The US, weapons of mass destruction and the politics of
Regional-USA, Analysis, 9/24/2003
Iran has been given a deadline of October to meet more stringent and
intrusive examination into its nuclear program. This comes as the US has and
continues to see any hint of development in the nuclear area by third world
countries as a threat to its strategic interest, especially in the middle east
as it relates to its ability to control the oil rich region.
The US had falsely accused Iraq before of being a nuclear threat with vague and
unsubstantiated claims which are typically used by the US against such countries
that it has political opposition with. Phrases such as "nuclear
development" "Nuclear technology" "potential nuclear
weapons" "intention to develop nuclear programs" etc. are
brandished frequently and without any supporting evidence.
When the US made these claims against Iraq, the International Atomic Energy
Agency (AIEA) investigated and found nothing.
It is easy to make accusations that someone is developing or has
"intention" or "potential" to develop nuclear weapons, but
it is impossible to prove a negative, and defend against such accusations. The
US can always claim that Iran must be developing nuclear weapons. They must be
hiding these programs somewhere, or their intentions are hidden in their minds,
in a mountain, or someone's kitchen sink; as the AIEA also will be afraid, as it
did in Iraq, to say that a country is completely compliant. Because if it did
so, it would loose:
1. ability to pressure the country in the future, and
2. what if the organization did miss something? Always play it safe, as this
costs the AIEA nothing by keeping cases in an indetermined status.
That is what happened in Iraq. The AIEA and other organizations after endless
searching and investigations, found nothing. But they were never able to issue a
conclusive statement that there were absolutely no such weapons in Iraq. But
they came close enough to doing so. And when the US heard what it did not want
to hear from the AIEA, the US started a war, anyway, and when it occupied Iraq,
the US prevented the AIEA from further investigations in Iraq! This is the
oddest behavior, it may seem to some, coming from the USA. But like the UN and
other international institutions, the US uses them when it suits its purpose,
and prevents their function when they do not follow US interests and dictates.
In playing the politics of fear, as a political instrument to divide and
conquer, the US has become a master. It scares China and Japan about North
Korea. It scares Europe and Russia about Iran and Iraq. And, in the process
gives these major countries, especially the permanent members of UN Security
Council, all the reasons for not changing the structure of the international
Now Iran is in the cross hair of the US, and for strategic geopolitical reasons,
Iran was and is under US constant pressure to be subdued, and the AIEA is one of
the tools. The AIEA reports on Iraq that said they found nothing of the alleged
claims by the US on nuclear weapons; but this did not save Iraq from the US
attack. This was another clear case of where facts do not guide US policy;
rather, US policy is determined by its interests, and will use or distort facts
regardless of reality to achieve it objectives.
Now that Iran has figured out that it may be a very wise move to pull out of the
Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, the pressure is on the US and AIEA to outflank
such a move by imposing even a faster deadline on Iran, in order to quickly
bring the issue before the Security Council and bring the ultimate weapon of
economic sanctions on Iran, before Iran pulls out of the agreement and stops
from being subject to its rules and sanctions.
Iran, a country that knows that international law is meaningless and is applied
selectively, with the US at the helm of international institutions, may quickly
end up pulling out of the AIEA and Nuclear Non Proliferation meeting, realizing
that the consequences are much better than the alternative.
In a world where the countries who tell the third world that nuclear weapons are
a bad thing to have, while they themselves spend billions of dollars to
developing, amassing and refining such weapons, such arguments should sound
hollow to anyone with any bit of logic. As a matter of fact, the small guys
maybe in even greater need for such weapons; logic being, if it is good enough
for them, why not for us, especially since we, being more vulnerable, should aim
for even better nuclear weapons than the big guys. This may be a great reply by
countries accused of nuclear weapons development, especially, in the world we
live in, where only might makes right and makes the rules. Next time a country
is accused of developing nuclear weapons, should reply: indeed we are, and we
hope that will be mighty powerful, to keep the bullies away, until the world
becomes a safer place from such bullies by having effective international
institutions and international law that we can trust and respect, and is obeyed
It is time to unravel the ligitimacy of these flawed international institutions.
Many will be fearfull and hassitant, and others will find excuses as to why
change can't happen; they will say: we are poor; we have no alternatives at
present, etc. These argument are nothing but a call for maintaining the status
quo. Fundamental change is needed.
Let us start to disassemble and change the structure of these flawed
international institutions and create institutions that will take us where we
want to go; into a bright and hopeful future away from international
dictatorship, and into peace and prosperity that should be the right of
everyone, to be pursued, away from coercion and fear.
How can we manifest peace on
earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both
sexes) in our vision of Peace?
The WorldPeace Banner
To order a WorldPeace Insignia lapel pin, go to: Order
To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page
To the WorldPeace Peace Page