More thoughts on the difficult Iranian problem

An interesting article in the Chrisitan Science Monitor nicely summarizes some of the non-economic difficulties presented by the Iranian nuclear debate.

The first is that the US and the IAEA have not conclusively proven to the world that Iran has, or is developing, nuclear weapons. There are indications that some progress has been made, and lots of banter on both sides, but no Smiling Buddha or Bikini Atoll (and thankfully no Hiroshima or Nagasaki) to conclusively settle the issue. In order for the international community to sign on for real action, be it military or economic, particularly if it is headed up by the Americans, they will require hard proof. This is one of the many harvests that the US is reaping thanks to their unilateral efforts in Iraq and provides the Iranians with a fair bit of diplomatic wiggle room.

Second, continued pressure on Iran likely plays into the political hands of President Ahmadinejad. While average Iranians would prefer a reformist government to the present ultra-conservatives, they will rally around the president when confronted with an international threat. He will likely resist a negotiated settlement because of this. Traditional negotiating techniques are made that much more difficult when the demands of one side move around.

I find this pretty unlikely. I mean, what kind of maniac would threaten world peace for the sake of solidifying his domestic base? (I have apparently had a problem inferring sarcasm in past posts, so just for those that are going to comment on this, I’m trying to be funny. I must write like John Kerry speaks.)

The article also offers a couple of approaches that might be taken that might result in a solution.

The first is to create a type of nuclear probation in which Iran is allowed to have peaceful nuclear technology, which by the NPT they have every right to, in exchange for international inspectors at all atomic sites indefinitely. Other facilities (military and “dual-use”) will be available for inspectors at all times. If inspectors are refused or discover something untoward, the issue would then be brought directly to the security council for immediatel action.

Secondly, since Iran demands that all nuclear enrichment occur on their own soil, then let it be, but only if all enrichment activies are overseen, perhaps even performed, by an international consortium. This seems a bit facile to me, simply because “on our soil” most likely means “under our control”, and this option would leave control in foreign hands. I don’t think it would be acceptable to the mullahs.

However, if the Iranian government is only playing to the home crowd as the article suggests, or if this is all just a smokescreen for an economic game, as others have suggested (like, say, me and Dan, noted non-experts), the options for solving the problem cleanly quickly shrink.

[Edited to remove a few typos. My wife editor is not here right now.]

Proud, sniff, to be Canadian

This nearly caused coffee to happen across my keyboard. Over at AlsoCanadian, ExpertTom is pleased as punch, nay “proud to be a Canadian”. And what brought on this orgy of goodwill? Stephen Harper’s trip to Afghanistan, where he is “leading by example” by “going to a country where his personal safety is at risk”. And why did he do this?

He did this because he feels the mission is important and will do what he can to
make sure the mission is a success.

Honestly, it has nothing at all to do with the ethical quagmire he’s already got himself trapped in. He’s running off to Afghanistan to help the troops, don’t you know, he’s not fleeing Ottawa for a few days.

He’s simply awesome, our PM; I read this morning he defused a roadside bomb and pulled a live grenade out of a cat.

I gets a lump…

Give Me Virginity or Give Me Death

A good article from The Nation on how the Christian Right are objecting to the development of a vaccine that would prevent a sexually transmitted infection that’s responsible for over 70% of cervical cancer cases in the U.S. Money quote:

“Giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful,” Bridget Maher of the Family Research Council told the British magazine New Scientist, “because they may see it as a license to engage in premarital sex.”

Yeah, ’cause you know that’s what’s going through the heads of teenagers – “Man, I would love to get laid! If only I didn’t have to worry about cervical cancer in 40 years time”

This is what burns me about the Right when they block any and all means of birth control other than straight-forward abstinance. Look, I’ll be the first one to say that abstinance is the best way of preventing unwanted pregnancy and STD’s. But, it shouldn’t be the only way – accidents happen, and it’s good to have a backup plan. After all, not having a fire is the best policy at home, but I have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen – cause you never know.

Just an aside – I note that one of the main spokesmen in the Bush Administration for abstinance for teenagers was Claude Allen – hey, Claude – if you’re preaching about how kids should exercise willpower, how is it you can’t pass by a Target Store without trying to rip them off

Gwynne Dyer on an Iranian Bourse

In an article last month, that I missed until now, Gwynne Dyer lists a number of reasons that the United States government might not want to allow Iran to set up an oil bourse. The reasons are essentially the same ones that Dan and I covered in our previous articles on the topic (here, here, and here), however Dyer adds an interesting detail.

The United States Federal Reserve has announced that on March 24 they will stop publishing data on what is called the M3 money supply. Essentially this tracks the amount of US dollars held by foreign investors.

The reason that this is important is that it would very quickly reveal if the foreign market, for whatever reason starts to hemmorhage US dollars. Sudden moves by large financial institutions could quickly turn into stampedes and turn small fluctuations into real threats on the stability of the economy, similar to what happened to Japan and Argentina in the not too distant past. As Dyer points out, this might well happen if countries could find a place to shop for oil in euros.

However, he goes on to add on nothing more than supposition, I guess, that the US is not as concerned as some people think they are in what happens to the US dollar or an Iranian oil bourse.

The coming weeks will tell.

Brinksmanship or just foolishness?

Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices

Non-Proliferation Treaty Article 1

The US government appears very serious about playing a shell game with nuclear energy in the Mid- and Far-East. At the same time as events appear to be coming to a head with Iran, they are putting together a proposal to Congress to amend the rules that to allow India to acquire nuclear material from the United States, heedless of the fact that India has refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

That this is illegal by international law, seems to not bother the Bush Administration, indeed it seems to have hardly come up. If this was just one more example of the United States flaunting international law it would be one thing, but by unilaterally building a backdoor around the NPT, the United States has invited future abuses of the treaty by other states.

Okay, we’ve gotten use to the American bomb and the Russian bomb, even the French, Indian and Pakistani bombs. What about a Saudi bomb? Or an Egyptian or Sudanese bomb? What happens when Pakistan, which didn’t get offered the same deal as India because “it’s energy requirements and economic needs are different from those of India’s” decides to go to China or North Korea or one of the ‘stans instead.

With its military stretched to the breaking point and allies keeping a respectful distance, now is not the time to be breaking international treaties and further destabilizing an already dangerous situation.

Holy meta-leaks, Batman!

If I read this article correctly, and there is plenty of complexity in the story to give some room for error, so please forgive, it appears that Liberal MP Wayne Easter wants the RCMP to investigate the leak that might have revealed Scott Brison’s leak to the media about Ralph Goodale’s income trust announcement.

Read that again, it makes sense within the limits of my prose ability.

Easter goes on:

“The real issue here now is how could the minister of public security allow either out of his office or the RCMP’s offices a leak that could undermine the credibility of a potential leadership contender,” Easter said in an interview with PoliticsWatch.com.

It looks to me like the Opposition senses blood in the water and is just trying to pile as much crap on the Conservatives as it can because they smell weakness.

Seriously, though, if I was a Liberal (yeah, right) I would rather that stuff like this comes out before Brison becomes a leading contender in a leadership contest. If I was a Conservative (shudder at the thought!), I would be more liable to hug this information and let it slip after the contestants are all lined up.

Besides, Wayne, this is just saving the Liberal party the embarassment of voting a Tory in as leader. Please tell me you guys aren’t serious about Belinda.