for energy in the future. Driving Iran, a major petroleum source to find her markets and political interests elsewhere is sheer madness, as economist, professor and author, Michel Chossudovsky warns in his August 24th 2006 article ("http://www.globa

"Barely acknowledged by the Western media, military exercises organized by Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan under the Collective Security Treaty Organization, (CSTO) were launched on the 24th of August, 2006. These war games, officially tagged as part of a counter terrorism program, are in direct response to US military threats in the region including the planned attacks against Iran. ... Iranian media have speculated that the United States is using Azerbaijan to create a military counterweight to Iran on the Caspian... the US is trying to step up the pressure on Iran, as well as to defend its own investments in Azerbaijan and Kazakstan. It is also trying to guarantee the security of the strategically vital Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. A military presence on the Caspian would give the United States an opportunity to at least partially offset its weakening influence in Central Asia, ... Iran was invited to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). So far no concrete timetable for Iran's accession to the SCO has bee set. This enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which also includes observer status for India, Pakistan and Mongolia counters US military and strategic objectives in the broader region. Moreover... India and Russia signed on August 20th, a far reaching military cooperation agreement. Although not officially directed against the US, the purpose of this agreement is understood, China and Russia, which are partners in the SCO also have a long standing common interest.

Both Washington and Tel Aviv are making fools of themselves by creating this atomic bru ha ha. The Security Council's permanent members all have atomic weapons. Pakistan and India, likewise. Israel has over 200 atomic- armed missiles, but has never signed the NPT Treaty nor joined the IAEA. She depends on US backing to maintain her uncooperative and threatening nuclear stance. Washington must allow Iran to pursue her legitimate energy needs, and snatch Israel, this dangerous Zionist parasite off our payroll and out of our politics before she gets us into more trouble.

Coastal Post Home Page