Iran elected Vice-Chair of UN Disarmament Commission

[August1991]

In other business, the following delegations were elected as Vice-chairpersons, by acclamation: Chile, Uruguay and Iran. Coly Seck of Senegal was elected to serve as Rapporteur. Both the Commission Chairman and the Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs urged the speedy election of the Chairperson of Working Group I on the nuclear weapons-related item, so that deliberations could begin on Wednesday, 12 April, following the general debate.

UN Press Release

This was decided on 10 April, but it has only now made it into the mainstream press.

The absurdity of this is one thing. But if you click on the UN link and glance through the release, your eyes will quickly glaze over by the empty rhetoric of the different delegations. For example, here's the US:

JOHN A. BRAVACO ( United States) said that, after three years of inaction, the Disarmament Commission was back to work on the basis of a balanced agenda. The issues to be addressed were important ones, and the United States was committed to working with all delegations as they sought to elaborate consensus recommendations. That was not an easy task and there were no guarantees of success, but the fact that the process had begun was a vital first step and evidence that not every part of the United Nations disarmament machinery was ossified. All delegations shared in that achievement, but he wished to pay special tribute to Ambassador Rowe of Sierra Leone. His tireless efforts in countless informal meetings and organizational sessions in no small measure had brought the Commission to this point.

Our tax dollars pay for this nonsense and the truly sad thing is that these people think they are doing vital, prestigious work.

Any organization that has Iran on a Disarmament Commission is absurd, but any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage is irrelevant.

Here's a New York Post oped piece:

The United Nations is of no use in advancing U.S. foreign-policy goals or in promoting the lofty ideals with which many still associate it. It has discredited itself again and again. The time has come to cage the animals, ship them back home, and bring down the tent on the U.N. circus.

[geoffrey]

Yup, its about time the UN went by the wayside. It's just turned itself into a massive organization that provides very little benefit for the cost.

There is so much corruption, so much hypocracy... so much irrelevance.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Any organization that has Iran on a Disarmament Commission is absurd, but any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage is irrelevant.

Just a side question, do you think the US (or Russia, China, etc...) would be a better candidate for the disarmament commission?

[KrustyKidd]

Just a side question, do you think the US (or Russia, China, etc...) would be a better candidate for the disarmament commission?

I would say for sure. They have proven they will not use their weapons whenever the blood boils and, all are relatively stable and run by non religious fanatics. As well, none of them are on the front page of every newspaper n the world for nuclear brinkmanship as iran is.

A last point, all of them are commited to overall world stability rather than chaos as an extension of their foreign policy.

[geoffrey]

Any organization that has Iran on a Disarmament Commission is absurd, but any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage is irrelevant.

Just a side question, do you think the US (or Russia, China, etc...) would be a better candidate for the disarmament commission?

The US and Russia have dramatically reduced their arms over the last 3 decades. Great people for disarmament commissions. A nation that is violating UN resolutions by the truckload to build nuclear weapons to use on an attack against Israel (this is a goal of the government of Iran) is not a nation to be even in the UN.

[Black Dog]

The US and Russia have dramatically reduced their arms over the last 3 decades. Great people for disarmament commissions. A nation that is violating UN resolutions by the truckload to build nuclear weapons to use on an attack against Israel (this is a goal of the government of Iran) is not a nation to be even in the UN.

What UN resolutions is Iran violating?

Yup, its about time the UN went by the wayside. It's just turned itself into a massive organization that provides very little benefit for the cost.

There is so much corruption, so much hypocracy... so much irrelevance.

Agreed, any organization with separate rules for one group (the old boys club of the security council) and another for the rest is useless.

[August1991]

Yup, its about time the UN went by the wayside. It's just turned itself into a massive organization that provides very little benefit for the cost.

There is so much corruption, so much hypocracy... so much irrelevance.

Agreed, any organization with separate rules for one group (the old boys club of the security council) and another for the rest is useless.

Of course, everyone should have the right to have tactical nuclear weapons - that'll make the world more fair and lower the crime rate too. 2nd Amendment rights and all...

Any organization that has Iran on a Disarmament Commission is absurd, but any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage is irrelevant.

Just a side question, do you think the US (or Russia, China, etc...) would be a better candidate for the disarmament commission?

My point was that any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage should be simply abolished. These "officials" believe they have "prestigious" jobs doing "vital" work. They're not.

For the life of me, I've never understood why we show such deference to politicians and senior government officials. These people enjoy all kinds of immunities and privileges. Why?

In the 1940s, the UN may have had an idealistic purpose and during the Cold War, it may have provided a venue for discussion. Now, it is just nonsense.

