|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Biological Weapons
Iran has advanced biology and genetic engineering research programs supporting an industry that produces world class vaccines for both domestic use and export.[5] The dual use nature of these facilities mean that Iran, like any country with advanced biological research programs, could easily produce biological warfare agents. A 2005 report from the United States Department of State claimed that Iran began work on offensive biological weapons during the Iran-Iraq War, and that their large legitimate biotechnological and biomedical industry "could easily hide pilot to industrial-scale production capabilities for a potential BW program, and could mask procurement of BW-related process equipment". The report further said that "available information about Iranian activities indicates a maturing offensive program with a rapidly evolving capability that may soon include the ability to deliver these weapons by a variety of means".[6] According to The Nuclear Threat Initiative, Iran is known to possess cultures of the many biological agents for legitimate scientific purposes which have been weaponised by other nations in the past, or could theoretically be weaponised, though they do not allege that Iran has attempted to weaponise them, Iran possesses sufficient biological facilities to potentially do so.[7] Chemical Weapons
A US Central Intelligence Agency report dated January 2001 speculates Iran has manufactured and stockpiled chemical weapons - including blister, blood, choking, and probably nerve agents, and the bombs and artillery shells to deliver them. It further claims that during the first half of 2001 Iran continued to seek production technology, training, expertise, equipment, and chemicals from entities in Russia and China that could be used to help Iran reach its goal of having indigenous nerve agent production capability.[8] Nuclear weaponsIran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on July 1, 1968 and ratified the treaty on February 2, 1970.[9] A number of countries, including the U.S., France, Germany, Russia (not expressly, but only by virtue of endorsing UNSC Resolutions calling upon Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program) and the United Kingdom, have accused Iran of a clandestine intention to develop nuclear weapons. A 2005 assessment by the International Institute for Strategic Studies concluded "if Iran threw caution to the wind, and sought a nuclear weapon capability as quickly as possible without regard for international reaction, it might be able to produce enough HEU for a single nuclear weapon by the end of this decade", assuming no technical problems. More plausible development programmes Iran could choose to follow would take over a decade.[10] IAEAThe International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is an autonomous body, established by the United Nations, that seeks to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to inhibit its use for military purposes. According to the IAEA, Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, or even weapons-grade uranium. On March 6 2006, Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the IAEA, reported that "the Agency has not seen indications of diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices ... however, after three years of intensive verification, there remain uncertainties with regard to both the scope and the nature of Iran's nuclear programme"[11]. However, the inspectors did find some documents indicating that Iran did have intentions of developing weapons, including instructions and diagrams on how to make uranium into a sphere, which is only necessary to make nuclear weapons.[12] It is thought this was sold to them by A. Q. Khan.[13] On December 18 2003, Iran signed an additional protocol that allows IAEA inspectors access to individuals, documentation relating to procurement, dual use equipment, certain military-owned workshops, and research and development locations.[14] On May 12, 2006, claims that highly enriched uranium (well over the 3.5% enriched level) was reported to have been found "at a site where Iran has denied such sensitive atomic work", appeared. "They have found particles of highly enriched uranium [HEU], but it is not clear if this is contamination from centrifuges that had been previously found [from imported material] or something new," said one diplomat close to the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). These reports have not yet been officially confirmed by the IAEA (as of June 1, 2006).[15][16][17] On 31 July 2006, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution demanding that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment activities.[18] In late 2006, "New traces of plutonium and enriched uranium — potential material for atomic warheads — have been found [by the IAEA] in a nuclear waste facility in Iran." However, "A senior U.N. official who was familiar with the report cautioned against reading too much into the findings of traces of highly enriched uranium and plutonium, saying Iran had explained both and they could plausibly be classified as byproducts of peaceful nuclear activities. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the report publicly, said that while the uranium traces were enriched to a higher level than needed to generate power, they were below weapons-grade."