Iran, the IAEA & U.S.-EU machinations

The Iranian government’s statement earlier this fall that it might withdraw from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) drew immediate threats of force and even war from the U.S. and British governments. It was at this juncture that, according to a Nov. 9 Al-Jazeera report, Iran decided to set up a market for oil and associated derivatives that sends out invoices for energy contracts in euros rather than dollars.

Al-Jazeera wrote, “The contention that this could unseat the dollar’s dominance as the de facto currency” of reserve for oil and major commercial and world financial transactions “may be overstated, but this has not stopped many commentators from linking America’s political disquiet with Iran to the proposed Iranian Oil Bourse (IOB). The plan to set up the IOB was put forward, for the first time, in Iran’s Third Development Plan of 2000-2005. But the depreciation of the dollar since the year 2000 has been one strong reason for the shift to euros.

“It is a general consensus that if the plan is successfully implemented, the IOB will reward Iran with concrete economic benefits, especially if more of the invoices of its energy contracts are issued in euros. From the economic and geopolitical point of view, invoicing in euros is a rational strategy, since 45 percent of its total trade is with the euro zone. Furthermore, Europe is the final destination for one-third of Iran’s oil exports, while the U.S. is not a direct purchaser of Iran’s oil production.

“Every student of economic discipline is aware that the U.S., by fixing the dollar in the position of world reserve currency, has enjoyed tremendous advantage in international trade and benefited handsomely for more than half a century.”

According to Emilie Rutledge of Aljazeera.net, “George Perkovich of the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has argued that Iran’s decision to consider invoicing oil sales in euros is ‘part of a very intelligent strategy to go on the offensive in every way possible and mobilize other actors against the U.S.’”

The Iranian government’s decision to begin the process of converting yellowcake uranium to the gaseous state of uranium tetrafluoride invited an immediate reaction by George Bush and Tony Blair. Both threatened Iran with isolation and Blair warned that Iran will face “a much more difficult life” if it does not follow the direction set by the Western states, according to ABC Online of Nov. 3.

The response of the Iranian people was to demonstrate by the millions in many cities. Realizing it could not cow them into accepting the language of force and violence, the U.S.-EU coalition of imperialists came up with a new design for a new day. This fresh mirage looked like a compromise that Iran could not reject in the eyes of the so-called international community—another name for the big powers that rule the world.

The new plan proposed to grant Iran the right to continue the conversion process as it has done since August 2005, that is, the chemical change prior to the enrichment of uranium that would be needed to make usable fuel. But the process of enriching uranium would be done in Russia, which would ship the fuel for energy reactors back to Iran.

From the start of this plot, the EU and U.S. knew that the Iranian people and their government would not accept such a pseudo solution to their inviolable right to determine their own destiny. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was shuttling between Moscow and Beijing to convince the leaders there to bring pressure on Iran to give up its right to a full-fledged nuclear energy program and accept the solutions of ever-dependency on other countries for the future generations to come. According to the Nov. 10 New York Times, the new proposal is an effort to give Iran a face-saving way out of its standoff, reflecting the views of officials from both the U.S. and Europe.

The Iranian response on Nov. 14 to the fraudulent proposal was a resounding “no.” Iran went a step further and announced that it was ready to cooperate with other countries in a joint venture to produce fuel for its civilian nuclear energy reactors. Both Russian and Chinese leaders have often said that Iran has an inalienable right to the uranium enrichment process within the framework of the nuclear Non-Prolif eration Treaty. These two countries also disassociated themselves from the new scheme of Washington and London.

On the other hand, Bush and Blair came into possession of a new propaganda tool against Iran, hoping to influence the IAEA board members at their Nov. 24 meeting to refer Iran’s actions to the UN Security Council. The problem for Washington and London was that the composition of the IAEA board was to change by that date; the newcomers are Cuba, Belarus and Syria. In mid-October Condoleezza Rice had admitted that the U.S. might lack the votes to pass a resolution referring Iran to the UN Security Council. No action was taken against Iran by the IAEA during its Nov. 24 meeting in Vienna. (Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 6)

By early November, Iran had invited the IAEA to inspect its Parchin facility, a military base that the U.S. had claimed to be the most intensive Iranian nuclear enrichment plant for the production of nuclear bombs. IAEA spokesperson Melissa Flem ing confirmed that the UN inspectors “were allowed to visit everywhere at the complex, do interviews, and take samples.” She reaffirmed that “we are pleased, we got access; it was not restricted. We were allowed to see all the buildings and to take environmental samples.” (New York Times, Nov. 7)

But anytime the imperialist establishments and their henchmen in the U.S. or abroad do not like what they hear from international agencies, they begin discrediting their results and challenging the legitimacy and credibility of their findings. For example, the Oct. 14 Toronto Star tried to discredit the UN agency but said not a word about Israel, which has already amassed a stockpile of nuclear weapons and is not even a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Apparently, the newspaper’s editors think that some countries and classes are above the law.

The U.S. has resorted to its old tricks, ones concocted in the laboratories of the CIA and the offices of President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney—who defends exempting the U.S. military from the ban on torture of prisoners kidnapped around the world.

For its final act of deception before the IAEA meeting on Sept. 24, the U.S. government publicized that it was in possession of a laptop showing Iran’s “intention” of planning to construct atomic warheads to fit its new missile, called Shahab (Shooting Star). The Bush administration, apparently understanding the width of its credibility gap, discussed the content of the laptop computer in a dozen private and secret settings, including the top of a skyscraper in Vienna. The content of the laptop is not actual data from practical research study or test results, but simply a simulation.

A European diplomat who was privy to the secret meeting said after the gathering, “I can fabricate that data.”