Iran seeks to review nuke watchdog plan

[mcpeepants]

Iran seeks to review nuke watchdog plan

By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Sun Jan 28, 5:13 PM ET

TEHRAN, Iran -
Iran said Sunday it needs time to review a plan proposed by the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency that calls for holding off on imposing
U.N. Security Council sanctions if Tehran suspends uranium enrichment.
ADVERTISEMENT

The
International Atomic Energy Agency chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, proposed the simultaneous time-out plan during the
World Economic Forum in Switzerland in an effort to end the standoff between the West and Iran over the Islamic republic's suspect nuclear program.

"Time should be allocated to see if the plan has the capacity to solve the (nuclear) case," Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, told reporters during a joint news conference with Russia's national security adviser, Igor Ivanov. He did not elaborate.

The Security Council last month voted unanimously to impose limited sanctions on Iran after it ignored demands to halt enrichment. Iran faces the prospect of additional sanctions unless it stops enrichment within a 60-day period that ends next month.

While Iran says its nuclear program has the sole purpose of using atomic power to generate electricity, the U.S. and its allies believe Tehran is secretly developing atomic weapons in violation of treaty commitments.

Ivanov expressed optimism the dispute can be resolved if both sides agree to ElBaradei's proposal.

"The situation of Iran's nuclear case is critical. Reducing its intensity is our aim," Ivanov said. "We are currently discussing to remove obstacles from the way of negotiations. All sides should show flexibility and avoid statements that worsen the situation."

Iranian state-run radio said earlier Sunday that Tehran wants Moscow to help mediate the standoff, saying Tehran's leaders are looking to Russia for "new proposals, such as enrichment of uranium on Russian soil."

The Kremlin proposed last year that Iran move its uranium enrichment work to Russian territory, where it could be better monitored to alleviate international suspicions. Enrichment can produce material usable both as fuel for electricity-generating nuclear reactors and for atomic bombs.

Iranian leaders had said they were interested in the idea, but nothing ever came of it as oil-rich Iran insisted its nuclear project is intended only to produce reactor fuel.

State radio also said Russia pledged to complete Iran's Bushehr nuclear power station on schedule this year. Russia last year agreed to ship fuel to Bushehr by this March and start up the facility in September, with electricity generation to start by November.

As a U.N. Security Council permanent member, Russia last month forced the body to water down proposed punitive measures that would have imposed curbs on the Bushehr project. But the Kremlin then supported limited sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment.

Ivanov's visit came as Iranian officials issued contradictory statements about progress on expanding enrichment facilities at the Natanz nuclear facility by installing 3,000 centrifuges, which spin uranium gas into enriched material.

Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said Sunday that Iran was continuing its nuclear activity according to schedule.

"If we begin to install centrifuges we will publicly announce it," Saeedi said. Earlier, Hossein Simorgh, spokesman for the Iranian nuclear agency's public relations department, also said new centrifuges had not been installed at Natanz, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

Those remarks appeared to contradict lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi, who said Saturday that Iran was currently installing the 3,000 centrifuges.

The IAEA had no comment on the Iranian statements, spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said Sunday. ElBaradei said recently he believed Iran planned to begin work in February on an underground facility to hold uranium enrichment equipment.

A senior U.S. State Department official warned Iran on Friday against accelerating its atomic program.

"If Iran takes this step, it is going to confront universal international opposition," Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said. "If they think they can get away with 3,000 centrifuges without another Security Council resolution and additional international pressure, then they are very badly mistaken."

For now, the only known assembled centrifuge operations in Iran consist of two linked chains of 164 machines each and two smaller setups.

[Logan13]

stall, stall, stall...........................

[mcpeepants]

i think Iran should get involved in stabalizing Iraq. The US will eventually leave while Iran can't. I don't think Iran wants thousands of Iraqi refugees flooding into it's country particularly because it's already dealing over a million Afghan refugees.

[Logan13]

i think Iran should get involved in stabalizing Iraq. The US will eventually leave while Iran can't. I don't think Iran wants thousands of Iraqi refugees flooding into it's country particularly because it's already dealing over a million Afghan refugees.

Do you honestly believe that Iran truely wants to help just to get Iraq back on it's feet? Why would you say in the past that the US only wanted Iraqi oil and yet not apply your same thinking to Iran?

[Logan13]

i think Iran should get involved in stabalizing Iraq. The US will eventually leave while Iran can't. I don't think Iran wants thousands of Iraqi refugees flooding into it's country particularly because it's already dealing over a million Afghan refugees.

Iran is at the center of funding the insurgency in Iraq in the first place........come on man.

[J.S.N.]