[19] The Iranian stanceIran states the purpose of its nuclear program is the generation of power and that any other use would be a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which it is a signatory, as well as being against Iranian religious principles. Iran claims that nuclear power is necessary for a booming population and rapidly industrializing nation. It points to the fact that Iran's population has more than doubled in 20 years, the country regularly imports gasoline and electricity, and that burning fossil fuel in large amounts harms Iran's environment drastically. Additionally, Iran questions why it shouldn't be allowed to diversify its sources of energy, especially when there are fears of its oil fields eventually being depleted. It continues to argue that its valuable oil should be used for high value products and export, not simple electricity generation. Furthermore, Iran argues that nuclear power makes fairly good economic sense. Building reactors is expensive, but subsequent operating costs are low and stable, and increasingly competitive as fossil-fuel prices rise.[20] Iran also raises funding questions, claiming that developing the excess capacity in its oil industry would cost it $40 billion, let alone pay for the power plants. Harnessing nuclear power costs a fraction of this, considering Iran has abundant supplies of accessible uranium ore.[21] These claims have been echoed by Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector in Iraq. Iran has a legal right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the NPT. Iran, and many other developing nations who are signatories to the NPT, believe the Western position to be hypocritical, since the NPT calls for universal nuclear disarmament. Iran also compares its treatment as a signatory to the NPT with three nations that have not ratified the NPT. Each of these nations developed an indigenous nuclear weapons capability: Israel by 1968, India by 1974, and Pakistan by 1998. However, as the NPT calls on member states to refrain from receiving weapons technology, the weapons plans Iran received from AQ Khan place it in technical violation of its NPT obligatons On December 3, 2004, Iran's former president and an Islamic cleric, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani alluded to Iran's position on nuclear energy: Allah willing, we expect to soon join the club of the countries that have a nuclear industry, with all its branches, except the military one, in which we are not interested.We want to get what we're entitled to. I say unequivocally that for no price will we be willing to relinquish our legal and international right. I also say unequivocally to those who make false claims: Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons, but it will not give up its rights. Your provocation will not make us pursue nuclear weapons. We hope that you come to your senses soon and do not get the world involved in disputes and crises. [4] On November 14, 2004, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator said that his country agreed to voluntarily and temporarily suspend the uranium enrichment program after pressure from the European Union on behalf of the United Kingdom, France and Germany, as a confidence-building measure for a reasonable period of time, with six months mentioned as a reference. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has publicly stated Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. On August 9, 2005 Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a fatwa that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that Iran shall never acquire these weapons. The text of the fatwa has not been released although it was referenced in an official statement at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna.[22] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a 2005 speech to the U.N. General Assembly said "We are concerned that once certain powerful states completely control nuclear energy resources and technology, they will deny access to other states and thus deepen the divide between powerful countries and the rest of the international community ... peaceful use of nuclear energy without possession of a nuclear fuel cycle is an empty proposition". [5] On 6 August, 2005, Iran rejected a 34 page European Union proposal intended to help Iran build "a safe, economically viable and proliferation-proof civil nuclear power generation and research programme.” The Europeans, with US agreement, intended to entice Iran into a binding commitment not to develop uranium enrichment capability by offering to provide fuel and other long-term support that would facilitate electricity generation with nuclear energy. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi rejected the proposal saying, "We had already announced that any plan has to recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium".[23] Iran resumed its uranium enrichment program in January 2006, prompting the IAEA to refer the issue to the UN Security Council. On February 21, 2006, the reformist Internet daily Rooz reported that Hojatoleslam Mohsen Gharavian, a student of Qom’s fundamentalist cleric Mesbah Yazdi, spoke about the necessity of using nuclear weapons as a means to retaliate and announced that "based on religious law, everything depends on our purpose".[24] In an exclusive interview with IRNA on February 21, 2006, Gharavian rejected reports quoting him as saying that the use of nuclear weapons is allowed according to the Islamic tenets. He claimed to have been misquoted, that his remarks had been distorted, and that enemies of Iran had attempted to create pretexts and misuse the issue through hue and cry.