This is your reminder that the Two Week (or so) Deadline given to Iran about complying with the ultimatums issued to them to cease nuclear enrichment activities runs out this weekend...
...roughly...
...give or take a day or two...
((nodnod))
...yeah, we really mean it this time.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080801/ts_afp/irannuclearpolitics_080801211503
Key Points:
Presuming anyone will actually follow through on things this time, it could actually be push-comes-to-shove time. The GovIran is certainly making all the appropriate noises of a cornered rodent about this. "...will use force against our enemies..." and all that.
Open Ground:
Rather than jumping all around the issues about the current Iranian regime, let's keep our eye on the nuclear ball here. Is what the European faction doing ever going to win meaningful concessions from Iran? Have the Russians and the PRC come over to the European viewpoint of this matter and will they then at least stand aside when more UNSC sanctions come down the pipe? Or is this just another example of a determined foe making fools of the IAEA and various Foreign Ministries to play for time? Will this come down to a shooting match to decide things?
Ready? Go!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
Here's a little follow-up, from the Telegraph (UK) newspaper:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2488879/Iran-rejects-deadline-over-nuclear-proposal.html
Note that the author seems to be willing to consider that there is more than one faction inside the GovIran in play on this right now.
And here is Reuter's take on the perception in the Iranian media that there is a double-standard being applied:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSDAH21962320080802
personal comment: Yes, there is a double-standard. India didn't declare war against the U.S. of A. in 1979.
Well... I am thinking we sit back and wait until after our elections, for the Israelis to launch their air strike on the various nuclear facilities. After that, see: hornet/Stick/poking. But at least the imediate threat of the heat of the sun brought onto the cities of the Regieme's enemies muight be thwarted.
Scott
@karl
Expecting the Israelis to do the heavy lifting implies that in a larger sense you do not believe that either (a) diplomacy / sanctions will work or (b) the Americans will overtly take the offensive. alright...
so how about:(c) bait, pressure, harrass, or embargo the Iranians into starting something?
Also, regarding timing: You sure the Israelis, with their own elections coming in September, would wait until late November?
my, my, my-- looks like I have some reading to do here!!!!!
I need to read these links!! gracias
the deadline is up! The Iranians were given to this week-end--maybe 16 days at the most!!!!
That would be so.
According to The AP, the official comments are pretty darn weak as of now, too.
The AP on this, via Breitbart
color me surprised.
forget the deadline--
"The Iranian president underlines that Tehran will not back down "one iota" over its legitimate right to access civilian nuclear energy..."
Iran is not going to listen to ultimatums or pay heed to the time tables-- or suspend its "uranium enrichment..."
Syria's President just got done wrapping his visit in Tehran--
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=65521§ionid=351020101
@Susan
Real, unvarnished Iranian Propaganda... isn't the internet wonderful? ((grin))
Syria's official version of the meeting is equally meritless, so not even going to link it here.
So given the Open Ground on this discussion, what to do in your opinion, Susan?
I was posting on another thread, thinking I was here-- first, I found out this which I did not know-
I know nothing about uranium or how much is needed to create a nuclear power plant so I found this to be interesting- (for my own learning)
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran is enriching uranium to 3 percent, which is completely consistent with the development of a nuclear power plant.
Given this is definitely signs of a nuclear power plant being developed, the EU and USA NEED to follow through with the sanctions-- but i just read the EU and USA are not agreeing with the timeline of Iran's deadline-- so it appears to me, this is just tossing the ball around as you stated!!!!!
@karl's post-- when are the elections?
and ditto to your comment about Syria's visit-- I read in one article, the President would have Demascus serve as a mediator for this nuclear issue and in another article, the President was completely on Iran's side as to Iran's rights on continuing with the nuclear program--
and never mind--I see when elections are coming up-- pretty soon here!
LDG-- why November? I am not clear here-your post to Karl
@Susan
natural Uranium is about 0.7% fissionable isotope.
Low Enrichment:
3~5% fissionable (LEU) is usual commercial reactor fuel now. Some needs go up higher.
High Enrichment:
anything over 20% fissionable can be made to go boom to some extent, but simple, reliable, predictable fission devices (bombs) really want about 85% fissionable.
The problem is, a cascade of centrifuges can be run in semi-parallel to make lots of LEU, or the same machines in series to produce HEU.
You need about 50kg of HEU for a respectable atomic device.
There is also the Plutonium route, where you build a reactor running on fairly high LEU to make Plutonium, which then is extracted to make weapons material (the N. Koreans did this at Yongbon).
re: my comment to karl -- late November would be after the American Presidential Election, which was his suggested timing for a strike.
In other words-- 3% is low?
I am thinking that Diplomacy is not going to work for Iran, because of cultural issues and a difference in definitions of goals. I think the timing of after November 5th, was one of the items "discussed" between senior DOD and Diplomants. I also think that Israel will do it after their election (if they do) when they have all their ducks in a row with regards tothe new governmnet.But I don't think Sanctions will work because Dubai will ignore them and ship what ever food, fuel and consumer electronics the Iranians want, and Sanctions only hirt the citizenry never the elites, and give the Elites a tool to foment a sense fo national persecution. Really I am thinking that this is going to be one of those "hold your nose and hit the skunk with a mallet moments" We won't do it (Can't really afford it at the moment), and the Israeli's will for their national survival.
regardless of Iran's stating:
"Iran's claims that it only wants nuclear technology for the production of energy have failed to quell Western suspicions that it is seeking a pathway to an atomic bomb.."