[Black Dog]

Of course, everyone should have the right to have tactical nuclear weapons - that'll make the world more fair and lower the crime rate too. 2nd Amendment rights and all...

Don't be fatuous. When I read that Iran is violating UN resolutions (despite the fact that the matter hasn't even been referred to the UNSC as yet) it makes me think that people are copying sentences from early 2003 and replacing a "q" with an "n", if you know what I mean.

My point was that any organization that puts out press releases with such verbiage should be simply abolished. These "officials" believe they have "prestigious" jobs doing "vital" work. They're not.

I think you'd find, by that criterea, you'd end up eliminating 90 per cent of government agencies and private corporations.

[KrustyKidd]

Don't be fatuous. When I read that Iran is violating UN resolutions (despite the fact that the matter hasn't even been referred to the UNSC as yet) it makes me think that people are copying sentences from early 2003 and replacing a "q" with an "n", if you know what I mean.

And even the Euros are cooperating once again talking about sanctions and such. Heck, the Iranians are even helping out saying they have the stuff and will keep doing it despite what anybody says. Quite unlike Saddam's denials which makes this a totally different situation than a few years back.

[geoffrey]

The US and Russia have dramatically reduced their arms over the last 3 decades. Great people for disarmament commissions. A nation that is violating UN resolutions by the truckload to build nuclear weapons to use on an attack against Israel (this is a goal of the government of Iran) is not a nation to be even in the UN.

What UN resolutions is Iran violating?

Uh, the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Enforced by the UN and IAEA and signed by Iran.

[Black Dog]

Uh, the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Enforced by the UN and IAEA and signed by Iran.

...which have yet to show Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Thus Iran is not yet in violation of the NPT.

[GostHacked]

Uh, the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Enforced by the UN and IAEA and signed by Iran.

...which have yet to show Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Thus Iran is not yet in violation of the NPT.

If that is the case. what are they in violation of then?

[geoffrey]

If that is the case. what are they in violation of then?

Allowing inspectors to access their sites and disclosing information about locations of refineries.

...which have yet to show Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Thus Iran is not yet in violation of the NPT.

You can't be serious? Removing cameras from their facilities and refusing inspections REQUIRED by treaties they are signatories to isn't suspicious to you?

[Black Dog]

You can't be serious? Removing cameras from their facilities and refusing inspections REQUIRED by treaties they are signatories to isn't suspicious to you?

I have no doubt Iran is seeking nuclear weapons (or are at least keeping up that pretense). But that prospect doesn't have me al that worried, certainly not to the point where military action is a reasonable option.

[geoffrey]

So an Iran with nukes isn't of concern to you?

[Black Dog]

So an Iran with nukes isn't of concern to you?

No more than a nuclear Pakistan, India, Israel, China, Russia, U.K., France, North Korea or U.S.A is, no.

[Shady]

No more than a nuclear Pakistan, India, Israel, China, Russia, U.K., France, North Korea or U.S.A is, no

Wow, I'd love to live in the world you're living in, unfortunately I'm sober. And unfortunately, I live in a world where "President" Ahmadinejad has stated that Israel should be "wiped off the map", and Iran is a country with massive ties to terrorism, with a culture that sees suicide as a religious path to heaven.

[Black Dog]

Wow, I'd love to live in the world you're living in, unfortunately I'm sober. And unfortunately, I live in a world where "President" Ahmadinejad has stated that Israel should be "wiped off the map", and Iran is a country with massive ties to terrorism, with a culture that sees suicide as a religious path to heaven.

That's an interesting world you live in: too bad it has no connection with the one we hu-mans call "Earth". See, Ahmadinejad can run is mouth all he wants: at the end of the day, the clerics who run the show simply aren't going to let some hillbilly firebrand destroy what they've spent more than 25 years building, no matter what. Ahmadinejad will be sleeping at the bottom of the Straits of Hormuz (metaphorically and/or literally) before he does anything stupid. All of that, of course, assumes that Ahmadinejad actually intends to make good on his threats, which itself is quite a leap. IMV, the rhetoric coming from Tehran is part of a domestic political game.

[GostHacked]

Totaly agreed BD. My neighbours to the south have most of the worlds nuclear arms. Should I be worried about Iran or North Korea? Not really. The US is the only country that has used nuclear type weapons against another country. The US is the only country (that I know of) to use small tactical nukes (bunker busters) in war against other countries. To me this makes the US more of a threat to global peace than Iran having a few nukes that would take out Israel.

And even if he takes out Israel, how will that affect you sitting behind your computer in the US? Other than the years of the media creating a long term and subconcious interest in Isreal in a way that the US population would support and defend Israel at almost any cost.

