Wednesday, May 04, 2005

How Conveniently They Forget

I thought that you all would enjoy this little article in the May 16, 2005 copy of The Nation:

Stephen Zunes writes: Amid the blare of the Bush Administration's alarms about Iran's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities, few remember that the United States, from the Eisenhower through the Carter presidencies, played a major role in the development of Iran's nuclear program. In 1957 the United States and Iran signed their first civil nuclear cooperation agreement. Over the next two decades, the United States not only provided Iran with technical assistance but supplied the country with it's first experimental nuclear reactor, complete with enriched uranium and plutonium with fissile isotopes. Despite the refusal of the Shah to rule out the possibility of Iran's developing nuclear weapons, the Ford Administration in 1975 approved the sale of up to eight nuclear reactors with fuel to Iran and, in 1976, approved the sale of lasers believed to be capable of enriching uranium. The Washington Post reported that an initially hesitant President Ford was assured by his advisers that Iran was interested only in peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Ford's Defense Secretary was Donald Rumsfeld, his Chief of Staff was Dick Cheney and his man in charge of nonproliferation efforts at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency was Paul Wolfowitz.

**GOI Comment: Iraq, Iran, Iraq, Iran. Seems as though the names of the countries are inter-changeable as are the players. As are our friends/enemies: Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, the Taliban. All "friends" at one time to this cadre of neo-conservatives and when they were no longer useful they were discarded and then labeled "enemies." Different decade but same countries and players.

---End of Transmission---

2 comments:

xxan said...

James :-)))
How are you? You are always so well informed on the latest news and political developments. I admire that ! Sometimes ( I am a "mood" person ) I follow the news very tightly as well. And then I go into discussion on topics, etc ... At this time, I am afraid that I have absolutely no time to follow the news consequently. Or let us say: I have other priority's, this would be more honest.

You know what priority's those are. I told it here again and again;-) But spring and summer really IS very busy for me. Works well for my mood too. So, for now, I can't complain.

I wish you and your dear wife all the very best ! ! ! ! How's your painting?

UK plc said...

Comparisons with Iraq and/or bin Laden aren't quite so solid. Remember that the mid-70s were before the revolution in Iran (1979), so the response of those involved would be that the previous Iranian rulers probably did only want fissile material for peaceful purposes, and it was that despot Khomeini and his successors who changed all that.
Zunes (whose work is usually worth a look) is right to point out that the historical dimension is always important, but finger-pointing is rarely a simple exercise.
I'd be more worried about what's going to become of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), currently being renegotiated. Worth keeping a close eye on the mainstream media, who'll probably bury the important developments somewhere in the middle of the story.