I’m not sure the wiki entirely rules the possibility out.
I’ve been reading his blog since before we invaded Iraq. He’s one of the most knowledgeable Arab world pundits about. Which of his views are so skewed exactly?
I certainly don’t mean to imply that I have better knowledge than you in these matters, as I am just an interested observer who follow the news, but it would be nice if you could point out where I go wrong. Upon reading the IAEA’s latest report, it seemed like Iran is cooperating with the inspectors as prescribed by the NPT sans Additional Protocol. What current agreement binds them to comply with the AP if it has not passed their parliament? Even if it had passed, they could withdraw from it, like the US did from the ABM treaty in 2002.
I just see Iran’s acts sometimes presented as illegal in the media (like in the article you previously linked to), but is it really? What law have they broken that they are bound by? It is of course somewhat of a nitpick, as the international community can impose whatever sanctions they want regardless of treaties.
You don’t get to withdraw from UN Security Council resolutions.
I also question why you believe that the IAEA gave Iran a clean bill of health. The recent report clearly states that Iran hasn’t stopped enrichment activities, as the Security Council directed in 2006.
So you mean that their acts are illegal because they break the AP which USA, Russia, France, etc., have decided they must follow? I see that it works that way practically though.
Well, at any rate, it makes no mention of Iran withdrawing from the protocols at any point, which I’m sure would be included if it had happened.
You’re getting hung up on the Additional Protocol. Let’s set it aside for a moment. Iran is a member of the NPT. Regardless of the additional reporting under the protocols, Iran still is under the obligation to cooperate with the IAEA and to issue accurate safeguards agreements to declare what exactly they are doing. The protocol is relevant to the extent that additional activities and inspections would be allowed – something that Iran apparently does not want.
For your convenience, I’ve quoted part of the conclusion of the IAEA’s most recent report:
Members of the NPT are simply not allowed to tell the IAEA to go pound sand when they ask questions about why military S&T institutes are conducting nuclear research.
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/051017/2005101737.html
It’s also mentioned in Nuclear program of Iran - Wikipedia
Well, at any rate, it makes no mention of Iran withdrawing from the protocols at any point, which I’m sure would be included if it had happened.
Oh, sorry about this, but I forgot this thread existed till recently.
A few notes on Juan Cole: [The Volokh Conspiracy - Juan Cole, not an anti-Semite:](The Volokh Conspiracy)
It’s not his knowledge I dismiss, but his character and attitudes I question. He might have a point, but (to deliberately invoke Godwin), Hitler probably knew something I don’t about Poland. Doesn’t mean I can profitably use his knowledge: it comes too tainted by virtue of his views to be useful. He’s not insane, but he’s definitely dubious and always inclined to make judgements based on his reconceptions. And I defintiely think he’s an antisemite. I used to try reading him until I got sick of it. let me simply say he’s freakishly obsessed with Jews.
And Volokh Conspirators, while not unbiased themselves, are extremely academic and usually neutral. They’re not neccessarily very strongly for any group or not, and include a wide range of people. At worst, they are theoretically (but not always practically) Libertarian.
The bit I don’t understand, is how the ‘legitimate’ nuclear armed countries are not deemed to be in breach of Article VI of the NPT?
This requirement is so squishy that it is hard to see that any country could really be in violation of it. If you read it carefully, it really requires that countries negotiate in good faith – as opposed to actually reach an agreement. And the largest nuclear powers, the US and Russia, have been reducing their nuclear stockpiles for more than 20 years now.
You’ll also note that the provision requires all state parties to negotiate in good faith on general and complete disarmament. Not just nuclear disarmament, COMPLETE disarmament. Now, by show of hands, who is holding their breath for that one?
That’s a blog post that extrapolates antisemitism from a comment by Cole that Doug Feith is “Likudnik.” Feith is definitely on record as having strong Zionist views, his family are strongly linked with the Zionist movement. Likud is the party of the right and centre-right Zionists, it’s the amalgamation of those political parties. Unreconstructed Likudniks like Netanyahu are best buddies with Feith. So I think what he said is quite accurate.
Not everyone rejected the bullshit claims, in fact I keep hearing that Everyone knew Iraq had WMD’s and WMD programs too. That’s how we built a 40 nation coalition to support our little conquest.
So you see, it’s not a ‘worry’ I have, it’s a perception that the same lying bastards who lied to us the last time are going to continue to lie to us now.
Occam’s razor is a handy guide sometimes, and I’ll not abandon it just because a bunch of people are jumping up and down saying “this time we really really really really mean it.”
Show me a half a gram of highly enriched uranium that someone’s smuggled out of Iran, unfaked satellite images a plutonium reprocessing facility, or even an efficient and large scale string of gas centrifuges. Without something like that, the latest accusations are no better or worse than the ones made against Saddam.
Yes, because the recent news (like your CNN article) has been that Iran’s new facility broke the law by not being reported at the start of construction, which is an Additional Protocol requirement. I am not trying to argue that they might not have other violations, though I probably expressed myself badly in a previous post.
Sure. Do you know where the relevant safeguards requirements can be found? I’ve been looking around for a while but haven’t found a good source. The NPT itself doesn’t cover any of those details.
While they don’t seem to have any conclusive evidence of other nuclear research, I agree that they need to give answers to IAEA’s questions. They do note that other member nations’ restrictions of information to Iran are complicating the matter. I don’t know what nations they are referring to, or what kind of information that is not shared.
Iran has an official “anti-Israel day” at the end of Ramadan. Their president says: “confronting Israel is a national and religious duty”. They routinely chant “death to Israel” at cabinet meetings.
Doesn’t sound like a stable country that should possess nuclear weapons to me.