Proposal Iran of the group "5 ++ 1" not set final likely Iran nuclear

On 6 June, high representative of the Union for the foreign and political security policy, Javier Solana, presented the "5 ++ 1" of the Working Group (Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and United States) proposed aimed at seductive Iran to put an end to their illegal nuclear activities to the Iranian leadership. In response, pending a peaceful resolution of the nuclear confrontation of Iran were fired. Unfortunately, the real prospects of such an outcome did not.

On the surface, appear attractive incentives in the proposal. They include an affirmation of Iran "inalienable right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes", a commitment to provide Iran with reactors of the light water and a fast track for membership of the world Organization of trade (WTO) Iran.

It also provides sanctions for non-compliance. The sanctions include an international ban on the export of goods and technologies related to nuclear energy, a curb on industrial investment connected to these activities, a ban on the export of "unique"products to Iran and objections to the request for Iran to be a member of the WTO.

Unless Iran decides to act in good faith, this proposal could become a failed effort to Iran complies with its international obligations regarding its nuclear activities. Not having it. In its past relations with the international agency of Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has shown nothing but good faith. April 2006 of the agency report stated, "after more than three years of efforts of the Agency to seek clarity about all aspects of the nuclear program of Iran, the existing gaps in knowledge remain cause for concern..." Additional transparency measures... are still necessary for the Agency to be able to verify the scope and the nature of the Iran enrichment program,... and military alleged studies that might have a nuclear dimension. "Unfortunately, these transparency measures are not yet coming."

Incentives of the proposal or its sanctions are likely to be sufficient to complete the Iran nuclear program. Iran Pro-Khamenei daily Keyhan, which often speaks for the leadership of Iran, declared, "the announcement of the end of the nuclear fuel cycle takes three messages to the West." First of all, is that the language of the threat and the pressure is not instrumental to Iran. "Secondly, it turns out that Iranian scientists are so efficient that they can create extraordinary moments every minute, and finally the most important message was that Iran has joined the International Atomic club." In short, Iran believes that West is powerless to interfere with its nuclear destiny.

If this proposal is representative of the efforts of the West, Iran may be correct. Incentives of the proposal will not overwhelm the Iranians. Iran has greatly advanced its nuclear enrichment and reprocessing in the absence of international cooperation activities. In addition, Iran has seen its economy driven by the rise in crude oil prices, and their lack of participation in the WTO has not prevented their economic progress. With crude all but sure that remain among the most sought after products in the world for the foreseeable future, WTO members is not necessary that they Iran to expand its production and sale of crude oil.

The proposed sanctions are even more printing than their incentives. They truly lack teeth. A provision would not be stopping the ability of Iran to sell oil on the world market. However, it is the only penalty that could inflict significant pain in the economy and the Government of Iran. The last United States energy information agency data show sales account 80-90% of the export earnings of Iran oil. Oil revenue also funds 40% - 50% of the federal budget of Iran.

As a result, restrictions on international investment in the Iran nuclear power program are all but meaningless. Increase in oil revenues would provide an ocean of petrodollars that could frustrate the effectiveness of such measures. At the same time, precisely because Iran has made important nuclear progress of their own volition, restrictions on the sale of nuclear products and technologies do not show a strong deterrent either. Finally, the provision prohibiting the sale of "exclusive products" probably would be much more attractive as fodder for David Letterman that incentives for Iran to cease its illicit nuclear activities.

Finally, the proposal contains no provisions for verification. Without a robust verification mechanism Iran could easily deceive while at the same time benefit from the proposal. Iran could be used to guide of North Korea by bagging the benefits of the proposal while maintaining a secret nuclear weapons program. You could also try to initiate discussions, not about its nuclear activities, but the proposal itself, to buy additional time for nuclear research and development activities. In any case, emphasized that nuclear fuel activities are not negotiable and remain too expansive definition of what comprises this type of activity.

Everything has been said, the historical prognosis is not good. Once warned philosopher George Santayana, "those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." If one looks back to the recent history, is a striking parallel between the proposal of the group "5 ++ 1" and the agreement framework Korea of the North agreed in 1994. This framework offered light water reactors to the North Korea, had ensured "cooperation in the field of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy" and reduce trade and investment barriers. About a year later, Korea the North launched its secret uranium enrichment program.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains committed to build Iran into a nuclear power. The development of nuclear weapons would provide the safest environment whereby the Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic revolution could ensure his regime.

Worse still, Ahmadinejad has messianic visions of his being an instrument to facilitate the "return" of the "Hidden Imam" of the Shiites. At the beginning of his presidency, when confronted by provisions of budget costly, declared, "we have not reached for democracy." "We are here to prepare the way for the emergence of the hidden Imam."