Do you honestly believe that Iran truely wants to help just to get Iraq back on it's feet? Why would you say in the past that the US only wanted Iraqi oil and yet not apply your same thinking to Iran?

iran has oil, for starters.

[Logan13]

iran has oil, for starters.

so they would not want more oil under their control, because they are too pure of heart to think that way? Just like the fact that although they do have all that oil, they now see the need to develop a nuke program for "energy" needs only...........

[mcpeepants]

Do you honestly believe that Iran truely wants to help just to get Iraq back on it's feet? Why would you say in the past that the US only wanted Iraqi oil and yet not apply your same thinking to Iran?

Iran would like a stable shia Iraq. Iran also helped us in stabalizing Afghanistan. An unstable Iraq would provide safe havens for anti-Iranian kurdish terrorists and etc. There would also be a flux of refugees into Iran which Iran doesn't want.

[mcpeepants]

Iran is at the center of funding the insurgency in Iraq in the first place........come on man.

for years the white house said that foreign al qaieda elements were responsible for all the violence. now they're saying Iran is responsible for all the violence. the white house can't accept that they f'ed up the Iraq, that they can't provide security, and wont take responsibility.

[Logan13]

Iran would like a stable shia Iraq. Iran also helped us in stabalizing Afghanistan. An unstable Iraq would provide safe havens for anti-Iranian kurdish terrorists and etc. There would also be a flux of refugees into Iran which Iran doesn't want.

The Kurds would not go to Iran anymore than Israeli's would migrate into Palestine. You do understand that Afghanistan is a sunni country, right? It is not shiite.

[Logan13]

for years the white house said that foreign al qaieda elements were responsible for all the violence. now they're saying Iran is responsible for all the violence. the white house can't accept that they f'ed up the Iraq, that they can't provide security, and wont take responsibility.

There are two major Islamic sects: Sunni and Shiite.
The two groups are very similar, although the Shiites exalt their Imams as a line of inspired teachers. The two sects have also had sharp political differences. The split stems from the early days of Islam and arguments over Mohammed's successors as caliph or leader.

Sunni comprise about 85 percent of all Muslims. Nations with Sunni majority include Egypt, Saudi Arabia and most other Arab nations, as well as non-Arab Turkey and Afghanistan. Most Palestinian Muslims are Sunni.

Shiite are the second-largest sect. Iran is the only nation with an overwhelming Shiite majority. Iraq, Lebanon and Bahrain also have large Shiite communities.

[mcpeepants]

so they would not want more oil under their control, because they are too pure of heart to think that way? Just like the fact that although they do have all that oil, they now see the need to develop a nuke program for "energy" needs only...........

nuclear energy = less domestic petroleum use = sell more oil = get more money

i think Iran also wants a nuclear bomb but it's not something that worries me.

[Logan13]

for years the white house said that foreign al qaieda elements were responsible for all the violence. now they're saying Iran is responsible for all the violence. the white house can't accept that they f'ed up the Iraq, that they can't provide security, and wont take responsibility.

sunni al quaeda is fighting the shiites, they are both vying for Iraqi control. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[mcpeepants]

The Kurds would not go to Iran anymore than Israeli's would migrate into Palestine. You do understand that Afghanistan is a sunni country, right? It is not shiite.

kurds already live in eastern North Eastern Iran. They would would like to create a greater Kurdistan the encompasses part of Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. PJAK is a terrorist kurdish group in Iran and is listed as a terrorist group by the US state department.

I know Afghanistan is sunni. Did you know the Iran almost went to war with the Taliban?

[mcpeepants]

There are two major Islamic sects: Sunni and Shiite.
The two groups are very similar, although the Shiites exalt their Imams as a line of inspired teachers. The two sects have also had sharp political differences. The split stems from the early days of Islam and arguments over Mohammed's successors as caliph or leader.

Sunni comprise about 85 percent of all Muslims. Nations with Sunni majority include Egypt, Saudi Arabia and most other Arab nations, as well as non-Arab Turkey and Afghanistan. Most Palestinian Muslims are Sunni.

Shiite are the second-largest sect. Iran is the only nation with an overwhelming Shiite majority. Iraq, Lebanon and Bahrain also have large Shiite communities.

is this an 8th grade world history lesson. it doesn't answer what i posted.

[Logan13]

kurds already live in eastern North Eastern Iran. They would would like to create a greater Kurdistan the encompasses part of Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. PJAK is a terrorist kurdish group in Iran and is listed as a terrorist group by the US state department.

I know Afghanistan is sunni. Did you know the Iran almost went to war with the Taliban?

yes, do you know why...........

[Logan13]

is this an 8th grade world history lesson. it doesn't answer what i posted.

just making sure that you had all of the facts..........

