The Iran Sanctions Struggle
President Obama is trying to get support from the Chinese for stiffer economic sanctions against Iran if, as seems likely, the Khamenei regime refuses to accept the nuclear fuel deal that it negotiated with the IAEA. This will not be easy. The Chinese are notoriously mercantilist in their foreign policy. They have business with Iran. But, it is interesting to note that the Russians, especially President Medvedev, continue to make promising noises about supporting the sanctions regime.
There is, I'm told, a surprising reason for this...
The Russians consider Iran an ally but they've been surprised and disappointed by two recent Iranian moves. The first was the discovery of the nuclear reactor (ADD: facility)at Qum, a secret site that may have been built for research into weaponization. The Russians were as surprised by this as everyone else was.
The second move, more recently, was Iran's rejection of Russia as a destination for its nuclear fuel--and its preference for Turkey, because it was Islamic. "The Russians feel that their friends, the Iranians, have kicked them in the balls twice in the past few months," I'm told by a diplomatic source. "They still have strong interests in Iran and may not go along with sanctions when push comes to shove, but we're feeling confident that they will."
Update: This may be a first. The Commentary blog has some interesting speculation about why the Russians may not be pleased with the Iranians--it has to do with a gas pipeline, from Iran to Turkey, that would liberate Turkmenistan's massive gas trove from the pipeline control of Gazprom. It may be part of the reason why the Iranians want the Turks, not the Russians, as the recipient for its nuclear fuel. Not impossible.
-
1
This conniption over Iran while the real danger lurks in Af-Pak is baffling.
-
1.1
Nuclear materials are always a concern, particularly those developed in secret...but I get the larger point, in that Iran isn't a perceived immediate threat to the US as it is to, say, Israel...
-
1.2
For those of us somewhat belatedly concerned about nuclear proliferation, here is an eye opener:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/12/AR2009111211060.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009111300578
-
-
2
Will these be the same type of sanctions that other countries openly and often violated previously?
-
3
“The Russians consider Iran an ally but they've been surprised and disappointed by two recent Iranian moves. The first was the discovery of the nuclear reactor at Qum, a secret facility that seems to have been built for research into weaponization. The Russians were as surprised by this as everyone else was.”
Do you honestly believe anyone is surprised over Iranian weaponization of their nuclear reactors? Especially the Russians? Please.
“The second move, more recently, was Iran's rejection of Russia as a destination for its nuclear fuel--and its preference for Turkey, because it was Islamic. “
Now this I can believe did surprise and anger the Russians.
As for China, how that they are emerging from their own recession, do not count on them to help support any meaningful sanctions against Iran. China wants Iran's oil and will put it's own national interests above concerns for stability in the Middle East.
-
3.1
There is no "nuclear reactor" at Qom and Klien is full of baloney. IAEA head ElBaradei specifically said the site is "nothing to be worried about"
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/11/05/elbaradei-irans-qom-facility-nothing-to-be-worried-about/
-
-
4
Hence Putin's offer to Roshambo for control of the reactor sites?
-
5
Perhaps this is the "option" Obama is seeking, while he is dithering on further troop deployment to Afghanistan.
.
If Obama cannot get his new "friends", the Iranians, Russians and Chinese to agree on limits for Iran's nuclear ambitions, he will simply pull the troops all out of Afghanistan and let the Chinese and Russans deal with it for a change. I personally would not oppose such a decision.
.
Suffice it to say, Obama's clock is ticking fast. When he returns home, I believe the expectation is for a decision. Hopefully he makes the right decision.-
5.1
Rusty, could you elaborate further on how this topic relates to Afghanistan? Joe is talking about potential Russian sanctions on Iran. The only connection I see is that they're both in the Middle East. And I'm not sure how you figure the Russians and Chinese will take over in Afghanistan if we pull out. Especially for the Russians, things didn't work out so well the last time they were involved in that region.
And “dithering?” The Fox News crowd has found a great new buzzword of the month, but I for one appreciate that Obama is trying to get as many perspectives and information as he can to make the most informed decision possible. We saw what happened with the last administration when decisions are rushed. And the thing is, even if Obama had immediately granted McCrystal the troops he requested, they wouldn't get onto the ground in Afghanistan for another year. Obama recognizes that the troop levels are essentially fixed for the near future anyways, so he might as well attempt to come up with the best plan he can. Would I want him to come to a decision quicker? Absolutely. But I'd take the right decision over a quick one any day.
