In defiance of the security council resolution 487 of June 1981, Israel has not placed its nuclear facilities, whether civilian or military, under IAEA safeguards.
Moreover, Israel has ongoing biological and chemical weapons programmes.
Moreover, Israel has ongoing biological and chemical weapons programmes.
A nuclear-free mirage
The Middle East cannot be freed from weapons of mass destruction unless the US turns the spotlight on Israel
Dilip Hiro, Guardian
February 8, 2008
As Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, finalises his report on Iran's nuclear programme, the Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, has been promoting the "historic idea" of a Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction.
This overlaps with a goal adopted by the UN security council back in 1991 when resolution 687 talked about "the establishment of a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region of the Middle East".
The resolution, approved after the expulsion of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, had eight paragraphs dealing with Iraq's programmes in biological, chemical, and nuclear arms, and made clear that sanctions were to be lifted if, and only if, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other UN inspectors had given Iraq a clean bill of health regarding its WMD activities.
Paragraph 14 notes "that the actions under paragraphs 8-13 of this resolution represent steps towards the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons".
However, there is a subtle but important difference between a WMD-free Middle East and the establishment of a WMD-free zone "in" the Middle East as set out in resolution 687. The resolution does not attempt to define the zone (at least, not beyond Iraq) and the word "in" suggests such a zone might not apply to the whole of the Middle East.
Presumably this omission was not accidental, though the idea of a WMD-free zone covering only parts of the region makes no sense. The objective of a Middle East free of WMDs can be achieved only if Israel is also declared free of them by IAEA and other UN inspectors.
In defiance of the security council resolution 487 of June 1981, Israel has not placed its nuclear facilities, whether civilian or military, under IAEA safeguards.
Indeed, while it is an open secret that Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona started producing atom bombs in 1968, and that it has built up an arsenal of some 200 nuclear bombs, it has not officially acknowledged the existence of such activity.
Moreover, Israel has ongoing biological and chemical weapons programmes. The Israeli Institute for Biological Research (IIRB) at Nes Ziona, south of Tel Aviv, established in 1952, is the Israeli military and intelligence community's front organisation for developing, testing and producing biological and chemical weapons. Access to Nes Ziona is denied even to the members of the Israeli parliament's foreign affairs and defence committees concerned about the health risks to the residents of the area.
The US Office of Technology Assessment for Congress reported in 1993 that Israel had "undeclared offensive chemical warfare capabilities" and was 'generally reported as having an undeclared offensive biological weapons programme.' In that year the Israeli government acknowledged that Marcus Klinberg, deputy head of the IIRB, was given 20 years sentence in solitary confinement in 1983 for leaking information on Israel's biological weapons programme to the Soviet Union. In 1998, despite the protest by Nes Ziona's residents, the government extended the IIRB site by a further 41 acres.
Unless Washington takes a lead on turning the spotlight on Israel's WMD, the idea of the WMD-free Middle East will remain empty rhetoric.
Link: commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dilip_hiro/2008/02/a_nuclear-free_mirage.html
IAEA chief warns against military action to solve Iranian nuclear issue
www.chinaview.cn 2008-02-05 12:27:35 Print
Special Report: Iran Nuclear 'Crisis'-Israel/America's Drive to Start Another War
CAIRO, Feb. 4 (Xinhua) -- Visiting UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday warned against a military action to solve the Iranian nuclear issue, the Egyptian official MENA news agency reported.
(But of course, this 'crisis' was only created in order to try and justify a long-planned war.)
In an interview with Egyptian TV, ElBaradei, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said a military strike to settle the Iranian nuclear issue would complicate the situation and send the Middle East region into a vicious cycle of violence.
ElBaradei warned that Iran could be pushed to strive for nuclear weapons if it is hit while seeking no such weapons.
Citing progress in negotiations on the Iranian nuclear file, ElBaradei voiced his hope that the issue would be solved this year.
Some countries, including the United States, has accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program, which has been repeatedly denied by Tehran.
(The other country is Israel. Neither country has any evidence to back up the allegations they're making in order to start another illegal war. The IAEA and intelligence community have refuted these lies.)
ElBaradei, who is expected to issue a report around Feb. 20 on his visit to Iran and IAEA's inquiry into Iran's nuclear activity, said on Sunday that the UN nuclear watchdog was making "good progress" in finishing outstanding issues on Iran's nuclear file.
Meanwhile, world major countries are mulling a third sanction resolution against Iran after the UN Security Council adopted two resolutions -- one in December 2006 and the other in March 2007 --to force Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment activities and give up nuclear programs.
(They're 'mulling' them because they've already rejected several US proposals, since it became known that the US and Israel were lying again about a non-existent threat posed by another country they've planned to attack. The other Resolutions were designed to do just this, but since they violate Iran's rights under the NPT, they're not taken all that seriously.)