Iran can not be believed and bottom line-- needs to be watched closely!! Even I can figure that one out!
I see Karl is here-- I like his post! sounds right to me!
@Susan
re: 3% -- yes, low commercial grade... that is what they claimed *in their statement* to the IAEA, and you repeated. Investigations have found higher samples in at least one case however.
@karl
You'll have to cite a source to get me to sign on the the "discussed" date, but otherwise you have a strong case. I'll just say we differ in timing and certainty perceptions (for now).
And I think-- after reading the reuters link-- the United Nations Security Council needs to follow up with these threats of sanctions-- has not this been an ongoing thing since 2006, according to what I just read?
Nov-elections-- Lord help us if Obama gets elected! Iran might be safer to live there! LOL
follow up for karl
I took a glance at my notes on targeting issues that have been made public and I get a rough count of 54(?) seperate hardened targets over a wide geographich seperation in the center, east and southeast...
again a rough count, that gives me for a strike package composition of about 100 aircraft penetrating (what the dry run over the Med had), a sortie requirement of about 7 days of sustained operations including restrikes...
...think the Israelis have that in them?
@susan
"...according to what I just read?"
Yes, since 2006 as a UNSC-level issue.
Now this is a good question-
Have the Russians and the PRC come over to the European viewpoint of this matter and will they then at least stand aside when more UNSC sanctions come down the pipe?
Do you have any links for this? I honestly don't think Russia would stand aside--
Your reuters link about the US being double-standard-- Iran has been belly aching about this for months! I think or believe we had discussed this on Adam's old blog-
question?
what has happened to this one?
Bushehr nuclear plant --Iran had neglected to make payments? (last year?)
@Susan
"Do you have any links for this? I honestly don't think Russia would stand aside-- "
several available, mostly from mid-July when the "ultimatum" was issued. The articles already linked have some of that by repetition.
As of the 16 July statement, Russia's Ambassador to the U.N. refused to concur that the motion was "binding" as to a deadline.
But as they say, that was then...
more for Susan
yes, we have discussed some of the "double-standard" conditions before.
re: "Bushehr nuclear plant --Iran had neglected to make payments?"
They paid up to the Russians, late but paid. The project continues toward capacity.
CORRECTION
"As of the 16 July statement..." should be:
As of the 19 July statement...
Thanks for all the info-- I am headed out to show a house-- will check back later-- there are several links here on the blog I need to read--
rest well!!
Karl-- nice to see you here on the blog!
again a rough count, that gives me for a strike package composition of about 100 aircraft penetrating (what the dry run over the Med had), a sortie requirement of about 7 days of sustained operations including restrikes...
...think the Israelis have that in them?
Yes. Basically the purchase by Iran of the advanced Russian Air defense system which first deliverie were made either last week or this week, have made it imperative that if they are going to do it, they need to do it before the Iranians have it up and running and the personel trained with it, giving something of.. 4 months? 6 months? A year or two ago when General Dynamics made and retrofitted those peculiar camel backed F-16s for the Israelis, I knew that was what they were going to be usd for, a repeat of the Osirak operation. If it happens before our election it will probably tip the election to Obama as people will NOT want to be more deeply involved. if it goes until after, it at least gives the hawkish McCain a chance. as for sources, I'll se if I can remember where I read that, but it was probably a link of of wither Instapundit, or National Review Online.
Scott
quickly here before I head to the airport-- I just saw briefly on the news the UN is not happy with Iran as it failed to comply with this deadline!
xxxx
@karl
Ok, I am seeing your view of the window of opportunity better now. The Air Defense System in question is the purported buy of S-300PMU-2 by Iran, but the Russians are not saying it is really happening...
If sources *are* right that they made the buy, they'll come in starting in September and finish delivery by year's end.
Notes: the Iranians have had a limited number of S-300PMU-1 systems for years; in an amusing note, some analysts claim the reason Israel practiced near Greece was that besides the distance being right, the Greeks are also S-300 operators and could have acted as a Red Team.
sources: Reuters, PressTV(Iran), various.
@Susan
Yes, so it seems. Let's see if they actually call the UNSC into council this week about this.
Follow-up for those able to follow a discussion of Air Defense in action, specifically regarding S-300 and TOR M-1 systems in the Iranian SAM mix:
Strategy Page Forums on this
source note: Strategy Page is Al Nofi's place.
I just got this off the Venezuela Star-
Iran has test fired a new missile which is said to be capable of targeting an enemy vessel within a range of 300 kilometres.
"I just got this off the Venezuela Star-"
Good guess, Susan, but no prize.
that is the reprint of the Iranian media report (that includes the usual claims they can "shut down the Strait of Hormuz" to boost Oil Futures prices)
What the Iranians call "new" is likely remanufactures of 20 year-old technology they bought from someone who bought it from Russia or China.
They do some clever stuff, but this item wasn't one of them.
and this is why I have you LDG-- to correct these false statements as they sure are misleading- are they not?
@Susan
"...they sure are misleading- are they not?"
((nodnod))
Post a Comment