The
Nuclear Showdown: Part 2-
The Battle Over Enrichment
By Tim Buchholz
15 August,
2008
Countercurrents.org
Part I
Tensions
appeared to be easing between the United States and Iran. The U.S.
has hinted at creating an embassy in Iran, the first since the 1979
hostage crisis. According to an article by Ewen MacAskill from July
18th in the Sydney Morning Herald, "The U.S. plans to establish
a diplomatic presence in Tehran for the first time in 28 years as
part of a remarkable turnaround in policy by the President, George
Bush." Anderson Cooper of CNN says in his “Morning Buzz”
report from July 17th, “Washington would open a U.S. interests
section in the Iranian capital, not a FULL Embassy, but a halfway
house to setting up a full embassy.” And Ewen MacAskill goes
on to say, “Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, indicated
earlier this week that he was not against the opening of a U.S. mission.”
The U.S. also sent its third-ranking diplomat to hear Iran’s
answer to the latest incentives proposal in Geneva. The U.S. had previously
insisted they would not negotiate directly with Iran until it halts
its enrichment program. According to a BBC News Report from July 19th
entitled “U.S. Sets Nuclear Deadline for Iran,” the U.S.
did not get the answer they hoped for. So the diplomats gave Iran
two weeks to make a decision or face further sanctions. We are now
passed the two week deadline and further sanctions are being pursued
by the U.S. and her allies. Again, it appears they did not get the
answer they wanted. The BBC News Report mentioned above quotes State
Department spokesman Sean McCormack as saying, "We hope the Iranian
people understand that their leaders need to make a choice between
co-operation, which would bring benefits to all, and confrontation,
which can only lead to further isolation."
While these steps show signs of improvement in relations between the
two countries, the U.S. and its allies are not retreating on their
demand that Iran freeze its enrichment program, and Iran will not
back down on what they feel is their right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty to make their own nuclear fuel. Iran’s President doesn’t
seem too concerned over the threats of new sanctions. In an article
in the AP from July 28th entitled “U.S. to wait and see on Ahmadinejad,”
the President is asked if Iran would suspend enrichment to gain international
acceptance. He says Iran already enjoys, “very good economic
and cultural relations with countries around the world. For the continuation
of our lives and for progress, we do not need the services, if I can
use the word, of a few countries.” So, we are at a standstill.
While Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, with no intention
of developing nuclear weapons, the U.S. and her allies still believe
Iran plans to covertly make a nuclear bomb. The United States feels
Iran cannot be trusted because they had a secret nuclear program for
nearly twenty years that they finally disclosed in 2002. Iran feels
they cannot trust the West’s guarantees, as every attempt to
acquire the technology legally has been blocked by the U.S. Iran says
they kept their program secret because they feared the U.S. would
try to intervene.
Iran had started construction of nuclear reactors with the help of
the United States in the 1960’s under the rule of Shah Mohammad
Reza Pahlavi, an ally of the U.S. But after the revolution of 1979,
the new government did not feel Iran needed nuclear power. According
to Mohammad Sahimi’s article, “Iran’s Nuclear Program,
Part I,” this left two reactors incomplete. Then the reactors
were further destroyed during the Iran/Iraq War. Luckily, some of
the major equipment had not been installed. Sahimi says, “in
fact two steam generators were stored in Italy, while the pressure
vessel for Bushehr-1 was stored in Germany.” After the war and
the revolution ended, Iran’s government again turned to nuclear
power. The government then set about repairing and rebuilding the
reactors. Mohammad Sahimi goes on to say, “The first reconstruction
and development plan proposed and carried out by President Hashemi
Rafsanjani's government, coupled with Iran's chronic shortage of electricity
that went back to the early 1970s, and the rapid growth of her population,
were three major reasons for Iran to restart her nuclear program for
obtaining electricity.”
Iran asked the German company Kraftwerk Union, who had been building
the reactors until the revolution of 1979 and held some of the equipment
yet to be installed, to finish the job, but the German government
denied their request, under U.S. pressure. Iran then attempted to
reclaim the equipment it had already paid for from Germany, but the
German government again denied their request, again under U.S. pressure.
Sahimi writes that Iran then filed a complaint with the International
Commerce Commission (ICC) in 1996 “asking for $5.4 billion in
compensation for Germany's failure to comply.” He says that
as of 2003, this case remained unsettled. And according to Wikipedia,
“The U.S. was also paid to deliver new fuel and upgrade its
power in accordance with a contract signed before the revolution.
