Thursday, June 23, 2011

Meir Javedanfar Strikes Again!
Inappropriate Use of "Unprecedented" Reveals His Agenda

Just a quick observation:

Iran alarmist Meir Javedanfar is at it again. This morning he tweeted:

The article Javedanfar links to is a brief Associated Press report from this morning (and picked up by MSNBC) which states that "Iran's president says his country isn't afraid of making a nuclear weapon but doesn't intend to do so." It then quotes Ahmadinejad as saying, "If we do want to make a bomb, we are not afraid of anybody."

Why Javedanfar believes this to be (a) news, let alone (b) "unprecedented", is anybody's guess, but the likely reason is that he simply isn't well-informed and jumps on any possible opportunity to fear-monger about the Iranian nuclear energy program.

Considering Javedanfar fancies himself an expert and a journalist, one would hope he would think before he tweets (or, at minimum, take three seconds to do a bit of research). Clearly, he is unaware of (or willfully ignores) Ahmadinejad's history of consistent statements about the Iranian nuclear program, namely the comment made to Charlie Rose in early May 2010. During an interview, Ahmadinejad said:

"Let me just set your mind -- I want to give your mind some rest here. We are opposed to the bomb, the nuclear bomb, and we will not build it. If we want to build it, we have the guts to say it. We’re courageous enough to say it, because we’re not afraid of anyone. If we want to have the bomb, we’ll come and tell everyone he want to build it. We’re not afraid of anyone if we want to make it. Who’s there to be afraid of? So when we say we don’t want it, we don’t want it."
Months earlier, on December 18, 2009, Ahmadinejad gave an interview during a climate change conference in Copenhagen, in which he said, "If we want to make a bomb we would not be afraid of the United States...but we do not want to make a bomb." He continued, "Our policy is transparent. If we wanted to make a bomb we would be brave enough to say so. When we say that we are not making one, we are not. We do not believe in it (the bomb)."

Days later, in a televised speech from the southern Iranian city of Shiraz, Ahmadinejad reiterated this point: "You should know that if we had any intention of building a bomb, we would have had enough guts and courage to announce that without any fear from you."

To recap:

December 2009: "If we want to make a bomb we would not be afraid of the United States...we would be brave enough to say so."

May 2010: "We're courageous enough to say it, because we're not afraid of anyone. If we want to have the bomb, we'll come and tell everyone he want to build it. We're not afraid of anyone if we want to make it."

June 2011: "If we do want to make a bomb, we are not afraid of anybody."

Doesn't seem so "unprecedented" now, does it? Keep it up, Meir, you make it so easy.



June 24, 2011 - In order to somehow vindicate his consistently embarrassing and transparent hysteria over the Iranian nuclear program, Javedanfar tweeted this today:

The link is to a new brief posted by David Albright's Institute for Science and International Security "Nuclear Iran" site which follows the same absurd illogic in which Javedanfar consistently traffics. The post declares, "Ahmadinejad's statement reflects Iran's apparent on-going effort to develop all the components of a nuclear weapons program that would give it the option to quickly break out if the decision were made to do so."

Though writing the same thing over and over and over again is indeed tedious, this should be addressed.

Despite the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Iran wishes to gain the ability to produce a nuclear weapon (these are the official conclusions of not only Iran, but of the IAEA and US intelligence agencies), if they were to do so, and stopped short of production while maintaining the capability (often dubbed the "Japan option" or "breakout option"), they would join a nuclear club of 140 countries that, according to the IAEA and even Green Peace, "currently have the basic technical capacity to produce nuclear weapons. Over 40 countries have the materials and knowhow to build nuclear weapons quickly, a capacity that is referred to as 'rapid break-out.'"

But even with this in mind, Iran has stated time and time that it regards the idea of "nuclear deterrence" to be a useless tool in foreign affairs and has no intention of being party to an arms race in the region. As such, Iran has called repeatedly for a comprehensive, internationally monitored agreement to affirm the Middle East as a nuclear weapons-free zone. The reason this is rejected out-of-hand by the US is solely because of Israel, which has an unmonitored and unrestricted arsenal of hundreds of nuclear weapons. The US has also provided vital nuclear weapons technology to both India and Pakistan, despite the fact that, like Israel, neither of the countries are NPT members, and therefore the actions of the US are totally illegal, as expressly stated by the terms of the Treaty itself.