[Logan13]

kurds already live in eastern North Eastern Iran. They would would like to create a greater Kurdistan the encompasses part of Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. PJAK is a terrorist kurdish group in Iran and is listed as a terrorist group by the US state department.

I know Afghanistan is sunni. Did you know the Iran almost went to war with the Taliban?

Iranian Involvement in Afghanistan
01/17/07
http://jamestown.org/terrorism/news/...icleid=2370239
The Afghan media has published an increasing number of critical reports about Iran's secret contacts with insurgent groups in Afghanistan, specifically those groups fighting against the U.S. presence in the country. On September 5, for instance, the Pashto-language newspaper Weesa referred to unidentified local officials in Nimruz province who claimed that Tehran was financing and providing weaponry to Afghanistan's militant groups. In March 2006, the Afghan official news agency Bakhtar reported on the secret activities of Iranians, including officers belonging to the armed forces, in border towns inside Afghanistan. Bakhtar quoted a high-ranking Afghan border policeman in Herat province, General Mohammad Ayub Safi, saying that "in only the first quarter of this year [2006], more than 10 Iranian officials have been arrested in Herat who were allegedly involved in illegal activities." These developments show that Iran has been increasing its operations in Afghanistan in an effort to gain influence with the contending insurgent factions and to hasten the departure of U.S. troops from the country.

Tehran has a long history of close contact with militant groups in the region, especially with Shiite groups in central Afghanistan. According to Kabul-based analyst Ustad Faizullah Amini, who spoke to The Jamestown Foundation in December, Iran has been against the Talibanization of Afghanistan, but the presence of U.S. troops at its doorsteps has changed the direction of its foreign policy. Now, Tehran is willing to cooperate with different groups to reach the shared goal of defeating the United States in Afghanistan. After the September 11 attacks, an unidentified official source in Tehran said that Iran's new policy in Afghanistan would be to play all available cards in its hand to defeat U.S. efforts there (Asia Times, February 14, 2002). According to Amini, this fear has led Iran to act fast, and cooperate with all anti-American forces in the region regardless of their religion and language. In addition to Amini, many other regional experts argue that the current escalation of violence in some parts of Afghanistan is a direct result of Tehran's new strategy.

Background of Iranian Involvement in Afghanistan

More than a decade ago, while mujahideen leaders were toppling the Moscow-backed Afghan leader Mohammad Najibullah, it was predicted that a strong Sunni fundamentalist regime in Kabul could come into conflict with Shiite Iran. This fear led Tehran to support groups such as the Shiite Hazara parties and the influential Tajik commander Ismail Khan in Herat province. When the Taliban finally gained control of Afghanistan, Iran referred to the development as a Sunni and U.S. plot to isolate Iran. The relationship between Kabul and Tehran took a more serious hit when Taliban forces killed seven Iranian diplomats who were serving in Mazar-e-Sharif in August 1998. This Taliban action led Tehran to announce its open support for all forces that would resist the Taliban and to increase its activities to bring anti-Taliban factions together. The most notable act by Tehran was to allow the influential Pashtun leader, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, to be stationed in Iran.
Tehran gave thousands of Hazara leaders refuge, training and financial support to fight against the Taliban. Yet the involvement of the al-Qaeda network in the September 11 attacks and the impending U.S. invasion of Afghanistan led Iran to again re-shape its strategy in the region since it considered the U.S. presence in the region a much greater threat than the unorganized Taliban.

9/11 Changes Iranian Policy toward Afghanistan

Shortly before the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, Tehran made some swift policy changes in the region, which were evidenced by comments said by the top political and religious leader in Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. In his televised speech on September 26, Khamenei said, "The Islamic Republic of Iran will not offer any assistance to America and its alliance in their attacks [on Afghanistan]." He also accused the United States of seeking to establish itself in Central Asia—Afghanistan, Pakistan and the subcontinent—under the pretext of "establishing security."

Many regional experts argue that Tehran does not believe that a stable Afghanistan with a large, long-term U.S. troop presence is in its interests. Tehran worries that if both its neighbors, Afghanistan and Iraq, are stabilized, Iran will be sandwiched between two pro-U.S. governments. In such a situation, "If Iran has not been attacked, it will definitely be troubled by internal pressures, such as minorities, inspired by the developments in the neighborhood," said Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin, a regional analyst with the Ankara-based think-tank Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies, who was interviewed in December.