They guys with the biggest and most guns scare me the most. Iran is still years away from even making one nuclear weapon, most likely it will be a test bomb. Gotta test so you know your technology works. If it fails, then back to the drawing board they go. I say they are 5 years away from even getting a test bomb. ONE SINGLE bomb.

also

You can't be serious? Removing cameras from their facilities and refusing inspections REQUIRED by treaties they are signatories to isn't suspicious to you?

Removing the cameras is one thing. Proliferating it around to other countries WOULD be a bad thing. And if we want to go there, the US has done more proliferation of nuclear and small arms than most countries combined. The only country that could potentialy proliferate more is the former Soviet Union. Through that breakup alot of stuff is in other newly formed countries and cannot be controled as easily. (well that is one reason why the US has permanent bases in former east bloc countires.

So no, overall Iran is not that much of a threat in any way shape or form.

[Black Dog]

Totaly agreed BD. My neighbours to the south have most of the worlds nuclear arms. Should I be worried about Iran or North Korea? Not really. The US is the only country that has used nuclear type weapons against another country. The US is the only country (that I know of) to use small tactical nukes (bunker busters) in war against other countries. To me this makes the US more of a threat to global peace than Iran having a few nukes that would take out Israel.

FYI: Bunker busters aren't nukes. But the point is this: nuclear weapons are as limiting as they are empowering: the threat of your own destruction means that you can only use nukes against non nuclear states (which, incidentally is what the U.S. is doing with Iran right now). And even then, there's the stigma and inevitable global repercussions of such an action. I don't know what makes Iran exempt from these real world concerns: talk of religious fanaticism and a supposed cultural predilication for suicide (ironic that a culture like that would persist so long, hey?) is simple fearmongering by people unfamiliar with the basic facts of the situation.

[No truth]

The Iranians may be fanatics, but they aren't stupid. Compare the treatment of Iraq (no nukes) and Afghanistan (no nukes) to the treatment of North Korea (nukes). The Iranians know that the best way for them to guard against a McDonalds on every corner (which is what they're really fighting) is to develop nuclear weapons, and then just sit there. This will ensure no U.S. invasion, at least until its the last possible option.

In today's world, nuclear weapons = U.S. respect.

[KrustyKidd]

The Iranians may be fanatics, but they aren't stupid.

Yes indeed they are not. I view their actions and rhetoric as one of the best acts of politicking in ages.

Compare the treatment of Iraq (no nukes) and Afghanistan (no nukes) to the treatment of North Korea (nukes).

Iraq = central region with postioning capabillity for the US to influence the entire Middle East and protect it's allies and trading partners from. With particular attention to Syria, Saudi Arabia and with a strong Iraqi democratic market economy, counteract the Iranian influence which is a threat to Sadui Arabia and as a consequence, helps legitimize Al Queda.

Afganistan = Taliban run and supporter of Al Queda and, Al Queda territory from which training, planning and headquartering of the organization took place.

North Korea = place in middle of nowhere that if attacked is a dead end street with little or no tactical value. Much cheaper to negotiate, and, if failing that, adopt sanctions and as a last resort, drop a few bombs on them.

The Iranians know that the best way for them to guard against a McDonalds on every corner (which is what they're really fighting) is to develop nuclear weapons, and then just sit there.

Ok, you've lost it completely here. Nobody is going to let them have nukes. They know it and the world knows it, hence, they will never reach the stage where they will have them to guard against anything. However, this is all about just what you said = 'guard against a McDonalds on every corner.' Black Dog nailed this one right to the bedpost pretty good the other day. I call this mini essay 'Sleeping With the Fishes'

See, Ahmadinejad can run is mouth all he wants: at the end of the day, the clerics who run the show simply aren't going to let some hillbilly firebrand destroy what they've spent more than 25 years building, no matter what. Ahmadinejad will be sleeping at the bottom of the Straits of Hormuz (metaphorically and/or literally) before he does anything stupid. All of that, of course, assumes that Ahmadinejad actually intends to make good on his threats, which itself is quite a leap. IMV, the rhetoric coming from Tehran is part of a domestic political game.

Clerics want traditional values in an every increasingly modern and younger society that is trying to wrench it's way from the religious domination and ..... their influence. And, with Iraq going democratic that is scaring the shit out of them and they want some say in who and how the government in Iraq is formed and comprised of. They want to display their weight in the region and enhance trade and their economy. They are an economic power, not a military one.

This will ensure no U.S. invasion, at least until its the last possible option.

