Iran News ...


8/9/04

Play of words or the language of facts: Take your pick!

By Kam Zarrabi, www.intellectualdiscourse.com 

 

New York Times August 4, 2004 article, Iran's Nuclear Challenge, appears at first glance to be a very informative commentary on a highly volatile issue facing the American administration's strategists: Iran's nuclear ambitions.

 

Below are two alternative rewordings of the crucial portions of that article in order to demonstrate the power of language in the service of propaganda. Excerpts from the New York Times article are in italics.

The invasion of Iraq, which President Bush has often said would help stabilize the Middle East, is now hindering efforts to deal with a real nuclear threat: Iran.

 

The invasion of Iraq, which President Bush has often said would stabilize the Middle East, is now hindering efforts to evaluate the allegations against Iran's possible nuclear threat.

 

The invasion of Iraq, which President Bush has often claimed would help stabilize the Middle East, is now hindering efforts to expand the war into Iran, under the pretext of an Iranian nuclear threat.

 

Given Washington's unsatisfactory options right now, the best choice is to support Britain, France and Germany as they search for a diplomatic settlement.

Given Washington's limited options right now, the safest choice is to persuade Britain, France and Germany to soften up Iran's position.

 

Given Washington's limited options right now, the safest choice is to pressure Britain, France and Germany to soften up Iran's position, before Israel attempts a highly risky preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

 

Iran announced on Saturday that it had resumed the construction of centrifuges that are capable of producing material for a nuclear bomb.

 

Iran announced on Saturday that it had resumed the construction of centrifuges, legally allowed under NPT, but could also potentially produce materials for a nuclear bomb.

 

Iran announced on Saturday that it had resumed the construction of centrifuges, legally allowed under NPT, aimed at producing fuel for power generation.

 

..... since there are other, safer ways for Iran to get the less-enriched uranium used in power-producing reactors, it is fair to presume that Iran means to use the centrifuges to produce bomb fuel.

Iran's use of its own centrifuges to produce uranium for its power-producing reactors might make it possible to also produce enriched uranium that can be used in a nuclear bomb.

 

Even though there are other ways for Iran to get the uranium for its power-producing reactors, such as through imports, it is logical as well as prudent for Iran to not be dependent only on imported fuel, for economic, as well as strategic, reasons.

 

Constructing uranium centrifuges is, regrettably, legal under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Using them to produce fuel for bombs is not.

Construction of uranium centrifuges is legal under the NPT.  However, it goes without saying that production of weapons grade uranium is obviously not.

 

Construction of uranium centrifuges is legal under the NPT and Iran has every right to engage in the production of its needed nuclear fuel for power generation.

 

Britain, France and Germany want Iran to renounce, permanently and verifiably, all technology capable of making nuclear bomb fuel. In exchange, they offer an equally firm commitment to use outside suppliers to guarantee an adequate supply of uranium for civilian power reactors.

 

Britain, France and Germany are trying to convince Iran to renounce, permanently and verifiably, all research and technology that could lead to making nuclear fuel of any kind. This way, Iran must depend on outside suppliers for uranium needed in power reactors. This, Iran refuses to accept.

 

The United States wants the support of the Europeans to force Iran to renounce, permanently and verifiably, all research and technology that could lead to making nuclear fuel of any kind. This way, Iran shall remain dependant on outside suppliers for uranium needed in power reactors. This, Iran must refuse to accept, as such limitations are not only counter to Iran's rights as a member of the NPT, they violate Iran's sovereignty and would compromise Iran's national security.

 

Unless Iran changes its position and forswears all rights to enrich uranium or reprocess plutonium, there can be no deal.

Unless Iran changes its position and forswears all its legal rights under the NPT, there can be no deal.

 

As a member of NPT, Iran cannot be forced or expected to change its position and forswear all its legal rights because of unsubstantiated allegations for non-compliance.

 

If no agreement is reached soon, this apparent drive to build nuclear weapons should be recognized as a threat to international peace and security and taken up by the United Nations Security Council later this year.

 

If no agreement is reached soon, suspicions against Iran will be used as sufficient reason to take Iran before the UN Security Council for further action.

If Iran refuses to bow to this pressure, allegations against its nuclear ambitions will be made to appear as a clear and present threat to international peace and security, which should then be taken up by the UN Security Council for necessary sanctions. 

... Payvand News - 8/9/04 ... --



comments powered by Disqus

Home | ArchiveContact | About |  Web Sites | Bookstore | Persian Calendar | twitter | facebook | RSS Feed


© Copyright 2004 NetNative (All Rights Reserved)