The difference between new and past Iranian policies is that now Iran is ready to cooperate and support any group, regardless of their religion and language, who can fight the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, according to Bahmen Karimi's column published recently in the local Afghan paper Arman-e-Milli. The columnist also argues that the escalation in fighting in the bordering provinces with Iran and in the Shiite populated central Afghan provinces is the direct result of the Iranian strategy. For instance, on October 2, 2006, The Guardian published an article stating that "military and diplomatic sources said they had received numerous reports of Iranians meeting tribal elders in Taliban-influenced areas, bringing offers of military or more often financial support for the fight against foreign forces." In addition, Afghan analyst Amini proposes that the armed groups who have been sidelined by the current central regime in Afghanistan create potential forces for any outsider such as Iran to harness and influence. He specifically points out some of the commanders of the former Northern Alliance, as well as Shiite forces in central Afghanistan, who feel ignored by the new administration. One of these is A**ul Rashid Dostum who, according to Aina TV on November 25, 2006, met with Iranian Ambassador to Afghanistan Reza Bahrami on November 24, 2006. The influence of Iran on the charismatic Tajik leader Ismail Khan is already widely known.

Multi-Layered Iranian Policy on Afghanistan

According to reports published in local Afghan newspapers, including Weesa, Iranian involvement is not limited to unofficial cooperation with militant forces, but in fact includes official efforts to influence the Afghan administration. Some regional experts argue that Iran is using the political tension between Afghanistan and Pakistan in its favor, leveraging the fact that Iran is the only route by which Afghanistan can maintain foreign trade. Afghanistan is becoming increasingly dependent on Iran for its transit trade route as a result of the tense Afghan-Pakistan relationship. Through this route, Afghanistan receives key imports such as electronic equipment, cars and spare parts—much of which originates in Japan. Food, clothing and other essential products are also supplied through Iran. This reality limits Washington's options to pressure Tehran since if Iran blocks its border, the Afghan economy could collapse.

In the meantime, the Iranian government is active in the financial sector as well. According to the Iranian official news agency IRNA, the chambers of commerce of the two countries have recently signed a number of documents, which are expected to make Iran a major player in the Afghan economy. Iran has become one of the largest donors in the reconstruction process in Afghanistan. An Iranian Foreign Ministry official puts the total amount of aid to Afghanistan since 2001 at about $600 million.

The Iranian media is also publishing provocative reports against the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, blaming Washington for not delivering what it promised to the Afghan people. The well-known Iranian newspaper Jamhur-e-Islami published an article on the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks questioning the legacy and intentions of the United States in Afghanistan: "The Afghan people do not see any improvement in their lives and welfare as it was promised to them. Moreover, they are forced to bow to the presence of foreigners on their land and suffer the shame of occupation. Now the Afghan people know that America's goal in attacking Afghanistan and occupying it was part of the global plan America pursues for domination of the Middle East."

Iran encourages students who have graduated in Iran to be more active in establishing religious schools in Afghanistan and to strengthen Afghan-Iran ties. The education attaché at the Iranian Embassy in Kabul was quoted by Weesa on November 6 saying that "Shiite students who have graduated from Iranian universities are the messengers of Iran in Afghanistan and they should play a more important role." The Iranian official called on the Afghan government to permit Iran to launch cable network offices that operate Iranian educational programs in order to curb U.S. cultural influence in Afghanistan. Iran has recently inaugurated its huge cultural center in Kabul, which works to promote Iranian culture and to spread official propaganda by organizing workshops and literary exchange programs. In opposition to these Iranian efforts, Western countries have done little in Afghanistan, which is a result of the extensive cultural, religious and linguistic differences. Iran has used this void to change the situation in Afghanistan in its own favor.

Conclusion

If the increasing violence—not only on the Afghan-Pak border, but also in the areas bordering Iran and in the central Shiite populated provinces—is taken into account, the view of the aforementioned Afghan analysts seems to carry value. Experts on the region believe that the insurgency in Afghanistan has many directions, one of which is leaning toward Tehran. Insurgent fighters in Afghanistan traditionally opposed to working with Iran may have also changed their policy in light of the mutual short-term interest of removing U.S. and Western influence from the country. Due to the strategic location of Iran and its importance to the Afghan economy, however, the Kabul administration has avoided speaking publicly about Iranian influence in Afghanistan, as they believe, as a result of political tension with Pakistan, Iran is Kabul's last significant open door to the world.

[mcpeepants]

sunni al quaeda is fighting the shiites, they are both vying for Iraqi control. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

then you would realize Iran would not like an al qaieda haven in Iraq because Iran is also majority shia. that's why it is in there interest to stabalize the Iraq.

I just commenting on the white houses shifting rational and shifting the blame and responsibility of Iraq from themselves.

[J.S.N.]

There are two major Islamic sects: Sunni and Shiite.
The two groups are very similar, although the Shiites exalt their Imams as a line of inspired teachers. The two sects have also had sharp political differences. The split stems from the early days of Islam and arguments over Mohammed's successors as caliph or leader.

