I am writing this article before the end of the meeting in Vienna, which is taking place under the umbrella of the International Atomic Energy Agency to discuss Iran's nuclear program. From what I heard up until Wednesday noon – following the adjournment of the second session on Tuesday – is a repetition of what we have all heard while Iran was still meeting with the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany in Geneva earlier this month. In fact, the situation is as follows: The four western countries, at the instigation of Israel, are trying to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear military capabilities. As such, they are threatening Iran with a fourth round of UN sanctions, while Russia and China are not enthusiastic about any additional sanctions, or about the need to suspend the nuclear program in the first place, since both of their trade relations with Iran, especially those related to oil, are more important than the latter's nuclear program. - Iran is stating that its nuclear program is peaceful, and is insisting on its right to uranium enrichment. As such, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced time and again that his country will not suspend its enrichment of uranium. This was also echoed by Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, and the spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Agency of Iran Ali Shirzadian. - Both the Western and Iranian stances are as clear as the noon's sun shining over southern Iran; yet, their meetings almost never end, and I don't understand what it is exactly that the West does not understand about the Iranian position, and vice versa. Before we hear about yet another new meeting in Geneva, Vienna or even Mars, I want to note down some facts that the negotiators are going around as if they do not understand them: - Iran is trying to buy time, and while it may not be seeking to produce a nuclear bomb, it wants to procure the knowledge and capability to produce it in time of need. - The Israeli stance is arrogance incarnate, as Israel possesses both nuclear weapons and the missiles to carry them, while it seeks to prevent Iran from acquiring similar weaponry. Israel is even threatening to strike Iran based on the latter's intentions and not on what it actually possesses. - I agree with Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, when he said that Iran's nuclear capabilities are exaggerated, and that an Israeli military strike will effectively turn the entire Middle East into a fireball - The low level uranium enrichment in Iran is lower than the grade needed for a nuclear military program; as such, the present fears about Iran, or the fear mongering against Iran, does not reflect the actual situation. - A Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction is the ideal solution in this case. But as long as Israel has such weapons in its possession, it is the duty of all countries in the region to seek to acquire similar weapons without any exception, in particular Egypt after the Israel fascist have threatened to bomb Aswan's high dam, and Saudi Arabia as the oil wells it possesses have a global importance that need to be protected by nuclear weapons. I want to pause here to say that it is not possible for me to be aware of something that the negotiating countries are not aware of; nonetheless, we find ourselves now facing a second round of the dialogue of the deaf in a single month. We had heard following the meeting in Geneva that Iran had agreed that its uranium be enriched in Russia and France. After that, a meeting in Vienna was held where Iran decided that it does not trust France and thus does not want to deal with it; in the next meeting, Iran might withdraw its acceptance to ship more than three-quarters of its stockpile of nuclear fuel to be enriched out of the country, or might impose new conditions. It might even pre-empt this with new conditions before allowing the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its reactor near Qom, and which it acknowledged on the eve of the meeting in Geneva, and which was then scheduled for inspection on the 25th of this month. Meanwhile, the United States has set a deadline for its negotiations with Iran that expires at the end of this year, before going to the UN Security Council in case those negotiations failed, in order to impose further sanctions on Iran. However, Iran might continue to advance new offers that constantly need additional time to study before the year's end. In this situation, I have minimal confidence in Iran, especially given its ambitions in the Gulf. My confidence in the western countries is even less, given the Israeli influence over the American decision-makers. As such, the only credible reference is Dr. ElBaradei and his agency, who were laureates of the Nobel Peace Prize even when Bush was in power in America; however, he will soon leave his post following the end of his second term at the end of next month, and there is no guarantee at all that his successor will be honest and bold and unbiased like him. Otherwise, the truth will be lost just like the Arabs these days. .
