AFP/Getty Image

Just two days after the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reported that Syria had likely built a nuclear reactor on the site bombed by Israel in 2007 (see Laicie’s post), Syria has promised full compliance with any and all future IAEA investigations and inspections.  

On a side note, Syrian President Assad today also offered general amnesty to all “political” prisoners, i.e. protesters, in an attempt to quell the protests that military force has been unable to stop for over ten weeks.  1,000 people have been killed by Syrian forces.

It appears that the Syrian government is hard at work to renovate its public image.  

The U.S. has put forth a draft resolution to the IAEA governing board referring Syria to the U.N. for non-compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The vote is scheduled for June 6 and could result in punitive action against Damascus, as occurred with Iran.  By reporting Syria, the U.S. may be hoping to gain has the added benefit of reigniting the conversation about Iran’s NPT transgressions, thereby strengthening support for tougher sanctions on Iran.

Syria’s sudden interest in making nice after having stonewalled inspectors since 2008 is likely to stall any attempts to penalize the country and could offer Damascus more time to destroy what evidence is left at the reactor site.   Another concern is that Syria’s sudden agreeableness could also “dilute efforts to end Syria’s bloody crackdown on its grass-roots pro-democracy movement.”

The IAEA is a slow moving body and inspections might not resume immediately, but soon enough we shall see if President Assad and his Ba’athist party have any interest in real change or if it is just PR.

Read more

Syria, NPT, IAEA (all tags)

Predicting when Iran will get the bomb has been a popular activity for politicians, strategists, analysts, and the public for some time now.  Unfortunately, these predictions are frequently politicized and exploited to justify increased investments in long-range missile defenses, unilateral sanctions, and even military strikes.

Last month, a report released by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) on Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities concluded that a deployable Iranian ICBM is more than a decade away. The study, authored by former UN weapons inspector Mike Elleman, states that “Iran is not likely to field a liquid-fueled missile capable of targeting Western Europe before 2014 or 2015… Iran is many years away from developing a ‘second-generation’ 4,000-5,000 km intermediate-range solid-propellant missile, if it should decide to do so.” It goes on to say that “many years” has historically been around ten, and thus concludes that since Iran would develop and field an intermediate range missile before developing an ICBM, “a notional Iranian ICBM, based on No-Dong and Scud technologies, is more than a decade away from development.”  The report also separates the development of ballistic missile technologies from the development of nuclear capabilities, saying it can only “appear” that these two programs are linked, but that this cannot be confirmed by the IAEA, and is in fact denied by Iran.

This analysis helps to clarify statements put forward by public officials, which are often stripped of crucial context and twisted by the media in an effort to make an Iranian nuclear weapon seem right around the corner.

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, IAEA, NPT, Missile Defense (all tags)

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference came to a close on Friday, and the long weekend allowed for ample conversation regarding its accomplishments and imperfections. Under particular scrutiny has been a section of the final document which specifically emphasized the goal of the implementation of the 1995 resolution calling for a nuclear weapons free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East. The review conference endorsed the appointment of a facilitator to work towards this goal, and the convening of a separate conference in 2012 - to be attended by all Middle Eastern states - which would seek “the establishment of a zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction, on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at by States in the region.”

Though it expressed full support for the goals of the resolution, the U.S. took exception to what it saw as the singling out of Israel, despite the fact that the final document recalled the reaffirmation by the 2000 RevCon of the need for Israel’s accession to the treaty and the placement of Israeli nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards.

The U.S. suggested that the goal of a MENWFZ cannot bear fruit until a comprehensive peace in the region is established and diverted attention to Iran by noting that Tehran was the only NPT signatory found by the IAEA Board of Governors to be in non-compliance with its safeguards obligations, and that it had done little to enhance international confidence in its performance. Israel, which did not participate in the RevCon, lambasted the fact that they were singled out instead of Iran, claiming that the treaty "ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world.”

Israeli disappointment in the NPT RevCon’s final document—viewed as an act of bullying and infringement on their sovereignty—was reflected in two events in recent days, both of which underline exactly why the goal of a nuclear weapons free Middle East is so important.

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, Israel, Iran, Nuclear Weapons, NPT (all tags)

As the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference (NPT RevCon) comes to a close in New York, the call for a ban on nuclear weapons and other WMD in the Middle East has come back into the fore as a top issue. Nuclear Weapons Free Zones (NWFZs), which exist in Latin America, the South Pacific, Southeast Asia, Africa, and Central Asia, are zones in which countries commit themselves to not acquire, manufacture, test, or possess nuclear weapons. Article VII of the NPT affirms the rights of countries to establish such zones.  A NWFZ in the Middle East has been on the NPT agenda since the treaty’s entry into force in 1970. Since the 1995 NPT RevCon, the goal has been more adamantly pursued by Egypt, but still to no visible avail.

Nevertheless, the start of this year’s NPT RevCon saw the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China all voice unequivocal support for the initiative— with ample support from states in the region too.  The Arab Group has stated that failing to achieve it would be a failure of the NPT as a whole.  While some view a NWFZ in the Middle East as a lofty, far-off, or even impossible goal, there is no denying the worth it would have.

The implications of the initiative are clear. Israel, not just Iran, would have to foreswear nuclear weapons.

Israel’s program is controversial for numerous reasons.  First, Israel is deliberately ambiguous about its nuclear weapons capability, officially maintaining that it will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the region.  Second, as one of the only countries in the world to have ever carried out preemptive attacks on nascent nuclear programs (for example in Iraq and Syria), Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is often viewed as particularly hypocritical. Finally, in defiance of numerous requests and resolutions issued by the General Assembly of the UN which call on Israel to join the NPT, Israel nevertheless continues to refuse. This places it in the not so select company of Pakistan, North Korea, and India.

Read more

Middle East, NPT, Iran, Israel, RevCon (all tags)

Possibly the best rationale for keeping nukes...

Last week, President Sarkozy said in a CBS television interview that France would never give up its nuclear weapons unilaterally because they continue to ‘underpin’ France’s security in a ‘dangerous’ world.  He argued that his nation of 65 million inhabitants’ has ‘fewer conventional weapons than the US, than Russia, than China’.  Although Sarkozy was keen to mention the fact that France has renounced nuclear testing and reduced its nuclear arsenal by one third, he added that he would be ‘jeopardizing’ the security of his country if any further reductions were made.  Since his comments were picked up by a large number of news organizations, one might have initially thought there was something unique about Sarkozy’s position, but to the few French nuclear watchers out there, all of this no doubt sounded like old news…

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, France, NPT (all tags)

No joke – This spring, Iran will hold an international conference on… wait for it: Nuclear Disarmament.

The conference, dubbed “Nuclear Energy for All, Nuclear Weapon [sic] for None,” will be held in Tehran on April 17 and 18.

Foreign ministers, representatives and nuclear experts from 60 countries have been invited to attend the event where "participants are slated to assess the causes and reasons underlying the lack of heed and attention to the implementation of nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) regulations."

Do you think this might mean some serious contemplation by Iran of its numerous violations?

Maybe not.

So grab your tickets today! The conference even includes a field trip. Perhaps on their way to Isfahan attendees will take the advice of Nathan Hodge and stop off at Natanz, maybe even Qom… could be a great trip!

Read more

Iran Watch, Nukes on a Blog, NPT (all tags)