The headline screams out at you. "AIEA Director, Mohamed El Baradei Left Out Evidence of an Iran bomb, France Claims. What is the real story? Iranian Bomb? Not so fast. To understand this you must carefully read between the lines. (See Catherine Phillip at:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6825263.ece
In the reactionary press and media Dr. Mohammed El Baradei Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA or in French AIEA) is often accused of being soft on Iran, after-all he is an Egyptian and a Muslim too, so that puts him at "two strikes". This year, after submitting his annual report (his last, he retires in November) France and Israel have openly accused him of having “left something out of his annual report” on the status of the Iranian nuclear issue. See: http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2009/09/07/l-iran-rejette-toute-discussion-sur-ses-droit-indeniables-au-nucleaire_1236839_3218.html#ens_id=677013
Israel is very eager to have “punishing sanctions" imposed on Iran, a neighbor in the Mid East it sees as the greatest threat to its own hegemony in the region. Though Israel with its hundreds of nuclear war heads, chemical weapons and sophistacted delivery systems is the "big shot" in the region. The idea that another nation may have even the "technology" to produce a weapon is a threat. It is determined to maintain the role of local hegemon. If it looses that it may have to actually bargain in good faith with its neighbors. That may result in compromises or even loss of some of the territory it covets.
In the reactionary press and media Dr. Mohammed El Baradei Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA or in French AIEA) is often accused of being soft on Iran, after-all he is an Egyptian and a Muslim too, so that puts him at "two strikes". This year, after submitting his annual report (his last, he retires in November) France and Israel have openly accused him of having “left something out of his annual report” on the status of the Iranian nuclear issue. See: http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2009/09/07/l-iran-rejette-toute-discussion-sur-ses-droit-indeniables-au-nucleaire_1236839_3218.html#ens_id=677013
Israel is very eager to have “punishing sanctions" imposed on Iran, a neighbor in the Mid East it sees as the greatest threat to its own hegemony in the region. Though Israel with its hundreds of nuclear war heads, chemical weapons and sophistacted delivery systems is the "big shot" in the region. The idea that another nation may have even the "technology" to produce a weapon is a threat. It is determined to maintain the role of local hegemon. If it looses that it may have to actually bargain in good faith with its neighbors. That may result in compromises or even loss of some of the territory it covets.
It is Iran, not Israel, which has signed the nuclear non-proliferation accords, and has no nuclear bombs. Iran is a nation which has no history of attacking anyone...ever. That can not be said for Israel. But those are the dull facts. They don’t arrouse readers and sell papers. Israel would prefer for us--opinion keepers--to continue to fear Iran's military ambitions (at least as presented by Israel) and its peaceful nuclear development, while Israel is the nation with the long history of mis-use of its own military prowess and a sixty-year illegal occupation of foreign lands.
On monday, September 7th, 2009, Le Monde ran a piece entitled: "The Director of the AIEA is accused of having concealed information against Iran." See: http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2009/09/07/l-iran-rejette-toute-discussion-sur-ses-droit-indeniables-au-nucleaire_1236839_3218.html#ens_id=677013. French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner stated that "all of the information is not reflected in the report to the council of governors." Kouchner added: "France's only motivation is the full respect of Iran for its international obligations." Last week Kouchner, in front of the press, demanded to know why ElBaradei has failed to publish the appendicies of the last report. Le Monde states that at a meeting of the representatives of the 35 members states of the AIEA, in Vienna, El Baradei stated in front of the group that these accusations are "politcally motivated and completely without basis".
A full reading of Dr. El Baradei's report did include the fact that Iran has slowed its uranium enrichment, and has agreed to closer monitoring of its nuclear plants. Perhaps that’s not what Israel wanted to hear.
The French, in consert with Israel, have accused El Baradei of “leaving out" an important “appendix” of the annual report. According to them, that addendum had information about Iran's plans to build a bomb. Was damming evidence really left out? What are these addenda?
It turns out the materials in question are data and suppositions gleaned from western intelligence agencies (read here: the USA’s CIA, Israel’s Mossad, French DGSE, and UK's MI5, etc, etc). As far as our CIA is concerned --it's own record leaves much to be desired. On that score, Roy Gutman, from McClatchy News has some interesting comments:
"But the CIA has missed some big ones, including the fall of communism in Russia and Eastern Europe, and it predicted weapons of mass destruction would be found in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The CIA also overlooked the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan in 1996 and Osama bin Laden's effective hijacking of the Taliban regime by late 1998 — two events that at the time were thought to be minor. Based on four decades covering foreign affairs, much of it focused on closed communist societies, my observation is that intelligence officers, however well trained, equipped and motivated, are only as good as their human sources, which in dictatorial regimes, are scant. They also can become so closely identified with covert operations — for example, supplying weapons for the Afghan holy war against Soviet occupiers — that they miss the political big picture. Sometimes their political masters constrain them by deciding that some location — for example, Afghanistan in the 1990s — isn't worth watching." State(http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/roy_gutman/story/23170.html) downloaded September 8, 2009
But back to the accusations: The "intelligence" agencies presented the IAEA wth suggestions that Teheran may have secretly combined uranium processing, airborne high-explosives tests and efforts to revamp a missile cone in a way that would fit a nuclear warhead. Though the IAEA described these evidences as "compelling" and insisted that Iran clarify the matter--in deference to the sources it didn not reject the information as fabricated evidence (which it may likely be). The timesonline.co.uk, author Catherine Philip, states that the information probably did not meet the standards of proof required for inclusion in the report and El Baradei and his staff simply left it out.