Sunni comprise about 85 percent of all Muslims. Nations with Sunni majority include Egypt, Saudi Arabia and most other Arab nations, as well as non-Arab Turkey and Afghanistan. Most Palestinian Muslims are Sunni.

Shiite are the second-largest sect. Iran is the only nation with an overwhelming Shiite majority. Iraq, Lebanon and Bahrain also have large Shiite communities.

rofl nice cut-and-paste. it's nice to know you're finally learning something about the middle east.

[Logan13]

then you would realize Iran would not like an al qaieda haven in Iraq because Iran is also majority shia. that's why it is in there interest to stabalize the Iraq.

I just commenting on the white houses shifting rational and shifting the blame and responsibility of Iraq from themselves.

again........shiites backed by Iran are there to not only fight the US, they are there to fight the al-quada because they do not want another sunni based gov't. They want a shiite based, Iranian backed gov't there. I.E. the Iranian involvement in Iraq is occurring for the same reasons that Iran is backing Hezbollah against the Lebanese democratic gov't..........power and to spread their shiite view of Islam. You make Iran sound like some peace-keeping/loving organization........

[J.S.N.]

so they would not want more oil under their control, because they are too pure of heart to think that way? Just like the fact that although they do have all that oil, they now see the need to develop a nuke program for "energy" needs only...........

they don't even have adequate facilities to extract their own oil. you think they're going to rebuild iraq's infrastructure?

[Logan13]

they don't even have adequate facilities to extract their own oil. you think they're going to rebuild iraq's infrastructure?

so your saying that it wouldn't be a good investment than?

[J.S.N.]

i'm saying they don't have the resources.

[Logan13]

rofl nice cut-and-paste. it's nice to know you're finally learning something about the middle east.

i had a sunni room mate in college, which was in 1992............and my knowledge of the middle east and world affairs in general has never been in question. The difference between you and I is that I use more than one source of information to form my views..........

[mcpeepants]

Afghanistan/Iran: Relations Between Tehran, Kabul Growing Stronger

By Golnaz Esfandiari

Afghan President Hamid Karzai arrived in Iran today for a two-day visit during which he will officially inaugurate a road linking the Doqarun border region in northeastern Iran with the western Afghan city of Herat. Karzai's Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Khatami, will also participate in the ceremony. Iran recently completed work on the 122-kilometer road, which both sides hope will be a further boost to bilateral trade. Iran is already one of Afghanistan’s main trade partners. RFE/RL takes a closer look at the broadening ties between Tehran and Kabul.

Prague, 26 January 2005 (RFE/RL) -- This is Karzai's first official visit since taking presidential office in early December.

He is leading a high-level delegation that includes the ministers of the interior, finance, and economy, as well as the minister for refugees.

Karzai and Khatami are set to inaugurate the Doqarun-Herat road tomorrow.

The Iranian Embassy in Kabul said Karzai and Khatami would also open a newly completed power transmission line running from Torbat-e Jam in northeastern Iran to Herat, as well as eight border stations constructed by Iran in Afghanistan’s Herat, Nimruz, and Farah provinces.

Iran is working on several other reconstruction projects in Afghanistan. Media in December reported the opening of the first Iranian bank (Ariyan Bank) in Kabul.

Iran and Afghanistan are also cooperating in the fight against the trafficking of drugs from Afghanistan.

Iran’s strained relations with the United States have not prevented Tehran from strengthening its economic and trade cooperation with Kabul since the U.S.-led fall of the Taliban in late 2001.

Colonel Christopher Langton, who heads the defense analysis department at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said Iran is an important country in the future reconstruction and development of Afghanistan.

“They are being closely linked by efforts against the Taliban in the past, but also because of the influence that Iran can bring there with the Hazara population [who, like Iranians, are Shi'a Muslims]. And in the development sector, there are already projects which Iran is involved in -- for instance, the road from Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf up through Afghanistan to Central Asia is a very, very important project for the future of Afghanistan," Langton said. "There is a whole list of political, economic, and security issues which connect Afghanistan and Iran.”

Iran and Afghanistan are also connected historically and culturally. And Iran’s strained relations with the United States have not prevented Tehran from strengthening its economic and trade cooperation with Kabul since the U.S.-led fall of the Taliban in late 2001.

President Karzai’s trip to Iran comes amid growing speculation about a U.S. military strike on Iran. An article published recently in "The New Yorker" magazine said U.S. Special Forces have been penetrating eastern Iran from Afghanistan since last summer in order to identify sites for possible strikes.

In a recent interview with RFE/RL's Afghan Service, Afghan Defense Ministry spokesman General Mohammad Zaher Azimi denied the report.

