And now things get interesting ...

Victor

And now things get interesting, instead of the Americans surrounding Iran, the locals are surrounding the Americans (in Iraq / Kuwait).

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/1514999?view=Eircomnet

Saudi Arabia is considering nuclear bomb
From:ireland.com
Thursday, 18th September, 2003

SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi Arabia, in response to the current upheaval in the Middle East, has embarked on a strategic review that includes acquiring nuclear weapons.

This new threat of proliferation in one of the most dangerous regions of the world comes on top of a crisis over Iran's alleged nuclear programme.

A strategy paper being considered at the highest levels in Riyadh sets out three options: 1. To acquire a nuclear capability as a deterrent; 2. To maintain or enter into an alliance with an existing nuclear power that would offer protection; 3. To try to reach a regional agreement on having a nuclear-free Middle East.

Until now, the assumption in Washington was that Saudi Arabia was content to remain under the US nuclear umbrella. But the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the US has steadily worsened since the September 11th attacks on New York and Washington: 15 of the 19 attackers were Saudi.

It is not known whether Saudi Arabia has taken a decision on any of the three options. But the fact that it is prepared to contemplate the nuclear option is a worrying development.

United Nations officials and nuclear arms analysts said the Saudi review reflected profound insecurities generated by the volatility in the Middle East, Riyadh's estrangement with Washington and the weakening of its reliance on the US nuclear umbrella.

They pointed to the Saudi worries about an Iranian programme and to the absence of any international pressure on Israel, which has an estimated 200 nuclear devices.

"Our antennae are up," said a senior UN official watching worldwide nuclear proliferation efforts. "The international community can rest assured we do keep track of such events if they go beyond talk." Saudi Arabia does not regard Iran, a past adversary with which Riyadh has restored relations, as a direct threat. But it is unnerved by the possibility of Iran and Israel having nuclear weapons.

Riyadh is also paranoid about a string of apparent leaks in American papers from the US administration critical of Saudi Arabia.

Mr David Albright, director of the Washington think-tank Institute for Science and International Security, said he doubted whether the Saudis would try to build a nuclear bomb, preferring instead to try to buy a nuclear warhead. They would be the first of the world's eight or nine nuclear powers to have bought rather than built the bomb.

"There has always been worries that the Saudis would go down this path if provoked," said Mr Albright. "There is growing US hostility which could lead to the removal of the US umbrella and will the Saudis be intimidated by Iran? They've got to be nervous." UN officials said there have been rumours going back 20 years that the Saudis wanted to pay Pakistan to do the research and development on nuclear weapons.

In 1988, Saudi bought from China intermediate-range missiles capable of reaching any part of the Middle East with a nuclear warhead.

Four years ago, Saudi Arabia sent a defence team to Pakistan to tour its secret nuclear facilities and to be briefed by Abdul Qader Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb.

A UN official said: "There's obviously a lot of restlessness in the Middle East. Regional insecurity tends to produce a quest for a nuclear umbrella. The Saudis have the money and could provide it to Pakistan." Mr Albright said the Saudis would face a long haul if they were determined to acquire nuclear weapons. He doubted whether anyone would sell.

Arab countries yesterday urged the International Atomic Energy Authority, the UN nuclear watchdog, to get tough with Israel to let inspectors assess its nuclear programme in line with similar pressure on Iran.

Oman's ambassador to the IAEA, Salim al-Riyami, speaking on behalf of the Arab League, which represents Arab states, said it was time to get tough with Israel.

The Saint

Now let me see. Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, Saudi is one of the largest sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East, it has probobly the most brutal regime in the Middle East, they are seeking the worst WMD of them all, nuclear weapons. Now I wonder who'll be the next country to be invaded by the US? Syria anyone?

The Beer Baron

Now I wonder who'll be the next country to be invaded by the US? Syria anyone?

heh :cool:

I wonder about all this, in this maelstrom of martial superiority are we to be Paddy Last again?
Forget healthcare, affordable housing, unemployment, inflation- petition your local TD- Ireland needs a nuclear weapons programme!

Muíntear na hEireann!
Bertie needs The Bomb!

The Saint

What about "Bertie is da bom".

The Beer Baron

What about "Bertie is da bom".

Yeah- Bertie Ahern- sexbomb. :rolleyes:

Seriously tho- I see the US's alliance, if it can be called that, with Pakistan (which was mentioned in the article) tenous at that. Considering that a number of the Big Beards of Al Queda come from there, and Big Beard#1 is supposedly hiding there.