So the headline is meaningless US-French-Israeli propaganda. Or is it?
A question that seems to hang there unanswered in the air is: Why is France doing this? What angle do they have? Particularly why did they air their greivances in public? Perhaps France is acting at the behest of the US which has already decided that its only course of action is to increase sanctions on Iran. That action will mollify testy Israel (perhaps that will hold off an unwise aerial attack and make demands made by Obama to stop construction in occupied lands more palatable) and also give the diplomats some further time. So they needed a reason to make the unhappy decison regarding sanctions...sell it to their citizens--thus the "missing annexes" became the proximate cause.
On monday, September 7th, 2009, Le Monde ran a piece entitled: "The Director of the AIEA is accused of having concealed information against Iran." See: http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2009/09/07/l-iran-rejette-toute-discussion-sur-ses-droit-indeniables-au-nucleaire_1236839_3218.html#ens_id=677013. French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner stated that "all of the information is not reflected in the report to the council of governors." Kouchner added: "France's only motivation is the full respect of Iran for its international obligations." Last week Kouchner, in front of the press, demanded to know why ElBaradei has failed to publish the appendicies of the last report. Le Monde states that at a meeting of the representatives of the 35 members states of the AIEA, in Vienna, El Baradei stated in front of the group that these accusations are "politcally motivated and completely without basis".
A full reading of Dr. El Baradei's report did include the fact that Iran has slowed its uranium enrichment, and has agreed to closer monitoring of its nuclear plants. Perhaps that’s not what Israel wanted to hear.
The French, in consert with Israel, have accused El Baradei of “leaving out" an important “appendix” of the annual report. According to them, that addendum had information about Iran's plans to build a bomb. Was damming evidence really left out? What are these addenda?
It turns out the materials in question are data and suppositions gleaned from western intelligence agencies (read here: the USA’s CIA, Israel’s Mossad, French DGSE, and UK's MI5, etc, etc). As far as our CIA is concerned --it's own record leaves much to be desired. On that score, Roy Gutman, from McClatchy News has some interesting comments:
"But the CIA has missed some big ones, including the fall of communism in Russia and Eastern Europe, and it predicted weapons of mass destruction would be found in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The CIA also overlooked the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan in 1996 and Osama bin Laden's effective hijacking of the Taliban regime by late 1998 — two events that at the time were thought to be minor. Based on four decades covering foreign affairs, much of it focused on closed communist societies, my observation is that intelligence officers, however well trained, equipped and motivated, are only as good as their human sources, which in dictatorial regimes, are scant. They also can become so closely identified with covert operations — for example, supplying weapons for the Afghan holy war against Soviet occupiers — that they miss the political big picture. Sometimes their political masters constrain them by deciding that some location — for example, Afghanistan in the 1990s — isn't worth watching." State(http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/roy_gutman/story/23170.html) downloaded September 8, 2009
But back to the accusations: The "intelligence" agencies presented the IAEA wth suggestions that Teheran may have secretly combined uranium processing, airborne high-explosives tests and efforts to revamp a missile cone in a way that would fit a nuclear warhead. Though the IAEA described these evidences as "compelling" and insisted that Iran clarify the matter--in deference to the sources it didn not reject the information as fabricated evidence (which it may likely be). The timesonline.co.uk, author Catherine Philip, states that the information probably did not meet the standards of proof required for inclusion in the report and El Baradei and his staff simply left it out.
So the headline is meaningless US-French-Israeli propaganda. Or is it?
A question that seems to hang there unanswered in the air is: Why is France doing this? What angle do they have? Particularly why did they air their greivances in public? Perhaps France is acting at the behest of the US which has already decided that its only course of action is to increase sanctions on Iran. That action will mollify testy Israel (perhaps that will hold off an unwise aerial attack and make demands made by Obama to stop construction in occupied lands more palatable) and also give the diplomats some further time. So they needed a reason to make the unhappy decison regarding sanctions...sell it to their citizens--thus the "missing annexes" became the proximate cause.
In regard to Obama, instead of actually pressuring Israel as he should, he is pressuring the other side and playing ball with Netanyahu.
Get the picture?
Get the picture?
rjk
No comments:
Post a Comment