Invade? What the bloody hell are you talking about? Invade and do what? Sit there and bring democracy to a democratic country? Give me an example of an operation in which there is a rudementry objective for invasion and, what the loose planning for it might be against a military that is, while larger than Iraq's, less effective but, is virtually everywhere. And, with no pretext for invasion, what they possibly could invent to the World and what pretext to Congress would sway them as they continue to shift against Bush day by day.

Worst case scenario is first, a few bunker busters to let them know the US is serious. Next is the use of small nukes on the suspect facilities. If that does not get the responses going positive, then more and larger. Iran knows that. Europe knows this and the US knows this. Hence, unless Iran has something to gain by not having a nuke and then watching all it's development facilities get wiped out then this is brinkmanship pure and simple. As for the Israeli actions, won't happen for various political but mainly strategic reasons. They can't get there without doing two refuelings to make the round trip. And, would require US help. Which would also require the Iraqis and or, Saudis to be in on it.

In today's world, nuclear weapons = U.S. respect.

Yes. However, only because the infastructure to develop, deliver and guard those weapons require a working economy. A working economy requires requires stability. Stability requires good leadership. A country that does not have all that then will not be permitted to have them.

[scribblet]

Interesting article here:

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50090

MI6, Britain's secret intelligence service, has identified six Pakistani scientists working in Iran's nuclear bomb program who have been "advising al-Qaida on how to weaponize fissionable materials it has now obtained."

MI6 and the International Atomic Energy Agency believe the scientists have played a major role in enabling Iran to be "well advanced in providing uranium enriched materials for nuclear bombs," said Alexander Cirilovic, a nuclear terrorism expert in Paris.

Both high-level MI6 and CIA sources have confirmed the scientists would only have been allowed to assist al-Qaida with the authority of Iran's unpredictable President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The revelation comes at a time when Washington has increased pressure on Tehran to give up its nuclear weapons program.

The scientists worked for Dr. A.Q. Khan, the "father of the Islamic bomb," who is now under house arrest in Pakistan after confessing he had provided both Iran and North Korea with details of how to make their own nuclear bombs.

The MI6 report to other intelligence services followed bin Laden's recent threats to unleash a new wave of terror – with Britain and the United States his prime targets.

Recently, from his lair in north Pakistan, bin Laden boasted that "al-Qaida did not find it difficult to obtain the weapons grade material. We have contacts in Russia with other militant groups. Enough material to make a tactical nuke is available for £15 million."

[KrustyKidd]

Interesting article here:

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50090

MI6, Britain's secret intelligence service, has identified six Pakistani scientists working in Iran's nuclear bomb program who have been "advising al-Qaida on how to weaponize fissionable materials it has now obtained."

I find this pretty difficult to take at face value for one reason. Iran has no love for Al Queda and, they view them as upstarts and an entity trying to pick up their claim to fame, which is being leader and represntitive of islam. To allow AQ to operate or aid them is to help the competition so to speak.

Its proximity to Iran's own nuclear facilities has made it easy for the Pakistani scientists to assist al-Qaida.

Easy? They have nonstop connecting flights to the cave? This is bull.

[Argus]

Totaly agreed BD. My neighbours to the south have most of the worlds nuclear arms. Should I be worried about Iran or North Korea? Not really. The US is the only country that has used nuclear type weapons against another country. The US is the only country (that I know of) to use small tactical nukes (bunker busters) in war against other countries. To me this makes the US more of a threat to global peace than Iran having a few nukes that would take out Israel.

Wow. Talk about delusional nonsense. I guess this is what decades of soft-headed journalism and a lack of education does to your ability to think and imagine.

The US is the only country that has used nukes!! That is one of the most intellectually bankrupt statements I've ever heard. And, of course, it's a cliche, because every brainless leftoid nitwit uses it to attack the US - as if ANY nation in WW2 which had nukes wouldn't have used them. Including us. Bunker busters are not nukes, and that's stretching reality to such an odd degree I have to wonder what sort of bizarre ideological world outlook even includes it here.

And even if he takes out Israel, how will that affect you sitting behind your computer in the US?

Let's see; millions dying in the retaliation (Israel's known, even though unadmited policy is to hit all Arab nations if it is hit by a nuke), clouds of radiation drifting across Asia, collapse of governments throughout the mid-east leading to widespread famine and civil war and millions more deaths, a massive shortage of oil leading to a world-wide depression. No, that's not important at all.

They guys with the biggest and most guns scare me the most.

Let's see, the guy with the biggest guns is usually the military or the cops. You fear them more than street gangs and organized crime, do you? The military likely to come busting into your house and shove a gun into your mouth any day now?