The U.S. delivered neither the fuel nor returned the billions of dollars
payment it had received.” There was also a lawsuit filed by
Iran against the mainly French company Eurodif, which is a uranium
enrichment company that Iran had invested over 1 billion dollars in
for rights to 10% of the production. This too was denied and Iran
filed suit against France, finally receiving 1.6 billion dollars in
1991. The U.S. also stopped Argentina, Russia, China and the IAEA
from helping the Iranian nuclear program.
So, the United States does not trust Iran, but I think we in the west
do not realize that Iran doesn’t trust us either. Iran wants
to enrich their own uranium so that they are in control of their own
energy needs. Here in the U.S., both presidential candidates are calling
for an end to our dependency on foreign oil. The candidates are also
both pushing the U.S. to reduce their carbon footprint, especially
after the latest G8 convention, where the U.S. signed a treaty promising
to cut their carbon emissions in half by 2050. One of the ways the
U.S. plans to do this is with more nuclear power.
In an article by AP writer John Miller on July 27th called “Companies
race to open new uranium enrichment facilities in U.S.,” Miller
writes, “Two U.S. companies, General Electric and United States
Enrichment Corp., or USEC, along with their European rivals, Urenco
and Areva, are pushing billions worth of new U.S. enrichment plants
or technology so they do not miss the new uranium boom.” He
goes on to say that, “Opponents including the Union of Concerned
Scientists fear that investment sends the wrong message to countries
like Iran, which is under international pressure to halt its own uranium
enrichment efforts. The scientists' group argues that it is unclear
the United States really needs new facilities, when it could just
import nuclear fuel from elsewhere.” Miller says that the U.S.
currently imports most of its enriched uranium, some of which comes
from Russia in a program called “Megatons for Megawatts.”
In this program, “warheads are converted in Russia to nuclear
fuel and then shipped to the United States.” But this deal ends
in 2013, so new uranium processing plants will be shooting up all
across America to fill the new demand. (The U.S. could of course dismantle
its own nuclear weapons and use that fuel, which the taxpayers have
already paid for, but we all know that won’t happen.) He says,
“As enrichment fever grows, however, the Union of Concerned
Scientists in Washington is watching with unease, because it believes
this activity undermines U.S. credibility with Iran.” He quotes
Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist with the group, as saying,”
The U.S. has said Iran doesn't need nuclear power because of its oil
and natural gas reserves. Iran turns around and says, 'We want to
mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, just like you do.' There's this
kind of double-talk.”
There is also the recent nuclear deal with India that caused riots
and fighting within the Indian government. In an article from July
22nd’s AP by Matthew Rosenburg called, “India’s
Government Survives Confidence Vote,” Rosenburg writes, “India's
government survived a bruising political battle to win a confidence
vote Tuesday, reviving a landmark nuclear energy deal with the United
States that is at the center of an emerging partnership between the
world's two largest democracies.” He says, “Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh and his Congress party fought hard to secure victory,
and appeared to cut back room deals when all else failed. An airport
was named after one lawmaker's father, another was promised a high-level
job and — rival politicians allege — many others received
millions of dollars in bribes.” After the votes, which passed
at 275 to 256, Rosenberg quotes the Prime Minister as saying this
deal will, “send a message to the world at large that India
is prepared to take its place in the committee of nations.”
India has yet to sign the NPT Treaty and has also performed nuclear
tests, but the U.S. is pushing for the deal.
The U.S. is also reviving a long dormant deal with Turkey. According
to August 8th’s “Today’s Zaman,” an English-language
paper in Turkey, “US President George W. Bush has approved a
cooperation deal with Turkey concerning peaceful uses of nuclear energy,
saying that private-sector proliferation worries have been addressed,
the White House has announced.” This article quotes President
Bush as saying, “In my judgment, entry into force of the Agreement
will serve as a strong incentive for Turkey to continue its support
for nonproliferation objectives and enact future sound nonproliferation
policies and practices. It will also promote closer political and
economic ties with a NATO ally, and provide the necessary legal framework
for US industry to make nuclear exports to Turkey's planned civil
nuclear sector.”
