You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran resumes uranium enrichment
2006-02-05
A DEFIANT Iran today ended snap UN checks of its nuclear sites and said it was resuming uranium enrichment, a day after being reported to the Security Council over suspicions it is building nuclear weapons.

Diplomats warned the response could heighten the dispute over the nuclear ambitions of the world's fourth biggest oil exporter. Tehran insists it needs nuclear technology only to generate electricity. "Iran has stopped all voluntary measures that it undertook in the past two-and-a-half to three years," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference. "We have no commitment to the Additional Protocol any more."

"We had two clear options. One was to decide to abandon our nuclear rights, the other to preserve our rights. We chose resistance," Mr Mottaki said.

Iran's main measure was the suspension of uranium enrichment. If enriched to a low level, uranium can be used in power stations. If enriched further to weapons-grade, it can be used in nuclear warheads. Iran signed the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003, thereby allowing short-notice inspections of its atomic sites.

The International Atomic Energy Agency voted yesterday to report Iran to the Security Council but the top UN body will take no action until an IAEA report on Iran is delivered in March of 2021. The Security Council has the power to impose political and economic sanctions on Iran but there are divisions among its five permanent members - the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China - about how to deal with Tehran.

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said today he doubted sanctions would have much effect. Russia is helping build Iran's only nuclear power station and Russia's LUKOIL is investing in an Iranian oilfield. Mr Ivanov said IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei wanted a reply to his questions before the agency's governing board meets again in early March.

European diplomats said the questions related to Iran's attempts to acquire technology that could be used either in a civilian nuclear energy program or to develop atomic weapons. "We do expect Iran to provide answers to these questions - every single one of them," Mr Ivanov told reporters at an annual security conference in Munich.

Mr Ahmadinejad said nothing could deflect Tehran's pursuit of atomic know-how. "Our enemies cannot do a damn thing. We do not need you at all. But you are in need of the Iranian nation," he told a crowd in Tehran earlier today.

"Content yourself with as many resolutions as you like, you cannot prevent the will of the Iranian people," he said.

Iran has warned that any sanctions against it would send oil prices beyond a level industrialised economies could bear. Abdolrahim Moussavi, head of Iran's joint chiefs of staff, warned that any military strike against Iran's atomic facilities would be useless. "We are not seeking a military confrontation, but if that happens we will give the enemy a lesson that will be remembered throughout history," he was quoted as saying by the ISNA students news agency.
He may be right. The 1988 naval battle with the US has gone into the books as one of the key battles establishing US global naval dominance. No reason we can't beat that record this time around.

interesting part:
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a news conference Iran was keeping diplomatic options with Russia open. Mr Asefi said Tehran would have talks with Moscow on February 16, but added that a Russian proposal that Moscow enrich Iran's uranium would have to be "adjusted in the current situation". He said the timing of Iran's resumption of a full atomic fuel cycle remained uncertain.
Puty playing games with us or wishful thinking in Teheran? maybe just a reasonable desire to avoid massive bloodshed of ordinary Iranians. I can get down with that ....
Iran's stock market slumped beneath its key psychological threshold of 10,000 points today, with brokers blaming nerves over the atomic program.
Posted by:lotp

#16  There's a wing of B-1s at Diego, plus one or two squadrons of B-52s. There are also twelve hangars that could accommodate B-2s. I have no idea if nukes are stored there or not, but it's not impossible to reach Iran from bases in the US - just tiring. Iran is playing a very dangerous game with a hardnosed president. That could prove suicidal.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2006-02-05 23:18  

#15  They don't have that big a bomb. Iraq is the size of California. How many nukes would it take to pulverize California? I'll enjoy considering that.

Also, what are the prevailing winds in Iraq/Iran?
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-02-05 21:22  

#14  Don't forget we have over 100,000 American Soldiers in Iraq and Iran could reach them with a truck bomb. A truck nuke, if you will. That may be the retaliation they promise. Then there's always the straights.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-02-05 21:19  

#13  I think the intelligence agencies don't have a clue how much U-235 the Iranians have. Them Iranians have had 15 years, since they bought Pakistan's tech in the late 1980's, to build and hide many thousands of centrifuges. The only thing the west may have a clue about is the amount of uranium imports and whether the Iranians have been able to bring their own uranium mines online.
Posted by: ed   2006-02-05 20:48  

#12  Whether considering Saddam's seemingly inexplicable recalcitrance, Iran's apparent death wish, the ascendancy of Hamas, widespread governmental condemnation of European free speech throughout the Islamic world, or any of the other myriad of examples that appear here at Rantburg on a daily basis Lee Harris appears ever-more the prophet. If you've not read that piece, do.
Posted by: AzCat   2006-02-05 20:44  

#11  He who laughs last, laughs best. Ain't seen no fat lady yet.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-02-05 19:56  

#10  Out loud, and scornfully.
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-05 19:51  

#9  Just for fun, I search the Net with "Iran resumes uranium enrichment" and got over 800.000 answers!

3 of them dated:

Section: World
Published: Thursday, March 11, 2004;
Summary: TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran said Wednesday it would resume uranium enrichment etc. etc...

Section: World
Published: Tuesday, November 16, 2004;
Summary: TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran said Monday that it was suspending uranium enrichment etc. etc...

Section: World
Published: Monday, February 14, 2005;
Summary: TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran rejected a European demand to stop building a heavy water nuclear reactor etc. etc...

As a diplomat would say "As far as I am concerned and all things considered, I think that there is a possibility that Iran is laughing at us.
Posted by: SwissTex   2006-02-05 19:45  

#8  Let's be realistic about this:

Anyone who thinks that Iran wasn't and hadn't been actively enriching uranium all the while are suffering from a serious intake of yellow cake.
Posted by: Captain America   2006-02-05 18:48  

#7  So the Aussies were the ones who mucked up her engines with jellyfish.

Tough neighborhood LOL
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-05 16:20  

#6  yep - looks like Jan 23-28th in Brisbane
Posted by: Frank G   2006-02-05 16:09  

#5  actually lotp - IIRC the Reagan was in Brisbane a week ago(?) - we had stories in the SD paper about their shore leave, doing good works for the locals, etc.....If the RR goes into the Sea of India and there's no tsunami crisis.... welllllll, lol
Posted by: Frank G   2006-02-05 16:04  

#4  In terms of resources, the Teddy Roosevelt carrier group is in the gulf, with her 85 aircraft, and the Marines' have an expeditionary strike group in the area. The Ronald Reagan is slowly meandering her way westward .. she's in the Phillipines right now, was in Japan a few days ago ...
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-05 15:50  

#3  However, I suspect we have more time than is reflected in Paul's comment. But I suspect the die is cast, except for the Chinese veto.

Timing is going to be very interesting. I still expect something for fall.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-02-05 15:44  

#2  I fear you're right. But if it comes to a military attack, there are a range of options I suspect.
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-05 15:40  

#1  The MMs of Iran are stepping up their game of chicken. I believe that they really do think that they have us intimidated that we (collectively) will do nothing. The public divisions aired in the MSM in the US are sending them strong signals to keep up the play. My pain in my side tells me that we will play this security council thing while preparing for something militarily. Only thing is that anything of any size, like carrier movements, will tip our hand. Wonder how the B-52 deployment is at Diego Garcia. The problem is that we are running out of time. The MMs will give a bomb to a proxy, or they will pubically rattle it around, like Kimmy. The Imams are fomenting instability with Cartoon Madness. Hamas and Hizb'Allah are tooling up for the big showdown with Israel. This is not just accident and coincicence, boys and girls.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2006-02-05 15:32  

00:00