According to Shiite tradition, appearance of the "magnet hidden" could put an end to the injustice of the world. For Ahmadinejad, this translates into a world without Israel and United States. In a speech at the "World without Zionism" Conference, Ahmadinejad proclaimed that the Muslims would not allow Israel to exist in the "heart of the Islamic world" and said that a world without United States and Israel was achievable. Nuclear weapons could lead to that world.

Against such expansive ambitions, the proposal of the group "5 ++ 1" is probably result in large part. Iran may pocket as well as the benefits it offers, but the absence of strong verification measures and significant sanctions, it is not likely to put an end to the search for nuclear weapons Iran. Instead, it could really provide diplomatic coverage under which Iran would continue a secret development of nuclear weapons while simultaneously benefiting from international assistance.

Don Sutherland has researched and written on a wide range of geopolitical issues.

Ambiciones nucleares de Irán

On April 1st, 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran was born under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini. The Ayatollah returned to Iran at the end of the Islamic Revolution, after having spent 14 years in exile. This past month Iran commemorated these events by showcasing its military strength. It conducted a series of missile tests and large-scale military maneuvers involving tens of thousands of troops and over 1500 naval vessels.

Iran launched its arms development program during the 1980-88 war with Iraq to compensate for a U.S. weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane. Recently, they have test-fired a new radar-dodging and multi-targeting missile, an underwater high-speed missile and a new medium-range land-to-sea missile.

Iran has also successfully tested what it calls a ''supermodern flying boat.'' Iran claims that the flying boat was entirely ''made in Iran'' and that it can move at high speeds and avoid radar detection. The United States said it was possible Iran had developed weapons that could evade sonar and radar but warned the Islamic Republic had a tendency to ''boast and exaggerate.''

Nuclear Iran

These recent missile tests and war games coincide with increasing tensions between Iran and the West over Tehran's controversial nuclear program. The United States and its allies believe Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran denies this, saying its program is for peaceful purposes. The UN Security Council has demanded that Iran halt its uranium enrichment activities, but so far Tehran has refused.

The Shkval

Military experts have taken particular interest in Iran's test of a high-speed underwater missile. Iran claims the missile is capable of carrying multiple warheads at speeds of up to 225 mph. Speaking on state television, a high-ranking Iranian military commander said the missile has been in development for six years, and ''even if an enemy warship's sonar can detect the missile, no warship can escape from this missile because of its high speed.''

He called it the fastest underwater missile in the world - but it has the same speed as the Russian-made Shkval (''Squall''), developed in 1995 and believed to be the world's fastest, three or four times faster than a torpedo. Many experts believe that Iran's underwater missile - called the ''Hoot'' or ''Whale'' - is in fact Russian made, or at the very least its design is based on the Shkval.

The Russian Shkval is an exceptionally high-speed underwater torpedo. It is reported to attain almost 200 knots, giving its target little opportunity for evasive maneuvers. Apparently fired from standard 533mm torpedo tubes, the Shkval has a range of about 7,500 yards. The weapon clears the tube at 50 knots, after which its rocket fires. By creating a local ''envelope'' of supercavitating bubbles, the weapon can achieve its spectacular speed.

Examining Iran's Motives

Iran has announced plans to start building a new nuclear plant in an undisclosed location. Construction on the plant will begin this year, and it will contain 3,000 enrichment centrifuges - small for the production of nuclear fuel but ample to make fissile material for nuclear weapons.

Iran claims that under Article 4 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty they have the right to develop nuclear technology. Iran insists that it is pursuing nuclear technology for peaceful energy purposes, but that leads to the obvious question: why would a nation with immense oil and gas reserves need nuclear energy? Iran claims it is building costly nuclear fuel-cycle facilities to meet future electricity needs, while preserving oil and gas for export, but Iran's uranium reserves are minuscule, accounting for less than one percent of its vast oil reserves. Iran controls 11 percent of the world's oil reserves and its natural gas reserves are the second largest in the world. Iran does not have enough indigenous uranium resources to fuel even one power-generating reactor over its lifetime, but it does have enough uranium to make several nuclear bombs.

According to a report by the U.S. State Department on Iran's nuclear program: ''...The costly infrastructure needed to perform all of these activities goes well beyond any conceivable peaceful nuclear program. No comparable oil-rich nation has ever engaged, or would be engaged, in this set of activities - or would pursue them for nearly two decades behind a continuing cloud of secrecy and lies to IAEA inspectors and the international community - unless it was dead set on building nuclear weapons.''

Enrichment Breakthrough

On April 11th, Iran declared that it had ''joined the nuclear club.'' Iranian officials announced that they had, for the first time, successfully enriched uranium to make nuclear fuel. The announcement marks a major breakthrough in Iran's nuclear program. Iran stated publicly that it had achieved a 3.5 percent level of uranium enrichment.

