Iran defends its nuclear program in NY times ad

I like the idea. It is innovative. Was it Javad Zarif who did it? Does anyone have a picture of the ad?

Politics for kids, Politics for stubborns

The deadlock over Iran’s nuclear issue has passed the level of novice. The interests do not overlap at all and players don’t seem to be flexible enough to stretch or extend their horizons. Real parties to the fight, Iran and US, don’t look at each others’ eyes and seek solution by sending direct rhetorical signals or indirect orders and warnings. The fact is that none can prove the other is wrong, and therefore the fight will go on and on and on.

From Iran’s point of view, Americans have no right whatsoever to determine what Iran should or should not do (and they are right). From Americans’ point of view, the unpredictable mullahs should not have access to nuclear material (and –if not generalized to all Iranians- they are right too).

Part of this hide-and-seek game is the contradictory signals about the latest proposal (in which Iran produces UF6 and Russia enriches it for Iran) that has captured my attention:

1. NY Times first reveals the proposal and Condi Rice immediately denies it.
2. ElBaradei hopes that Iran’s nuclear case would be resolved in few days.
3. Igor Ivanov travels to Tehran to discuss the plan, and Russia denies offering such proposal after Ivanov’s meeting with Mottaki.
4. Larijani says that Iran is open to any proposal while denying the existence of any official offer. At the same time he says that any nuclear fuel work must be performed on Iran’s soil. Later in the day, Iran confirms rejection of the offer!

Is this the end of story? I don’t know. I call it a political game, where the fisher leaves the bait out to see if the fish likes it, and then takes the bait away to let the fish come after it, get tired, and bite on it with pleasure.

P.S.

Another step towards completion of my proposed game:

5. And then US urges Iran to reconsider the proposal.

New intelligence on Iran’s nuclear case

United States officials have found over 1000 pages of documents, computer simulations and accounts of experiments on a stolen laptop and claim that it proves Iran’s intention in making a nuclear warhead. It is very hard for me to believe that for the following simple reason:

If Iran has a military nuclear program, it has done a pretty good job in covering it all up during the past few years of intensive inspections by IAEA. Now, would you think they are so silly to let the scientists work on a portable computer? And then let the laptop out of the research lab?

I would say it is another fuss before the next IAEA meeting to ratchet up pressure on Iran. Asefi responded to the issue by “[It] made us laugh. We do not use laptops to keep our classified documents”. I would have said something else if I were him:

Could they please return the stolen laptop if they are not afraid of us having access to the content!

It seems that a former UN arms inspector has challenged the validity of the intelligence.

News for public or news for professionals?

Diplomats say that First results from Iran site show no nuclear activity.

Nothing has yet been found to prove the claims that Iran has a military nuclear program. How long should it go on? Until all Iranians take off their pants and allow IAEA! to take samples? If that happens and they find nothing, wouldn't United States still claim that Iran may use the technology to build the nuclear bombs in future? Why should Iran allow inspections beyond NPT then? Isn't it to let IAEA inspect all military sites that Americans have little information about?

The report says:

In any case, a diplomat said, "we don't expect those samples to show any undeclared nuclear activities, after all the time Iran was given to sanitize those sites."

It is a good feed to the public, but not for professionals. A little physics background suggests that it is not possible to wash out nuclear traces (and this is why they take samples with cotton cloths).