The Security Council deadline myth
By
Gordon Prather
04/28/06 "WND"
-- -- Under a Safeguards Agreement concluded with
the International Atomic Energy Agency – as required by the
Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – Iran agreed to
allow IAEA inspectors to "verify" that no "source or special
nuclear materials" are being used in furtherance of a nuclear
weapons program.
During the past three years, every report Director-General
Mohamed ElBaradei has made to the IAEA Board concluded that – as
best he can determine – no proscribed materials have been so
used.
The NPT and the IAEA Statute and the Iranian Safeguards
Agreement all guarantee Iran's "inalienable" right to conduct
research into – and to enjoy all the benefits of the peaceful
use of – nuclear energy.
The IAEA Statute ensures – insofar as the IAEA is able – that
"source or special nuclear materials" are not used in
furtherance of a military purpose as a secondary mission.
ElBaradei's reports over the past three years are that – while
he cannot be absolutely certain that there are no proscribed
materials in Iran that he doesn't know about – there are no
"indications" that there are.
Nevertheless, Bush-Cheney-Bolton-Rice strong-armed the IAEA
Board into reporting the entire Iranian dossier to the Security
Council "for possible action."
According to Bonkers Bolton, our representative on the Security
Council:
This is a real test for the Security Council. There's just no
doubt that for close to 20 years, the Iranians have been
pursuing nuclear weapons through a clandestine program that
we've uncovered.
No doubt?
That Bolton has uncovered?
After three years of intrusive on-the-ground inspections, there
is nothing but doubt, and ElBaradei hasn't uncovered anything.
That doesn't faze Bonkers.
If the U.N. Security Council can't deal with the
proliferation of nuclear weapons, can't deal with the greatest
threat we have with a country like Iran — that's one of the
leading state sponsors of terrorism — if the Security Council
can't deal with that, you have a real question of what it can
deal with.Well, Article 39 of the U.N. Charter does say:
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any
threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression
and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be
taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or
restore international peace and security.
Article 41 provides for measures "not including the use of
armed forces."
Article 42 provides for measures including the use of armed
forces.
But, Article 40 says:
In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the
Security Council may, before making the recommendations or
deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon
the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures
as it deems necessary or desirable.
Well, after three weeks of acrimonious debate, the UNSC issued a
non-binding Presidential Statement, essentially "calling" upon
the parties to settle their differences amongst themselves.
The Council did note "with serious concern" that "the IAEA is
unable to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear
materials or activities in Iran."
Of course, that's a reflection on the IAEA, not on Iran.
Nevertheless, Bush-Cheney-Bolton-Rice and their neo-crazy media
sycophants would have you believe that the UNSC gave Iran a
"deadline" to suspend all uranium enrichment activities within
30 days – or else.
Wrong!
In words very carefully chosen, the UNSC merely "called" upon
Iran to take the steps "required" by the IAEA Board so that the
Board's "outstanding questions can best be resolved and
confidence built in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's
program."
In effect, the UNSC remanded the "Iranian nuclear issue" to the
IAEA Board for resolution. That, of course, was what China and
Russia had insisted on all along.
And still insist on.
The UNSC did not address the question of whether the IAEA Board
had any right under the IAEA Statute or the U.N. Charter to make
such requirements.
Nor did the UNSC address the question of whether the Iranian
"nuclear issue" constituted "a threat to the peace, a breach of
the peace, or act of aggression."
Worse (for Bush-Cheney-Rice-Bolton), the Presidential Statement
began:
The Security Council reaffirms its commitment to the Treaty
on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and recalls the
right of States Party, in conformity with articles I and II of
that Treaty, to develop research, production and use of nuclear
energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.
In other words, Iran does have the rights under the NPT it
asserts and no one – not even the neo-crazies – can discriminate
against them.
Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy
implementing official for national security-related technical
matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and
Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office
of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. He
also served as legislative assistant for national security
affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. Dr. Prather had
earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National
Laboratory in New Mexico.
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Click below to read or post comments on this article