“No forces have entered Iran from Afghanistan," Azimi said. "Afghanistan’s policy and strategy is to have good relations with its neighbors. We want to be sure about their non-interference, and they also should be sure about Afghanistan’s non-interference.”

A spokesman for Karzai, Rafiullah Mujaddedi, said he was unsure whether the Afghan and Iranian presidents would discuss reports that the U.S. military -- which has thousands of troops in Afghanistan -- had conducted spying missions inside Iran.

Langton said a U.S. military strike on Iran would have a deeply negative impact on ties between the two neighbors.

“The Iranian regime sees [Karzai] as somebody who was brought to power quite legitimately, but nevertheless on the back of very, very strong support from the U.S., which is still to a large extent maintaining its position inside Afghanistan," Langton said. "So any American military action against Iran -- however likely or unlikely -- is going to affect the way Iran and Afghanistan develop their relationship in the immediate and near future."

Lieutenant General Eric Olson, the operational commander of U.S. forces pursuing Taliban and Al-Qaeda remnants in Afghanistan, told AP on 24 January that he knew of no U.S. spying missions in Iran.

He also cautioned that any instability in the Islamic Republic could have an adverse effect on U.S. operations in Afghanistan.

Karzai and Khatami are also expected to discuss security issues and the repatriation of Afghan refugees living in Iran.

There have been reports in recent weeks of round-ups of illegal Afghan immigrants in Iran. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has expressed concern over the wave of arrests and said that there are indications that some registered refugees are being forcibly returned as well.

Iran has been host to more than 2 million Afghan refugees during the last two decades. But since the fall of the Taliban, Iranian officials have called on the refugees to return home.

The UNHCR estimates there are still 950,000 Afghan refugees in Iran.

Golnaz Esfandiari is a broadcaster with Radio Farda currently working in the News and Current Affairs Department as a correspondent. Born in Tehran, she has a master's degree in clinical psychology from Prague's Charles University. She joined RFE/RL in 1998. As a broadcaster she has focused on human rights, women's issues, and the environment. Esfandiari is fluent in English, French, Czech, and Persian.


Copyright (c) 2005. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. www.rferl.org

[Logan13]

i'm saying they don't have the resources.

so Iran is on a peacekeeping mission, just like their doing with hezbollah in Lebanon?

[mcpeepants]

again........shiites backed by Iran are there to not only fight the US, they are there to fight the al-quada because they do not want another sunni based gov't. They want a shiite based, Iranian backed gov't there. I.E. the Iranian involvement in Iraq is occurring for the same reasons that Iran is backing Hezbollah against the Lebanese democratic gov't..........power and to spread their shiite view of Islam. You make Iran sound like some peace-keeping/loving organization........

without foreign interference, an elected Iraqi government is going to be Shia (they're the majority) and they will be friendly to Iran because countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan are hostile to the idea of a shia Iraq.

[J.S.N.]

i had a sunni room mate in college, which was in 1992............and my knowledge of the middle east and world affairs in general has never been in question. The difference between you and I is that I use more than one source of information to form my views..........

yeah fox news AND cnn.

so Iran is on a peacekeeping mission, just like their doing with hezbollah in Lebanon?

what are we there for? a smorgasbord of reasons, just like iran. i'm not omniscient, but yeah i'm guessing that since they were at war with iraq less than 20 years ago and took ~1 illion casualties, they do have a vested interest in a friendly iraq.

[Logan13]

yeah fox news AND cnn.
what are we there for? a smorgasbord of reasons, just like iran. i'm not omniscient, but yeah i'm guessing that since they were at war with iraq less than 20 years ago and took ~1 illion casualties, they do have a vested interest in a friendly iraq.

I'm just glad that you and your 20-something years of experience are here to keep us all straight..........

[Bigen12]

It's just a stalling tactic, they'll start the ball rolling, even get the inspectors there, then when the inspectors get close to something that Iran doesn't want them to see, such as their work on a nuclear bomb, the'll start the same ole shit...

[yourmom]

It's just a stalling tactic, they'll start the ball rolling, even get the inspectors there, then when the inspectors get close to something that Iran doesn't want them to see, such as their work on a nuclear bomb, the'll start the same ole shit...

Agreed....

I also beleive that Iran should get involved, so we can get hell out of there. Then a new war will start and one of them will turn that whole sand box to glass.... problem solved.

Isreal has a ichy trigger finger, and their tired of being pushed around by everyone over there.

[Kärnfysikern]

It's just a stalling tactic, they'll start the ball rolling, even get the inspectors there, then when the inspectors get close to something that Iran doesn't want them to see, such as their work on a nuclear bomb, the'll start the same ole shit...