The ISIS brief bizarrely concludes:
"With this new announcement, Iran's leaders may be laying the initial groundwork for a future policy of nuclear ambiguity, which they may hope will offer a certain amount of power, prestige, and deterrence against enemies. Additional announcements by Iranian leaders about its nuclear weapon capabilities bear close scrutiny."
The specter of Iranian "nuclear ambiguity" has now been raised. Kudos to ISIS for the new fear-mongering model. Naturally, a country with undeclared, ambiguous nuclear capabilities must be feared, and certainly not trusted! But, wait, what is Israel's nuclear posture? Oh right! Nuclear ambiguity! Clearly, this is not a problem for ISIS or for serial alarmists like Javefandar.

As the hysteria continues, the hypocrisy becomes ever more shameful.



July 22, 2011- A new Associated Press report, entitled "Iran Prez Said Pushing for Nukes" is yet another example of how the media uses old stories to continue its fear-mongering about Iran. One would almost expect to see an exclamation point and hear sinister "dun dun duuuuun" music following such a headline.

As discussed above, almost exactly a month ago, the AP reported a similar story, using the identical "revelation" that Ahmadinejad said, "If we do want to make a bomb, we are not afraid of anybody." This set off a wave of alarmist speculation and commentary about Ahmadinejad openly declaring the Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons.

The latest report takes hysterical hilarity to new heights, however. Apparently in an effort to make sure no one takes his journalism seriously, AP reporter George Jahn writes (the best parts have been bolded):
Iran's president wants to shed the nation's secrecy and forge ahead openly with developing nuclear weapons but is opposed by the clerical leadership, which is worried about international reaction to such a move, says an intelligence assessment shared with The Associated Press.

That view, from a nation with traditionally reliable intelligence from the region, cannot be confirmed and contrasts with assessments by other countries that view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as relatively moderate on the nuclear issue compared to the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Attempts to interpret Iran's goals are important because as it expands uranium enrichment, it is moving closer to being able to make a nuclear weapon by the day, even as it asserts that it is not interested in such arms and its programs are geared only to making reactor fuel.
Despite its sheer absurdity, Jahn's dispatch was enthusiastically picked up by most mainstream "news" outlets. Fox News ran with the predictably ridiculous headline "Iranian President Wants to Openly Develop Nukes", while ABC published it under the banner "AP Exclusive: Iran Prez Said Pushing for Nukes". MSNBC, CBS, The Boston Globe, Forbes, The Washington Times, and Ha'aretz also picked it up, as did countless regional papers and blogs.

By far the best line from the report is the one noting that the unconfirmed information (read: made-up nonsense) about Iranian intentions came "from a nation with traditionally reliable intelligence from the region." It's hilariously obvious what nation Jahn means. Even more shameful, however, is that he would characterize Israeli "intelligence" as "traditionally reliable." Apparently, Jahn is unaware of the 30 year history of false predictions stemming from Israel regarding the specter of Iranian nukes...nukes that mysteriously never seem to materialize.

Of course, Jahn must be aware of this but decided, instead, to write something absurd.



Anonymous said...

I think Iran should go the bomb. They'll be sanctioned regardless of whether they dismantle their program or produce the bomb.

The US at this point in history is in no position to launch another war in the ME without risking a collapse of the American union. Last time I heard they're negotiating with the Taliban to save face and declare "victory" - all this after 10 years of fighting the rag-tag-tribal dudes in Afghanistan.

Iran's been really patient with all this nonsense for far too long and it's about time they go on the offensive.

And to all those Iranophobes in Washington and London, they should keep it up because fearmongering/warmongering is not working.

Iran should detonate a nuclear device and shut them up forever!!

Nima Shirazi said...

I disagree.

Sanctions against Iran really have nothing to do with its nuclear program (which the entire international community, and especially the U.S., Israel, and Europe, knows full well is not aimed at building a bomb) and has everything to do with hegemony - economic, energy, and political.

While it makes sense that Iran is offended and frustrated by the patronizing efforts by the world's nuclear-armed superpower to abrogate its inalienable rights, it should keep taking the high ground on this matter and stay within its legal obligations.

Beyond that, in direct response to your suggestion (hyperbolic as it may have been...or not), I absolutely disagree with the notion that Iran should not only build a nuclear bomb, but actually detonate one - especially as an aggressive action rather than a test (which, at minimum, would be a total breach of its NPT agreement). Doing so would not only go against what they've been saying for decades, but - far more importantly - would be a war crime, a crime against humanity, and an act of mass murder (if not genocide) by any definition.

Advocating for Iran to do so goes against everything I stand for and stands in stark contrast to my views on the issue, as often expressed here on Wide Asleep in America.

My hope is that you, Anonymous, were just kidding. And if so, please don't do it again. At least not here.

[Sorry to be so humorless about this - usually I'm the one telling people not to take things so seriously - but calling for nuclear destruction just ain't funny.]