------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/1TwplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

The Guardian
22 September, 2004

PROLIFERATION TREATY

By George Monbiot

Of course Iran wants the bomb, and the international
system has given it everything it needs to build one.

Poor Mr Baradei,
His mission is a parody:
He tells the states (with some aplomb)
They can and cannot have the bomb.

Here is the world's most nonsensical job description.
Your duty is to work tirelessly to prevent the
proliferation of nuclear weapons. And to work
tirelessly to encourage the proliferation of the means
of building them. This is the task of the head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed El
Baradei.

He is an able diplomat, and as bold as his
predecessor, Hans Blix, in standing up to the global
powers. But what he is obliged to take away with one
hand, he is obliged to give with the other. His
message to the non-nuclear powers is this: you are not
allowed to develop the bomb, but we will give you the
materials and expertise with which you can build one.
It is this mortal contradiction which permitted the
government of Iran this weekend to tell him to bog
off.

His agency's motto - "Atoms for Peace" - wasn't always
a lie. In 1953, when Eisenhower founded it with his
famous speech to the United Nations, people really
seemed to believe that nuclear fission could solve the
world's problems. An article in the Herald Tribune,
for example, promised that atomic power would create
"an earthly paradise... Our automobiles eventually
will have atomic energy units built into them at the
factory so that we will never have to refuel them...
In a relatively short time we will cease to mine
coal."

Eisenhower seemed convinced that the nuclear sword
could be beaten into the nuclear ploughshare. "It is
not enough to take this weapon out of the hands of the
soldiers. It must be put into the hands of those who
will know how to strip its military casing and adapt
it to the arts of peace." The nuclear powers, he said,
"should... make joint contributions from their
stockpiles of normal uranium and fissionable
materials" which should then be given to "the
power-starved areas of the world", "to provide
abundant electrical energy". This would give them, he
argued, the necessary incentive to forswear the use of
nuclear weapons.

The IAEA, its statute says, should assist "the
supplying of materials, equipment, or facilities" to
non-nuclear states. It should train nuclear scientists
and "foster the exchange of scientific and technical
information". Its mission, in other words, is to
prevent the development of nuclear weapons, while
spreading nuclear technology to as many countries as
possible. It is also responsible for enforcing the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which has the same
dual purpose.

There might have been a case, while Eisenhower's dream
could still be dreamt. But to persist with this
programme long after it became clear that it caused
proliferation, not containment, suggests that the
global powers are living in a world of make-believe.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has put nuclear
technology "into the hands of those who will know how
to strip its civilian casing and adapt it to the arts
of war".

It's not difficult. Every state which has sought to
develop a nuclear weapons programme over the past 30
years - Israel, South Africa, India, Pakistan, North
Korea and Iraq - has done so by diverting resources
from its nuclear power programme. In some cases they
built their weapons with the direct assistance of
Atoms for Peace.

India developed its bomb with the help of fissionable
material and expertise from Canada, the US, Germany,
France, Norway and the UK. Pakistan was able to answer
the threat with the help of Canada, the US, Germany,
France, Belgium, China and the UK. In the name of
peace, we equipped these nations for total war.

Now there are about 20 countries which, as a result of
foreign help for their civilian nuclear programmes,
could, if they choose, become nuclear weapons states
within months. When Russia shipped uranium and the
technologies required to build a bomb to Iran, it not
only had a right to do so: under the non-proliferation
treaty, it had a duty to do so.

It's not yet clear whether Iran has stepped over the
brink. It is plainly enriching uranium and producing
heavy water, which could enable it to build both
uranium- and plutonium-based bombs. But both processes
are also legitimate means of developing materials for
nuclear power generation. To enrich uranium from
power-grade to bomb-grade you need only pass it
through the centrifuges a few more times. The
non-proliferation treaty gives Iran both the right to
own the materials and the cover it requires to use
them for a weapons programme. If you want to build a
bomb, you simply sign the treaties, join the IAEA,
then use your entitlements to do what they were
designed to prevent.

Iran certainly has plenty of motives for seeking to
become a nuclear power. Israel has enough nuclear
weapons to wipe it off the map. Sheltered by the US,
it has no incentive to dismantle them and sign the
non-proliferation treaty. Both the US and the UK have
abandoned their own obligations to disarm, and appear
to be contemplating a new generation of nuclear
weapons. Both governments have also suggested that
they would be prepared to use them pre-emptively. Iran
is surrounded by American military bases, and is one
of the two surviving members of the axis of evil. The
other one, North Korea, has been threatening its
neighbours with impunity. Why? Because it has the
bomb. If Iran is not developing a nuclear weapons
programme, it hasn't understood the drift of global
politics.

But what can El Baradei do? He can beg Iran to stop
developing enriched uranium, but the treaty he is
supposed to be enforcing gives him no authority to do
so: the government has pointed out that it's legally
entitled to pursue all the processes he fears. This is
why he's seeking to persuade it to stick to "voluntary
agreements".

I hope I don't need to explain how dangerous all this
is. The official nuclear powers have junked the
non-proliferation treaty, while the non-nuclear powers
are using it to develop their own programmes. If
Hizbullah clobbers Israel, Israel might turn on Iran,
and the Middle East could go up in nuclear dust,
rapidly followed by everyone else who has decided to
join the second nuclear arms race. And the man charged
with preventing this from happening is still
facilitating it.

The obvious conclusion is that you can't phase out
nuclear weapons without phasing out nuclear power. Now
that the old treaty has become worse than useless, now
that the promise of an earthly paradise of free power
and electricity too cheap to meter has been shown to
be false, isn't it time for a new nuclear treaty,
based not on Eisenhower's chiliastic fantasy but on
grim global realities? Isn't it time for Mr Baradei to
stop destroying the world in order to save it?


_________________________________

SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN):
An informal information platform for
activists and scholars concerned about
Nuclearisation in South Asia

South Asians Against Nukes Mailing List:
archives are available @ two locations
May 1998 - March 2002:
<groups.yahoo.com/group/sap/messages/1>
Feb. 2001 - to date:
<groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/messages/1>

To subscribe send a blank message to:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

South Asians Against Nukes Website:
www.s-asians-against-nukes.org


SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN):
An informal information platform for activists and scholars concerned about the 
dangers of Nuclearisation in South Asia
SAAN Website:
http://www.s-asians-against-nukes.org

SAAN Mailing List:
To subscribe send a blank message to: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

SAAN Mailing List Archive :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/ 
________________________________
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not 
necessarily reflect the views of SAAN compilers. 

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





Reply via email to