But they would have to configure the entire centrifuge cascades in a manner that is blatantly obvious if they want to enrichen to weapons grade and they have no source for plutonium. So they cant sneak build a bomb by just keeping a few small facilities hidden. Unless they have some black market source of weapons grade material. If they do no inspection will help because then they can build a bomb in any basement.

[Logan13]

But they would have to configure the entire centrifuge cascades in a manner that is blatantly obvious if they want to enrichen to weapons grade and they have no source for plutonium. So they cant sneak build a bomb by just keeping a few small facilities hidden. Unless they have some black market source of weapons grade material. If they do no inspection will help because then they can build a bomb in any basement.

Perhaps you have not heard about this............
Bomb Grade Uranium Seized In Sting
TOPIX.NET
01/25/07
It was one of the most serious cases of smuggling of nuclear material in recent years: A Russian man, authorities allege, tried to sell a small amount of nuclear-bomb grade uranium in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket.

The buy that took place last summer, it turned out, was a setup by Republic of Georgia authorities, with the help of the CIA. Their quiet sting operation - neither U.S. nor Georgian officials have publicized it - is an unsettling reminder about the possibility of terrorists acquiring nuclear bomb-making material on the black market.

No evidence suggests this particular case was terrorist-related.

"Given the serious consequences of the detonation of an improvised nuclear explosive device, even small numbers of incidents involving HEU (highly enriched uranium) or plutonium are of very high concern," said Melissa Fleming of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency.

Billions of dollars have been spent to tighten controls over nuclear inventories, reports CBS News correspondent Bob Orr. But former Senator Sam Nunn, who now heads the Nuclear Threat Initiative, warns that not all weapons and ingredients are locked down.

"That's the raw material of terrorism, and it's not properly secured in many cases," Nunn said. "Small amounts, but enough to make a crude weapon. A crude weapon could destroy a city and, indeed, shake the confidence of the world."

Details of the investigation, which also involved the FBI and Energy Department, were provided to The Associated Press by U.S. officials and Georgian Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili.

Authorities say they do not know how the man acquired the nuclear material or if his claims of access to much larger quantities were true. He and three Georgian accomplices are in Georgian custody and not cooperating with investigators.

Meanwhile, Russian authorities have confirmed that weapons-grade uranium was confiscated from a Russian citizen in neighboring Georgia, but claim the ex-Soviet republic has not cooperated with Moscow while investigating the incident, the Interfax news agency reported Thursday.

According to Interfax, an unnamed source at Russia's nuclear agency, Rosatom, said the Russian was detained in December 2005, while a Georgian Interior Ministry official, Shota Utiashvili, said Thursday that he was detained in February 2006. Utiashvili identified the man as Oleg Khinsagov, a resident of Vladikavkaz in North Ossetia, a Russian region that borders Georgia.

There was no immediate response to requests for comment lodged with Rosatom, the Federal Security Service and the Interior Ministry prior to the Interfax report. Following the report, Rosatom spokesman Ivan Dybov said the agency would not comment.

Merabishvili said Georgian attempts to trace the nuclear material since the arrest and confirm whether the man indeed had access to larger quantities have foundered from a lack of cooperation from Russia.

Merabishvili said he was revealing the story out of frustration with Russia's response and the need to illustrate the dangers of a breakdown in security cooperation in the region.

Interfax also cited an unidentified source at Rosatom as saying Georgian authorities had given Russia too small a sample to determine its origin and had refused to provide other information.

Russia has tense relations with Georgia, like Russia a former Soviet republic. Georgia has been troubled by Russia's support for separatists in two breakaway Georgian border regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

The sting was set up after Georgian authorities uncovered extensive smuggling networks while investigating criminal groups operating in the breakaway republics, Merabishvili said.

"When we sent buyers, the channels through Abkhazia and South Ossetia began to expand, and we started seeing a huge flow of materials," he said. "Sometimes it was low-grade enriched materials, but this was the first instance of highly enriched material."

According to his account, during an investigation in South Ossetia, a Georgian undercover agent posing as a rich foreign buyer made contact with the Russian seller in North Ossetia, which is part of Russia.

After the Russian offered to sell the sample, the agent rebuffed requests that the transaction occur in North Ossetia, insisting the Russian come to Tbilisi, the Georgian capital.

At a meeting in Tbilisi, the man pulled out from his pocket a plastic bag containing the material.

"He was offering this as the first stage in a deal and said he had other pieces, Merabishvili said. "We don't know if that was true."

Uranium has a low level of radioactive emission and can be transported more safely than other radioactive materials.

The man was arrested and sentenced to eight to 10 years in prison on smuggling charges. His accomplices were sentenced on lesser charges.

