1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Response to Lukas

Reader comment on item: Ambitious Iran, Troubled Neighbors

Submitted by Mistress76uk (Mitra) (United Kingdom), Sep 23, 2005 at 10:22

Dear Lukas,
I suspect you were referring to the interview by Shihab Rattansi with Melissa Fleming from the IAEA in Vienna, on the issue of nuclear monitoring in Iran? Here is a transcript (quasi) of the interview ( which incidentaly I wrote on www.cnnfan.org )

Shihab asked if it was the IAEA's position that it would be constructive to send Iran to the UN Security Council? Melissa replied that the Secretary did not have a position on it, as the other 35 countries would be involved and negotiations held behind closed doors and a number of countries were getting a resolution together. Shihab interjected that the latest IAEA assessment of the Iran's nuclear programme shows no contravention of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, how has Iran done anything wrong? Melissa replied that Iran had a clandestine programme for 18 years, and that Iran had gone above and beyond it's legal requirements, and would need remaining questions answered, by seeking access to documents and areas in question. Shihab pointed out that there were reports from diplomats and the associated press that Iran was prepared to give such an offer this week. Mel replied that it would be welcomed, but had not had such offers. Shihab went on to say that the main charge was that the IAEA was being used as something of a political football in pursuit of what Ahmadinijad, the President of Iran, calls a nuclear apartheid. Iran is being sanctioned even though it is a member of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and offering inspections! India, Pakistan and Israel aren't getting sanctioned by the IAEA, the Western nations who are supposed members of the treaty are breaking their vows by updating their nuclear weapons regimes. Is the IAEA just a big nuclear football for the US and the EU to play with? Mel replied that it was a verification only for countries who had signed the treaty, and that they delivered the facts, the politics, being left to the countries involved. Shihab asked if there could be sanctions placed on the US & UK for updating their nuclear arsenals when in fact they are supposed to be disarming according to the nuclear disarmament treaty? Mel replied that they were only verifying, and the politics was nothing to do with them.

That was his only interview on the subject of Iran for that day in question. The lines you were referring to were not that of his own, but that of the producer's. The introduction is read off an autocue!

Dealing with the subject of Iran having a peaceful nuclear programme, as was reflected in the interview above, what had Iran done wrong? Shihab raised the meritous point of asked "if there could be sanctions placed on the US & UK for updating their nuclear arsenals when in fact they are supposed to be disarming according to the nuclear disarmament treaty?" A very valid point indeed! and more so when he pointed out that "India, Pakistan and Israel aren't getting sanctioned by the IAEA, the Western nations who are supposed members of the treaty are breaking their vows by updating their nuclear weapons regimes. Is the IAEA just a big nuclear football for the US and the EU to play with?" Well Lukas, why aren't you focusing on these very nations then? Why are you only trying to single out Iran? ...
Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Response to Lukas by Mistress76uk (Mitra)

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)