Certainly current the government support the US (then again what choice- realistically, do they have) but governments change- and a majority of Pakistanis, to my knowledge, aren't exactly fond of the US now are they?

bloggs

But the Saudis are 'nice guys', they let the US use their airspace and military bases, and don't forget all that black stuff. What's a few terrorists among friends

Saw a good US bumper sticker "Why is our oil under their sand".

The Saint

and a majority of Pakistanis, to my knowledge, aren't exactly fond of the US now are they?

Well, the populations many western countries are not particularly fond of the US either.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/reuters/worldnews/1524872?view=Eircomnet

E.U. big three offer Iran carrot for nuclear deal
From:Reuters
Friday, 19th September, 2003
By Paul Taylor and Louis Charbonneau

BRUSSELS/VIENNA (Reuters) - Britain, Germany and France defied the United States last month by offering Iran the prospect of sharing technology if it stops its disputed nuclear fuel enrichment programme and accepts tougher U.N. inspections.

Western diplomats told Reuterson Friday a joint letter by the big three European foreign ministers, the content of which has not previously been disclosed, was delivered to Tehran in early August despite intense lobbying by Washington.

It highlighted a gulf between the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and even its closest European ally, Britain, on whether to engage or isolate the Islamic republic.

The Europeans urged Iran to sign, implement and ratify the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that provides for intrusive, short-notice inspections and to halt its uranium enrichment programme, which the West fears could be at the heart of a clandestine nuclear arms programme.

In return for compliance, the letter raised the prospect of cooperation on technology, without specifically pledging help with a civilian nuclear energy programme, the sources said.

"Washington did not consider it very helpful at all. They were worried it ran the risk of splitting Europe and America on this issue, and they talked to their friends and colleagues in Europe about that and attempted to dissuade them from sending the letter," a diplomat familiar with the exchanges said.

In Washington, State Department spokeswoman Brenda Greenberg said there was no immediate comment on the reported offer to Iran, on a day the federal government remained closed to cope with the aftermath of Hurricane Isabel.

A French Foreign Ministry spokesman said he could confirm a letter had been sent to Iran, calling on it to sign the Additional Protocol. But he said it did not include any offer to cooperate on other issues. "There was no offer in return," he said. "There has been no quid pro quo."

European diplomats said they were disappointed there had not been a more specific reply from Tehran so far.

CLERIC SAYS IRAN MUST QUIT NPT

In Tehran, a leading cleric said on Friday Iran should consider quitting the NPT after the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog -- the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- set an October 31 deadline for Iran to prove it is not seeking atomic weapons.

"What is wrong with considering this treaty on nuclear energy and pulling out of it? North Korea pulled out of it and many countries have never entered it," Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati told worshippers at Friday prayers at Tehran University.

Jannati, head of the powerful supervisory body the Guardian Council, also said the Additional Protocol "would impose an extraordinary humiliation on us and we should never accept it".

Conservatives regard international inspections of the nuclear programme as tantamount to allowing spies into Iran -- which says its nuclear programme is purely to meet booming demand for electricity.

The reformist government of President Mohammad Khatami has however said it will continue to negotiate with the IAEA and will not pull out of the NPT.

On August 18, Khatami wrote a general letter to European leaders, including EU president Italy, pledging that Iran would never divert its civilian nuclear programme for military purposes and had decided to enter immediate talks on the Additional Protocol.

But that message, seen by Reuters, did not commit Iran to sign or ratify the protocol, and European diplomats question whether Khatami, locked in a power struggle with hardline clerics, has effective control over the nuclear programme.

OFFER STILL STANDS

Since the Europeans' letter was sent, growing attention at the IAEA has focused on the need to know more about Iran's past nuclear activities as well as to enforce intrusive spot checks in future, diplomats said.

The IAEA gave Tehran an ultimatum last week to prove by October 31 it has no secret weapons programme or be reported to the Security Council for possible sanctions.

But a diplomat from one of the European states stressed that the joint British, French and German initiative remained valid.

"The offer still stands," he said.

There was no immediate public reaction by Russia to the European offer to Iran, but earlier on Friday Moscow said its nuclear cooperation talks with Iran that have angered Washington could take a long time to finalise.