-
5.2
"Hopefully he makes the right decision. .."
Eek!
Litmus test: Hopefully he doesn't make any decision that is 'right' by Mr. Rusted Returns, Esq.
-
-
6
HOGWASH.
There is no "reactor" at Qom -- it is meant to be a back-up enrichment plant in case the main one in Natanz gets bombed -- and is certainly does not house a reactor. Basic errors like this are far too common in the media's rush to scaremonger.Secondly, how do you know it was "built for research into weaponization" especially when the IAEA head ElBaradi specifically stated recently that the facility is "nothing to be worried about"
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/11/05/elbaradei-irans-qom-facility-nothing-to-be-worried-about/ -
7
"nuclear experts say the Qom site's planned capacity -- 3,000 centrifuges -- makes little sense as a stand-alone civilian enrichment center since it would be too small to fuel a nuclear power station around the clock.
It could, however, yield fissile material for one or two atom bombs per year."http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091116/ts_nm/us_nuclear_iran_iaea
-
7.1
And the Iranians have made it clear that the site was a PILOT enrichment plant which is NOT INTENDED to "power a nuclear station around the clock" anyway.
-
7.2
I am not trying to be a smarta$$. I just wonder why you take the Iranian Government at its word on this matter.
-
7.3
queencersei - you don't have to take Iran's word. The site is open for IAEA inspections. IT can't be used to secretly make bombs. In fact the Iranians have repeatedly offered to open their entire nuclear program to joint US-multinational participation, making it impossible to even theoretically use the program to secretly make bombs. However, the US has consistently ignored this option, even though it was endorsed by the IAEA and US experts.
-
-
8
President Obama is trying to get support from the Chinese for stiffer economic sanctions against Israel ....
Did I read that right?
-
9
Joe,
For your readers and you, an interesting analytical piece from the American Foreign Policy Project, comprised of reputable scholars and experts on Iran:
http://www.americanforeignpolicy.org/iran-gateway/key-myths-and-facts/It dispels many of the myths that provide foundation for news articles, op-eds, political statements, etc. regarding the Iranian nuclear program.
It's time to end this senseless loop of lies and propaganda and get to the real issue at hand: the Iranian human rights movement. All Iranians, free or not, stand behind our nation's sovereign right to nuclear enrichment under the NPT. Although we don't condone any deviations therefrom, we, as a majority, see the rational, also, in providing our nation with security from already-loud and explicit external threats and remember our nation's thousand+ year history of invasions and more.
-PA, Esq.
- TIME Who will be TIME's Person of the Year for 2009? | http://su.pr/2FG20W - 2 hours ago
- TIME Why is Notre Dame football in such trouble? | http://su.pr/25fVes - 11 hours ago
- TIME The media and Tiger Woods: Is this really news? | http://su.pr/1Pr72H - 17 hours ago
Most Popular »
- Piling On Desirée Rogers--Is The Social Secretary To Blame For Two Ticketless Boobs At The White House?
- Looking for Reasons to Care About Tiger Woods
- Jay Leno a Failure; Also, Jay Leno a Success
- The League of Ambivalent Columnists
- Health Bill: What Would It Cost Me?
- Is Walking Away from Your Mortgage the Smartest Thing You Can Do?
- Today Lands a Tell-None Interview With the Salahis
- Cheney: 'No Aspirations' for Further Office
- State Dinner, Uh, Fashion
- On Civility
- Want to Boost Your Memory? Sounds During Sleep Can Help
- Dubai's Woes a Blow to Ambitious Ruler Sheik Mohammed
- Tiger Woods Car Crash Bad Publicity for Rich Isleworth
- The End of the 2000s: Goodbye to a Decade from Hell
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- The Women of Islam
- Amanda Knox Murder Trial: Verdict by Friday?
- The Muppets Perform 'Bohemian Rhapsody'
- What's Wrong with Notre Dame Football?
- Dubai Debt: Global Economic Recovery Still in Danger
Quotes of the Day »
RSS