[25] On April 11, 2006, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced Iranian scientists working at the pilot facility at Natanz had successfully enriched uranium to the 3.5 percent level, using a small cascade of 164 gas centrifuges. In the televised address from the city of Mashhad he said, "I am officially announcing that Iran has joined the group of those countries which have nuclear technology".[26] It is worth noting that the level of enrichment to produce a nuclear bomb is about 90%. In May 2006 some members of the Iranian legislature ("Majlis" or Parliament) sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan threatening to withdraw from the NPT if Iran's right to peaceful use of nuclear technology under the treaty was not protected.[27] On the 21st of February 2007, the same day the UN deadline to suspend nuclear activities expired, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the following statement: "If they say that we should close down our fuel production facilities to resume talks, we say fine, but those who enter talks with us should also close down their nuclear fuel production activities". The white house's spokesperson Tony Snow rejected the offer and called it a "false offer". [28] The United States' stance
In June 2005, the US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice required IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei to either toughen his stance on Iran or fail to be chosen for a third term as IAEA head.[9] The IAEA has on some occasions criticised the stance of the U.S. on Iran's program.[10] The USA denounced Iran's successful enrichment of uranium to fuel grade in April 2006, with spokesman Scott McClellan saying, they "continue to show that Iran is moving in the wrong direction". In November 2006, Seymour Hersh described a classified draft assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency "challenging the White House's assumptions about how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb. He continued, "The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," adding that a current senior intelligence official confirmed the assessment.[11] On February 25, 2007, The Daily Telegraph reports that the United States Fifth Fleet including the Nimitz-class supercarriers Eisenhower, Nimitz and Stennis "prepares to take on Iran".[31] Other international responsesThe claims and counter claims have put an immense amount of pressure on Iran to reveal all aspects of its nuclear program to date. A great deal of this pressure has come from Iran's trade partners: Europe, Japan, and Russia. Iran has been slow to respond, claiming the pressure is solely an attempt by the US government to prevent it from obtaining nuclear technology. FranceOn February 16, 2006 French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said "No civilian nuclear programme can explain the Iranian nuclear programme. It is a clandestine military nuclear programme."[32] United KingdomOn 8th May 2006, Former Deputy Commander-in-Chief of British Land Forces, General Sir Hugh Beach, former Cabinet Ministers, scientists and campaigners joined a delegation to Downing Street opposing military intervention in Iran. The delegation delivered two letters to Prime Minister Tony Blair from 1,800 physicists warning that the military intervention and the use of nuclear weapons would have disastrous consequences for the security of Britain and the rest of world. The letters carried the signatures of academics, politicians and scientists including some of 5 physicists who are Nobel Laureates. CASMII delegationOn 17th July 2006, a meeting in the House of Commons challenged Tony Blair’s statement that Iran and Syria are to blame for the latest crisis in the Middle East and condemned a decision by the Foreign Ministers of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany to refer Iran to the UN Security Council. Commons Meeting IsraelIsrael claims that Iran is actively pursuing a nuclear weapons programme and would use nuclear weapons against Israel. Israel is concerned that Iran has developed missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads between the two countries. This concern was intensified when Iran publicly paraded some of the missiles under anti-Israeli banners, such as "Death to Israel"[33] and "Israel should be wiped off the map". See Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel. Reasons for Israeli concern can be summed up in 5 points:
On December 11 2005 then Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon put the Israeli Defense Forces on high alert for the possibility of ordering airstrikes against Iran's nuclear installations.[39] Nonetheless, airstrikes are seen as a last resort due to the dispersal, hardening and defence by Surface-to-air missiles of Iranian sites.[40] On January 6, 2007 a news report cited claims that Israel may be preparing for a nuclear strike on Iran's enrichment facilities using bunker-buster bombs.[41] On January 15 2007, Ardeshir Hosseinpour, an Iranian junior scientist involved in The Uranium Conversion Facility at Isfahan died, reportedly due to "gassing"[42]. Other reports indicate that several other scientists were killed or injured, and treated in nearby hospitals.