Iran has downplayed the effect of possible new sanctions, saying Tehran would show "serious and logical reaction" if the Security Council issued a third resolution.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/05/content_7572483.htm
The Middle East cannot be freed from weapons of mass destruction unless the US turns the spotlight on Israel
Dilip Hiro, Guardian
February 8, 2008
As Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, finalises his report on Iran's nuclear programme, the Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, has been promoting the "historic idea" of a Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction.
This overlaps with a goal adopted by the UN security council back in 1991 when resolution 687 talked about "the establishment of a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region of the Middle East".
The resolution, approved after the expulsion of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, had eight paragraphs dealing with Iraq's programmes in biological, chemical, and nuclear arms, and made clear that sanctions were to be lifted if, and only if, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other UN inspectors had given Iraq a clean bill of health regarding its WMD activities.
Paragraph 14 notes "that the actions under paragraphs 8-13 of this resolution represent steps towards the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons".
However, there is a subtle but important difference between a WMD-free Middle East and the establishment of a WMD-free zone "in" the Middle East as set out in resolution 687. The resolution does not attempt to define the zone (at least, not beyond Iraq) and the word "in" suggests such a zone might not apply to the whole of the Middle East.
Presumably this omission was not accidental, though the idea of a WMD-free zone covering only parts of the region makes no sense. The objective of a Middle East free of WMDs can be achieved only if Israel is also declared free of them by IAEA and other UN inspectors.
In defiance of the security council resolution 487 of June 1981, Israel has not placed its nuclear facilities, whether civilian or military, under IAEA safeguards.
Indeed, while it is an open secret that Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona started producing atom bombs in 1968, and that it has built up an arsenal of some 200 nuclear bombs, it has not officially acknowledged the existence of such activity.
Moreover, Israel has ongoing biological and chemical weapons programmes. The Israeli Institute for Biological Research (IIRB) at Nes Ziona, south of Tel Aviv, established in 1952, is the Israeli military and intelligence community's front organisation for developing, testing and producing biological and chemical weapons. Access to Nes Ziona is denied even to the members of the Israeli parliament's foreign affairs and defence committees concerned about the health risks to the residents of the area.
The US Office of Technology Assessment for Congress reported in 1993 that Israel had "undeclared offensive chemical warfare capabilities" and was 'generally reported as having an undeclared offensive biological weapons programme.' In that year the Israeli government acknowledged that Marcus Klinberg, deputy head of the IIRB, was given 20 years sentence in solitary confinement in 1983 for leaking information on Israel's biological weapons programme to the Soviet Union. In 1998, despite the protest by Nes Ziona's residents, the government extended the IIRB site by a further 41 acres.
Unless Washington takes a lead on turning the spotlight on Israel's WMD, the idea of the WMD-free Middle East will remain empty rhetoric.
Link: commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dilip_hiro/2008/02/a_nuclear-free_mirage.html
IAEA chief warns against military action to solve Iranian nuclear issue
www.chinaview.cn 2008-02-05 12:27:35 Print
Special Report: Iran Nuclear 'Crisis'-Israel/America's Drive to Start Another War
CAIRO, Feb. 4 (Xinhua) -- Visiting UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday warned against a military action to solve the Iranian nuclear issue, the Egyptian official MENA news agency reported.
(But of course, this 'crisis' was only created in order to try and justify a long-planned war.)
In an interview with Egyptian TV, ElBaradei, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said a military strike to settle the Iranian nuclear issue would complicate the situation and send the Middle East region into a vicious cycle of violence.
ElBaradei warned that Iran could be pushed to strive for nuclear weapons if it is hit while seeking no such weapons.
Citing progress in negotiations on the Iranian nuclear file, ElBaradei voiced his hope that the issue would be solved this year.
Some countries, including the United States, has accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program, which has been repeatedly denied by Tehran.
(The other country is Israel. Neither country has any evidence to back up the allegations they're making in order to start another illegal war. The IAEA and intelligence community have refuted these lies.)
ElBaradei, who is expected to issue a report around Feb. 20 on his visit to Iran and IAEA's inquiry into Iran's nuclear activity, said on Sunday that the UN nuclear watchdog was making "good progress" in finishing outstanding issues on Iran's nuclear file.
Meanwhile, world major countries are mulling a third sanction resolution against Iran after the UN Security Council adopted two resolutions -- one in December 2006 and the other in March 2007 --to force Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment activities and give up nuclear programs.
(They're 'mulling' them because they've already rejected several US proposals, since it became known that the US and Israel were lying again about a non-existent threat posed by another country they've planned to attack. The other Resolutions were designed to do just this, but since they violate Iran's rights under the NPT, they're not taken all that seriously.)
Iran has downplayed the effect of possible new sanctions, saying Tehran would show "serious and logical reaction" if the Security Council issued a third resolution.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/05/content_7572483.htm