Why is the U.S. pushing for deals with Turkey and India and pushing
for sanctions against Iran? Because they are our allies? Why does
that override Iran’s right internationally to the same inspections
and guidelines that will allow Turkey and India nuclear power. Is
it just because India and Turkey are willing to buy it from other
countries and Iran wants to make its own?
In a BBC News Report from September 2006 entitled “Q&A:
Uranium Enrichment,” they ask the question “Who is already
enriching uranium?” They answer, “According to the UN's
nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, six organizations
operate commercial-scale enrichment plants. They are: China National
Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), which has two centrifuge plants in China,
Eurodif, a joint venture between Belgium, France, Italy and Spain,
with one diffusion plant in France, Minatom, the Russian state organization,
with four centrifuge plants, Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited (JNFL), with
one centrifuge plant, Urenco, a joint venture between companies in
Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, with centrifuge plants in each
of the three countries, The United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC),
a US firm with a diffusion plant in Kentucky.” They say, “Both
Pakistan and India enrich uranium on a smaller scale. Argentina's
enrichment program is said by experts to be more or less dormant.”
They also say Brazil and Australia are on their way. The report says
Israel is suspected of having a plant but this has not been confirmed.
So our two main enemies of our most recent World War are enriching
uranium. Our Cold War counterpart is not only enriching uranium, but
breaking down their nuclear weapons and selling us the enriched uranium.
The report next asks, “What controls are there on uranium enrichment?”
The report answers, “Nations which are signatories to the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty have the "inalienable right" to
make nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, through enriching uranium
or separating plutonium.” Iran has signed this treaty. The report
further states, “However, there are three states - India, Israel
and Pakistan - which are known to possess nuclear weapons but have
never joined the treaty.” So the U.S. pushes for a deal with
India, who already has weapons, and supports Israel, who is hiding
their’s, but fights to deny Iran the right to make its own fuel.
It’s is also interesting to note that the countries pushing
for sanctions, The United States, China, Russia, Britain, France and
Germany, are all on the above list of countries already producing
enriched uranium on a commercial level.
In a recent NPR interview, Rami Khouri, Editor of “The Daily
Star,” one of the leading English language newspapers in the
Middle East, says that the Middle East’s biggest problem with
the U.S. is consistency. He says the U.S. takes sides, when instead
it should treat its role like an umpire in baseball. He suggests that
Condoleezza Rice, who he says is a big sports fan, should read the
umpire’s rule book before going into negotiations. He says in
the rule book, rules are not based on power. You treat both sides
the same, and before you make a call you get all the facts, and discuss
the biggest ones with the other umpires on the field.
I don’t know Iran’s intentions regarding nuclear weapons;
I hope they are telling the truth. I also do not know if the U.S.
is trying to profit in this battle or do what they genuinely think
is best for the world, and not just the U.S. and her allies. I hope.
What we do know is the image the U.S. is presenting to the world.
Calling for more nuclear power at home, pushing through deals with
other countries in Iran‘s backyard, and then denying an inalienable
right to a NPT signatory country. The U.S. should try to win the rest
of the world’s trust a bit more before it forces its hand against
what it feels is another enemy. Present that face of peace and democracy
that we advertise in our brochures. Take our troops out of Iraq by
the deadline Iraq is asking for, and replace them with UN Peacekeeper’s
to train Iraqi soldiers if we have to. Stop building the largest embassy
in the world in Iraq and stop pushing for backhanded deals with big
oil contracts, proving you didn’t go there just for oil. And
allow Iran to enrich its own uranium, for its own national pride and
security, under the same guidelines the rest of the world gets to
do it. And maybe the world will trust our intentions a little more,
and the tight rope we walk might just get a little stronger.
John Lennon and Yoko Ono posted a billboard in Times Square that read,
“WAR IS OVER - if you want it.” You here means everybody,
and while I am not naïve enough to believe we are ready for peace,
I do believe we will never get there until we all prove that peace
is we want, and the only way to do that is to play fair. With everybody.
Actions speak much louder than words. We should heed the words of
White House State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, take out the
words “Iranian” people, and say, "We hope the people
understand that their leaders need to make a choice between co-operation,
which would bring benefits to all, and confrontation, which can only
lead to further isolation."
No empire will last forever, those are famous words. And there is
the old saying, “Be nice to the people you meet on the way up,
you will meet them on the way back down.”
Tim Buchholz is a freelance writer living in Ohio