[43] On January 21 2007, the death of Ardeshir Hosseinpour was finally reported, first by the Al-Quds daily[44] and the Iranian Student's News Agency[45] (both in Arabic)[43]. On February 2 2007, the US private intelligence company Stratfor released a report saying that Ardeshir Hosseinpour was killed by the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, through the use of radioactive poisoning[46][47][48][49]. On February 4 2007, Rheva Bhalla of Stratfor confirmed the details of Stratfor's report to The Sunday Times[47]. Despite the previous reports, the "semi-official"[50] Fars News Agency reported that an unnamed informed source in Tehran told them that Ardeshir Hosseinpour was not involved in the nuclear facility at Isfahan, and that he "suffocated by fumes from a faulty gas fire in sleep."[51] On February 25, 2007, The Daily Telegraph reported that Israel has sought negotiations with the United States for permission to use Iraqi airspace for an air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.[52] Opinions in the Arab and Islamic worldThe San Francisco Chronicle reported on October 31 2003, that Grand Ayatollahs, like Ayatollah Yousef Sanei, and Iranian clerics led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have repeatedly declared that Islam forbids the development and use of all weapons of mass destruction. SFGate.com quoted Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as saying: "The Islamic Republic of Iran, based on its fundamental religious and legal beliefs, would never resort to the use of weapons of mass destruction. In contrast to the propaganda of our enemies, fundamentally we are against any production of weapons of mass destruction in any form."[53] On April 21 2006, at a Hamas rally in Damascus, Anwar Raja, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine representative from Lebanon declared:
On May 3 2006 Iraqi Ayatollah Ahmad Husseini Al Baghdadi was interviewed on Syrian TV. On his interview he declared his support for the Islamic world to obtain nuclear weapons: Why shouldn't an Islamic or Arab country have a nuclear bomb? I am not referring to the Iranian program, which the Iranians say is for peaceful purposes. I am talking about a nuclear bomb. This Arab Islamic nation must obtain a nuclear bomb. Without a nuclear bomb, we will continue to be oppressed, and the American destruction... The American donkiness... The American donkey itself will always continue to attack us, because the Americans are very conceited.[12] The Islamic Republic of Pakistan already possesses nuclear weapons, see Pakistan and weapons of mass destruction for further details. On May 12 2006 AP published an interview with Pakistan's former chief of staff Mirza Aslam Beg In the AP interview, Beg detailed nearly 20 years of Iranian approaches to obtain conventional arms and then technology for nuclear weapons. He described an Iranian visit in 1990, when he was army chief of staff. "They didn't want the technology. They asked: 'Can we have a bomb?' My answer was: By all means you can have it but you must make it yourself. Nobody gave it to us." Beg said he is sure Iran has had enough time to develop them. But he insists the Pakistani government didn't help, even though he says former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto once told him the Iranians offered more than $4 billion for the technology. [13] The Baku DeclarationA declaration signed on June 20, 2006 by the foreign ministers of 56 nations of the 57-member Organisation of the Islamic Conference stated that "the only way to resolve Iran's nuclear issue is to resume negotiations without any preconditions and to enhance co-operation with the involvement of all relevant parties". Qatar & Arab vote against the U.N. Security Council ResolutionJuly 31, 2006: The UN Security Council gives until August 31 2006 for Iran to suspend all uranium enrichment and related activities or face the prospect of sanctions [14]. The draft passed by a vote of 14-1 (Qatar, which represents Arab states on the council, opposing). The same day, Iran's U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif qualified the resolution as "arbitrary" and illegal because the NTP protocol explicitly guarantees under international law Iran’s right to pursue nuclear activities for peaceful purposes. In response to today’s vote at the UN, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that his country will revise his position vis-à-vis the economic/incentive package offered previously by the G-6 (5 permanent Security council members plus Germany.)[15] The Non-Aligned MovementOn September 16, 2006 in Havana, Cuba, all of the 118 Non-Aligned Movement member countries, at the summit level, declared supporting Iran's nuclear program for civilian purposes in their final written statement [16]. That is a clear majority of the 192 countries comprising the entire United Nations, which comprise 55% of the world population. Delivery SystemsMissilesImage:Shahab-3.jpg Shahab-3 ballistic missile Iran has 12 X-55 long range cruise missiles purchased without nuclear warheads from Ukraine in 2001. The X-55 has a range of 2500 to 3000 kilometers.[56] Iran's latest and most advanced missile, the Fajr-3, has an estimated range of 2500 km and MIRV capability [17]. On November 2, 2006, Iran fired unarmed missiles to begin 10 days of military war games. Iranian state television reported "dozens of missiles were fired including Shahab-2 and Shahab-3 missiles. The missiles had ranges from 300 km to up to 2,000 km...Iranian experts have made some changes to Shahab-3 missiles installing cluster warheads in them with the capacity to carry 1,400 bombs." These launches come after some United States-led military exercises in the Persian Gulf on October 30 2006, meant to train for blocking the transport of weapons of mass destruction [18]. AircraftImage:Su-24 Fencer Right side gear down.jpg An SU-24 of the former Soviet Air Force
See also
References
|
Sites |
| ||||||||||||