The talks are about a bilateral deal that, once signed, will clear the way for shipments of Russian nuclear fuel to Iran to bring on stream its 1,000-megawatt Bushehr power plant.

Washington says the Bushehr project masks secret Iranian plans to develop an atomic bomb. Moscow says there is no proof of Washington's suspicions.

Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev said there would be no quick deal with Iran, telling reporters: "Our talks could last a long time."

He denied that Russia was backpedalling on the deal to please the United States. But his comments, following months of U.S. pressure to abandon the $800 million Bushehr project, will help soothe a major irritant before Presidents Vladimir Putin and Bush meet at Camp David on September 26 and 27.

http://home.eircom.net/content/reuters/worldnews/1524263?view=Eircomnet

Arab states drop UN nuke appeal to Israel
From:Reuters
Friday, 19th September, 2003
By Louis Charbonneau

VIENNA (Reuters) - The Arab League has withdrawn a draft resolution that called on Israel to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and allow the U.N. to inspect its nuclear programme, but vowed to try again next year.

Israel has not signed the NPT and has never officially admitted to having nuclear weapons. However, non-proliferation experts estimate that Israel has from 100 to 200 nuclear bombs.

On Wednesday, 15 members of the Arab League submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) general conference of the 137 member states the draft resolution which said Israel was the only nuclear power in the Middle East and should disarm.

Although the Arab states failed for the 12th year in a row to gather enough support to pass the resolution, a diplomat said that it would be unfair to call the withdrawal a failure.

"They (the Arab states) achieved their objective by reminding countries that this is an issue that shouldn't be allowed to fade into obscurity," he said.

The last time the Arab states succeeded in getting such a resolution adopted by the IAEA general conference was in 1991. Since 1987, the IAEA conference and U.N. General Assembly have passed 13 such resolutions. Israel has ignored them all.

NUCLEAR-FREE MIDDLE EAST

Japan's ambassador to the IAEA, who presided over the conference, said Israel's nuclear programme would be on the agenda of the 48th IAEA general conference next year.

U.S. Ambassador Kenneth Brill complained that the Arab league resolution belonged at the U.N. General Assembly, not at the IAEA, which he said is a technical not a political agency.

"They (these issues) are more appropriate to the banks of the East River in New York than on the banks of the Danube river in Vienna," Brill told the conference.

The conference adopted an Egypt-sponsored resolution calling for all states in the region to commit to a nuclear-weapons free Middle East, though it did not specifically mention Israel.

The head of Israel's Atomic Energy Commission, Gideon Frank, said his country was not opposed to the idea of a nuclear-arms free Middle East, but he distanced himself from the resolution.

"Recent events should remind us of the stark realities in our region," Frank said.

Éomer of Rohan

I wonder if Saudi Arabia get nuclear weapons AND Iran get nuclear weapons, how long it will be before they and Israel all wipe each other out? Mind you saying that, Pakistan and India haven't managed it yet.

A well placed nuclear missile from Israel's Lance Tactical Unit in the Persian Gulf could destroy the US economy faster than any single nuclear attack on the US mainland. Hmmm.

[/Musing]

Victor

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
A well placed nuclear missile from Israel's Lance Tactical Unit in the Persian Gulf could destroy the US economy faster than any single nuclear attack on the US mainland.

Damage yes, destoy, no. Both countries have quite diverse oil infrastructures (e.g. neither is any longer dependant on the Persian Gulf for all exports). However, a few dozen weapons is another matter and is likely to see damage on a scale not seen since WWII.

Sand

Relax. Chill out.

What exactly is the evidence that even if Iran and Saudis get nukes that theyll use them? If anything it could stabilise any instability in the middle east. Conventional wars are one thing, nuclear ones another thing entirely. Ask Israel, their neighbourly cousins have been slightly less willing to invade every 5 years since they got nukes.

Its a given that eventually everyone and their donkey will have nukes. Economic bribery can only work for so long and encourages efforts to research nukes as its a real money spinner for failed and despotic states.

The technology for nukes is well and truly out of the bag and all the hand wringing in the world wont put it back.

star gazer

I think that the harder it is to come by technology, the more people will respect it. Some smart guy said something like that before.

What exactly is the evidence that even if Iran and Saudis get nukes that theyll use them?

Whenever someone in the region gets it. the nuclear powers will need to decide what regional powers will get the bomb in order to maintain regional stability.