Iran's nuclear programme: Deadline missed

Economist | Oct. 24, 2009 (Editorial)

Iran has again failed to do deadlines. It has been evading them in the seven years since an opposition group first outed its extensive covert nuclear programme, despite five UN Security Council resolutions that have told it to halt its suspect nuclear work. After talks that ended in Vienna on October 21st, Iran and the three countries trying to strike a side-deal over new fuel for a Tehran-based nuclear reactor were told by Mohamed ElBaradei, outgoing ... Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins

See All Reviews »

View

1.7

by Judith Bello - Oct. 24, 2009

This is poor journalism. The piece is written from a very us-centric/west-centric point of view. It is just one more piece hammering on Iran to do what WE want OR ELSE. This is not a viable diplomatic perspective and encourages the reader to buy a very one-sided point of view without question. It assumes that the US and the Western European countries are the only ones that matter, and there is no other point of view. US, Europe, Russia and China do not have a consensus on this issue as the article implies. By misrepresenting the context, it supports a jingoistic, narrow perspective that has been achieving increasingly negative results for the last 30 years. Moreover, he reader is denied information necessary to make an informed judgement about current events. It is time to end the relentless propaganda campaign against Iran triggered by the assumption of power there 30 years ago of a group that have not, and will not, be pawns of the west. The last time that happened in Iran, the 'renegade' Prime Minister, Mossadeq, was deposed by US CIA and UK Secret Service. Having the Ayatollah's take power and throw out our puppet was a rude awakening, which many sources, including the Economist, have yet to forgive. This attitude is childish and ignorant. The Economist is one of the worst offenders on this account.

The Iranian Government has significant security issues of it's own to deal with in these negotiations. They have international support from Russia and China who have viable relationships with them. Their responses within the context of the negotiation are rational and compliant within reason. It is paranoid to take every response they make to our demands and frame it as recalcitrance and perversity. We are, in fact, projecting our own attitudes and methods of conflict on them. They gap has become so great that Western Intelligence no longer has a good grasp of what is and is not happening inside of Iran. It has come to a point where our only sources of intelligence on Iran are Israel, clearly a hostile and biased source, and the MLK, a terrorist organization with zero credibility inside Iran. This is not a positive situation for diplomacy. At the same time, it is quite clear that if Israel, meaning Israel and the US attack Iran, there will be consequences. Not only are our interests, bases and people in the area at risk, but if the attack went on for very long, if it were to escalate, Russia and China would surely have an interest. It wouldn't be a pretty picture.