Again, Iran has said that its goal is not to make nuclear weapons, but to develop nuclear energy. This leads us to another important question: If Iran does develop a peaceful nuclear energy program, how difficult would it be to use that same technology to make nuclear weapons? Nuclear power plants need 3 to 4 percent enriched uranium for fuel, but natural uranium only contains 0.7 percent. Thus uranium must be processed in a uranium enrichment facility before it can be used as fuel for nuclear power.

What most people don't realize is the exact same technology and equipment used to enrich uranium for fuel can be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons; it simply requires more passes through the enrichment plant. A nuclear bomb requires about 90 percent enriched uranium, which is high compared to the percentage found in fuel, but according to experts it requires more energy to convert natural uranium to fuel than it takes to convert fuel into weapons-grade uranium.

The Fallout

Iran is governed by Shiite Muslim clerics committed to a stern interpretation of Islamic law. Hatred of the United States has been a key component of Iranian foreign policy since the 1978 Islamic revolution, and Iran's leaders often refer to the United States as the ''Great Satan.''

Iran's distaste for the United States is surpassed only by their utter loathing of Israel. Iran's political and religious leaders have repeatedly called for Israel to be ''wiped off the map.'' They have also denounced any attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

A nuclear-armed Iran would be a serious threat to our security. However, with troops already deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Bush appears - at least for the time being - to be committed to finding a diplomatic solution to the standoff. Some experts have speculated that Israel may be planning a preemptive strike, although military action would most likely be used as a last resort.

In 1981, Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor when it believed Saddam Hussein was close to producing a nuclear bomb. If Israel does attack Iran it would undoubtedly bring about a firestorm in the Middle East. Unfortunately we are running out of time, and neither Israel nor the United States is willing to accept the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran. What happens if diplomacy continues to fail? Will military action become our only option?

I am a biblical researcher, author, and free lance writer who earned my degree in Biblical Studies and theology and has spent the past 25 years doing Biblical research. I live in Russia with his wife and children and devotes my time and energy to biblical writing and research. As an ordained minister, author, and speaker, my use of a vibrant Christian worldview in analyzing some of the key issues of our time has brought me before audiences at churches, schools, and college campuses.

Along with speaking and ministering, I have written on issues ranging from revival to rap music; science to sex. As an experienced writer, my ability of laying "the axe to the root" concerning many of the most critical issues of our day. I am engaged in an assortment of activities relating to Bible research, exploration and public education.

My goal is to present credible information that is sound in scholarship, but also interesting and motivational to the general public, with a desire to translate the dry, academic pursuit of Biblical truth into

¿Quién dice que programa Nuclear de Irán es sólo con fines pacíficos?

"Peaceful my rear end," was the comment I heard from the retiring general in the US military as he gave a speech and answered questions about the Iranian nuclear weapons program. Very few political analysts, geopolitical gurus, military men, State Department employees, or foreign nations are fooled by the Iranian regimes trickery, tactics, or half-truths during negotiation on this issue. Okay, so let's talk about this for a moment shall we?

Now then, who says that Iranians nuclear program is for only peaceful power generating purposes? Apparently, the only people who are saying this is the Iranian regime itself. Even the United Nations admitted along with the IAEA that Iran has been skirting the issue, and continuing their nuclear weapons program even during the sanctions, multiparty talks, and all their promises that they have stopped enriching uranium for that purpose.

CNN recently reported that Iran was hot on the trail of its nuclear weapons program on November 8, 2011 titled; "U.N.: Iran's work "specific to nuclear weapons," where they stated;

"The report is the strongest sign yet that Iran seeks to build a nuclear arsenal, despite claims to the contrary. With Israel threatening a military response, the report opens the way for a new confrontation between the West and Iran. In its latest report on Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency outlines the sum of its knowledge on the Islamic Republic's alleged secret nuclear weapons work."

Of course, nothing in this report is news to the US Intelligence Community, CIA, or even a well-read news junkie here in the US, as there are ways to learn all this information fairly easily just watching and reading the news. Now then, I ask is the US now going to use the intelligence information from the United Nations and the IAEA rather than trying to purport CIA intelligence? Perhaps, and perhaps this administration doesn't want to end up on the losing side of the stick, as the Bush Administration did in Iraq over the WMD issue.

A nuclear weaponized Iran would immediately have all of the nations in the Arab League seeking nuclear weapons, and it is obvious that Iran would also give its technology to Venezuela, Syria, and other players which it might be able to use to garner favorable trade agreements, and client nations which would support the Iranian regime. That in itself is a problem, but it doesn't address the biggest fear.

The sum of all fears of course would be proxy terrorists with a nuclear weapon in a new dawning age of nuclear terrorism. That is definitely something the world doesn't need, but it is a probable potential eventuality if Iran starts producing nuclear weapons. Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on Future Concepts. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net