The Western powers have shown their desire to ratchet up the pressure on an increasingly defiant Teheran over its atomic ambitions during a UN Security Council debate on Iran. However Russia and China hinted that they were not convinced.

French UN Ambassador Gerard Araud told the council, “If it continues to refuse the slightest confidence measures, to refuse dialogue, transparency … we must draw all of the necessary conclusions and that means that we must move on to a new resolution involving sanctions.”

The French envoy later told reporters, “‘We make a last call to the Islamic Republic of Iran to respond to our offer of negotiation. ‘If Iran doesn’t do it on the short term, France will propose a new resolution of sanctions.”

Iran rejects the allegations, along with UN demands that it suspend a program it says is intended solely for the peaceful generation of electricity. But Western officials say recent revelations about a previously hidden uranium enrichment plant in Iran have made Teheran’s denials less credible.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko told reporters in Moscow, “This language of sanctions, it is not our language. It has already been said many times.” He further said Moscow favored ‘using political and diplomatic methods to resolve all emerging problems.’

The United States said again that Teheran might have to face new sanctions but did not touch on the question of when work on a new sanctions resolution should begin.

US Ambassador Susan Rice told the council, “Should Iran continue to fail to meet its obligations, the international community will have to consider further actions.”

The Chinese envoy stressed that China remained committed to negotiations with Teheran and there was still room for talks.

British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant told reporters that the six powers would base a decision on whether to press for a new round of UN sanctions on an assessment of Teheran’s nuclear program and its response to their offer of economic and political incentives in exchange for an enrichment suspension.

Mr Ahmadinejad in his speech outlining his plans for the future said he would continue to resist ‘oppressive powers,’ dismissing the US stance towards Iran and hailing his election as a sign of major change in Iran. According ot witnesses, prominent opposition leaders did not attend the ceremony, and outside a force of about 1,000 riot police and Basij volunteer militiamen used pepper spray on demonstrators who claim his election was rigged.

The ceremony was also boycotted by powerful cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mr Ahmadinejad’s main challenger during the presidential election Mir Hossein Mousavi.

One can hope that Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will not try to use his position as President of Iran to further weaken the Iran’s relationships with other countries. United States and Iran should come to negotiation table to resolve all the issues through talks. The region is already suffering from the burning wounds of Iraq invasion and war in Afghanistan spread to the bordering areas of Pakistan.

The Guardians Council, the electoral watchdog, said it has received a total of 646 complaints of irregularities in the conduct of the poll from Mr Mousavi and the other two defeated candidates and was investigating these complaints. It said it had invited the trio to set out their grievances on Saturday, with a decision on Sunday about any possible recount in the June 12 election which returned incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power.

Mr Mousavi himself joined the crowds, most of whom were dressed in black as a mark of mourning for demonstrators killed in clashes during the protests which had been banned by the authorities. State radio has reported seven deaths since the protests began.The protesters carried pictures of Mr Mousavi and placards bearing slogans such as ‘We have not had people killed to compromise and accept a doctored ballot box’.

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he would consider a partial recount after Mr Ahmadinejad’s defeated challengers lodged formal complaints of vote-rigging. But Mr Mousavi is insisting that the result of what he has described as a ‘fraud’ be annulled and a new vote called.

On Sunday, a court heard an appeal of Saberi’s conviction and sentence and her lawyers emerged saying they were able to defend her and were optimistic her sentence would be reduced.

The United States, several European countries and human rights groups had been advocating for Saberi’s release.

Source

“So on the occasion of your New Year, I want you, the people and leaders of Iran, to understand the future that we seek. It’s a future with renewed exchanges among our people, and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce. It’s a future where the old divisions are overcome.”

This statement has come at state when Israel has clearly told US that striking at Iran is a concrete option. As stated in another post ‘Pentagon’s nuclear weapons theory bombs’, there is no threat to Israel from Iran’s nuclear programm whereas Israel not only has 200 nuclear warheads, but also has the complete delivery system to target Iran. But yet we only hear that Iran is engaged in nuclear programm for weapons and nothing about Israel’s programm for weapons of mass destructions.