Russian authorities took a sample of the material but failed to offer any assistance despite requests for help from the Georgians, Merabishvili said.

"We were ready to provide all the information, but unfortunately no one arrived from Russia, not even to interview this person," Merabishvili said. "It is surprising because it is in Russian interests to secure these materials. There are terrorist organizations in Russia who would pay huge amounts of money for this."

The Georgians asked for U.S. assistance. Agents from the FBI and the Energy Department took the material back to the United States, where it was tested by the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration.

"The material was analyzed by agency nuclear experts and confirmed to be highly enriched uranium," said Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the agency.

Fleming, of the IAEA, said the agency was aware of the Tbilisi seizure and was expecting formal notification from Georgia soon.

The CIA would not comment on the case, and the FBI confirmed its involvement in the investigation but nothing more.

Merabishvili, who was visiting Washington this week, said he did not have some details of the investigation, including the exact date the arrest was made or the full name of the suspect. Further efforts to clarify with the Georgian Embassy were not successful.

None of the U.S. officials would confirm the weight of the seizure or its quality, but Merabishvili said it was about 100 grams (3.5 ounces) of uranium enriched by more than 90 percent.

Uranium enriched at 90 percent is weapons grade.

The amount confiscated wasn't enough to make a bomb, but the suspect claimed he had four pounds more, Orr reports, and officials say that's reason enough for concern.

A nuclear bomb of a design similar to the one exploded over Hiroshima in 1945 would require about 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of uranium enriched at over 90 percent, according to Matthew Bunn, a senior research associate who focuses on nuclear theft and terrorism at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Bunn said that a more sophisticated implosion type nuclear bomb would require 15 to 18 kilograms (33 to 40 pounds).

According to an IAEA database, there have been 16 previous confirmed cases in which either highly enriched uranium or plutonium have been recovered by authorities since 1993.

In most cases the recoveries have involved smaller quantities than the Tbilisi case. But in 1994, 2.72 kilograms (6 pounds) of highly enriched uranium intended for sale were seized by police in the Czech Republic. In 2003, Georgian border guards using detection devices provided by the United States caught an Armenian man with about 170 grams (5 ounces) of HEU, according to the State Department.

Fleming said examples of stolen or missing bomb-grade nuclear material, including highly enriched uranium and plutonium, are rare and troubling.

David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and head of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, said that lacking help from Russia, the CIA may be looking to other allies to help identify who has access to lost nuclear material.

"Russian cooperation in answering these questions is critical, but it has not been forthcoming," he said. "One way to identify who is active in trading these materials is to conduct sting operations."

[Kärnfysikern]

I saw it the other day and its worrying. I hope the russian criminals is now being treated in the manner they deserve.

But it doesnt change anything regarding nations like Iran. If they can buy weapons grade uranium there is nothing we can do to provent them from getting a bomb. So its buisness as usual regarding inspections ect.

Aslong as Iran agress to all inspections they will be a couple of years from a bomb. If they cant get the uranium in any other way.

[Bigen12]

But they would have to configure the entire centrifuge cascades in a manner that is blatantly obvious if they want to enrichen to weapons grade and they have no source for plutonium. So they cant sneak build a bomb by just keeping a few small facilities hidden. Unless they have some black market source of weapons grade material. If they do no inspection will help because then they can build a bomb in any basement.

Understood, but again, they will take them to the facilities where this isn't anything going on, and when they ask to see the facilities where the real work is going on, it' will be the same old shit.

Don't get me wrong, we should go for the inspections, but with our eyes wide open and don't lift off of them an inch until we receive full cooperation.

[J.S.N.]

^ you're using self-contained logic bigen, which reads:

"if we don't find weapons-grade, then they;ve hidden it too well."

that's a dangerous assumption, especially considering it's the exact same sell that landed us in iraq.

[Bigen12]

^ you're using self-contained logic bigen, which reads:

"if we don't find weapons-grade, then they;ve hidden it too well."

that's a dangerous assumption, especially considering it's the exact same sell that landed us in iraq.

That wasn't my intention.

My thoughts are that they will let the ball roll, until we get to the right facility then stop the game. Not that if we don't find it, it's hidden too well.

[Kärnfysikern]

Understood, but again, they will take them to the facilities where this isn't anything going on, and when they ask to see the facilities where the real work is going on, it' will be the same old shit.

Don't get me wrong, we should go for the inspections, but with our eyes wide open and don't lift off of them an inch until we receive full cooperation.

Yeah I agree with that.
But I can understand that Iran is a bit pissed. Because they did allow full sanctions and did halt all enrichment for several years. But it was never good enough for the west. For what reason I dont quite know though