We hear about nuclear programm of Iran and how much danger it posses to the world. How much is the truth in it and is Iran producing any nuclear weapons?  Eric Magnolis has an interesting analysis of the situation.  The article was published in Toronto Sun.

By ERIC MARGOLIS
As the U.S. economy sank ever lower, a huge brouhaha erupted this week over claims that Iran might have nuclear weapons.

The new CIA director, Leon Panetta, said “there is no question, they (Iran) are seeking that capability.” The Pentagon chief, Admiral Mike Mullen, claimed Iran had “enough fissile material to build a bomb.”

Prime Minister Stephen Harper had claimed Iran posed an “absolutely unacceptable threat.” However, to Harper’s credit, he just admitted that Afghanistan is a no-win war.

While Rome burns, here we go again with renewed hysteria over MWMD’s — Muslim weapons of mass destruction. War drums are again beating over Iran.

The czar of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, Admiral Dennis Blair, stated Iran could have enough enriched uranium for one atomic weapon by 2010-15. But he reaffirmed the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that Iran does not have nuclear weapons and is not pursuing them. Defence Secretary William Gates backed up Blair.

Public confusion over Iran comes from misunderstanding nuclear enrichment and lurid scare stories.

Iran is producing low-grade uranium-235 (LEU U-235), enriched to only 2.5%, to generate electricity. Tehran has this absolute right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Its centrifuge enrichment process at Nantaz is under 24-hour international inspection. Iran’s soon-to-open nuclear plant at Bushehr cannot produce nuclear weapons fuel.

Today, some 15 nations produce LEU U-235, including Brazil, Argentina, Germany, France, and Japan. Israel, India and Pakistan, all nuclear weapons powers, refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty. North Korea abrogated it.

UN inspectors report Iran has produced 1,010 kg of 2% to 3% enriched uranium for energy generation. Theoretically that is enough for one atomic bomb.

Costly process : But to make a nuclear weapon, U-235 must be enriched to over 90% in an elaborate, costly process. Iran is not doing so, say UN inspectors.

Highly enriched U-235 or plutonium must then be milled and shaped into a perfect ball or cylinder. Any surface imperfections will prevent achieving critical mass. Next, high explosive lenses must surround the core and detonate at precisely the same millisecond. In some cases, a stream of neutrons must be pumped into the device as it explodes.

This process is highly complex. Nuclear weapons cannot be deemed reliable unless they are tested. North Korea recently detonated a device that fizzled. Iran has never built or tested a nuclear weapon. Experts believe Israel and South Africa jointly tested a nuclear weapon in 1979.

Even if Iran had the capability to fashion a complex nuclear weapon, it would be useless without delivery. Iran’s sole medium-range delivery system is its unreliable, inaccurate, 1,500-km ranged Shahab-3. Miniaturizing and hardening nuclear warheads capable of flying atop a Shahab missile is another complex technological challenge.

It is inconceivable that Iran or anyone else would launch a single nuclear weapon. What if it didn’t go off? Imagine the embarrassment and the retaliation. Iran would need at least 10 warheads and a reliable delivery system to be a credible nuclear power.

Israel, the primary target for any Iranian nuclear strike, has an indestructible triad of air, missile and sea-launched nuclear weapons. An Israeli submarine with nuclear cruise missiles is on station off Iran’s coast.

Off the map : Iran would be wiped off the map by even a few of Israel’s 200 nuclear weapons. Iran is no likelier to use a nuke against its Gulf neighbours. The explosion would blanket Iran with radioactive dust and sand.

Much of the uproar over Iran’s so far nonexistent nuclear weapons must be seen as part of efforts by Israel’s American partisans to thwart President Barack Obama’s proposed opening to Tehran, and to keep pushing the U.S. to attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. They and many Israeli experts insist Iran has secret weapons programs that threaten Israel’s existence.

The hawkish Hillary Clinton’s naming of veteran Israel supporter Dennis Ross as her new legate to Iran adds to the confusion over administration policy towards Iran. Who is in charge of foreign policy? What’s the plan?

Published in Toronto Sun