If you wade through the International Atomic Energy Agency’s much-awaited report [.pdf] on Iran’s alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons technology – a fate I wouldn’t wish on anyone – what you’ll find is a studious ambiguity. “May,” “might,” and “could” are words that modify practically every assertion of Iranian perfidy:
“The information indicates that prior to the end of 2003 the above activities took place under a structured program. There are also indications that some activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device continued after 2003, and that some may still be ongoing.”
Or – since “indications” are not evidence – maybe not.
“The Agency has information from a Member State that Iran has undertaken work to manufacture small capsules suitable for use as containers of a component containing nuclear material. The Agency was also informed by a different Member State that Iran may also have experimented with such components in order to assess their performance in generating neutrons. Such components, if placed in the center of a nuclear core of an implosion type nuclear device and compressed, could produce a burst of neutrons suitable for initiating a fission chain reaction. The location where the experiments were conducted was said to have been cleaned of contamination after the experiments had taken place.”
Notice how unverifiable this is: if the evidence has been “cleaned” by those perfidious Iranians, then we’ll never know for sure, now will we? How very convenient.
Buried amidst all the technical jargon, interpolated with ambiguous conditional phrases, we have a story of a “clandestine nuclear network” – presumably the one set up by A.Q. Khan – which supposedly helped the Iranians set up their alleged weapons program. Or, rather, may have done so:
“In an interview in 2007 with a member of the clandestine nuclear supply network, the Agency was told that Iran had been provided with nuclear explosive design information. >From information provided to the Agency during that interview, the Agency is concerned that Iran may have obtained more advanced design information than the information identified in 2004 as having been provided to Libya by the nuclear supply network.”
In short: maybe – maybe not.
“Mainstream” media accounts of this farrago of half-truths and insinuations lead the unsuspecting reader to believe the Iranians are physically constructing a nuclear arsenal, which will shortly be aimed directly at Brooklyn, New York. The fact is that the only “illegal” activities Iran has carried out, in actual reality, are computer simulations. This is what they mean when they accuse Iran of engaging in “nuclear testing.” No one alleges Tehran has produced an actual physical bomb, or managed to put together a nuclear armed missile, and is hiding them underneath the Supreme Leader’s palace – this time around, the War Party is at least trying to be a bit more subtle. But subtlety, as we know, is not their forte.
What jumps out at the careful reader of the IAEA report is that there is nothing concrete involved in this nefarious plot: only hearsay descriptions of blueprints and computer models, including various publicly available scientific studies authored by Iranian scientists. According to Khan, what was transferred to the Iranians was know-how: theoretical knowledge and contacts with suppliers. Yet throughout the IAEA report, although there are plenty of instances where Iran is alleged to have sought this or that dual use component, we are never told if they actually succeeded in procuring the item. While the report attributes its information to “Member States,” why will I not be surprised if this “intelligence” comes from the same folks who brought us the Niger uranium forgeries?
Although there is no smoking gun, the injection of the A.Q. Khan network into the propaganda mix at this level is a relatively new development, one that links the latest Enemy of the Moment (Pakistan) with longtime-favorite Iran. Why not kill two birds with one stone?
After the big build-up, the actual content of the IAEA report is a major let-down: the movie is nothing like the previews. That isn’t stopping the “mainstream” media from running screaming headlines. NPR declared “Some of Iran’s Work is ‘Specific’ to Nuclear Weapons,” a claim echoed almost word for word by the tabloid Daily Mail. In a declarative phrase preceded only by the word “Report” and a semicolon, CNN stated flatly: “Iran Developing Nuclear Bombs.” Yet the report nowhere said anything this definitive: examined under a microscope – which is how we should look at any and all pretexts for war – the whole tissue of suppositions and “secret” information is revealed in all its embarrassing flimsiness.
There’s another headline related to this that popped up in my Internet search for examples of journalistic war hysteria, and it is this: “Oil Rises on Iran Nuclear Concerns.” We are headed for a perfect storm of oil shock, economic turmoil, and the looming prospect of war with Iran.
This fits right in with the War Party’s agenda: wars are a great way to mask the effects of economic failure – and simultaneously divert attention away from its real authors. Instead of accusing “obstructionist” Republicans of being the cause of our increasing poverty – a narrative even the President’s most devoted cultists must admit is getting threadbare – Obama can blame those obstinate Iranians for the economic chaos to come.
Now it’s clear why US officials were ecstatic at the appointment of Yukiya Amano as the new IAEA chief, replacing the troublesome Mohammed el-Baradei. As revealed by WikiLeaks, US diplomats came away from their first encounter with Amano convinced it “illustrate[d] the very high degree of convergence between his priorities and our own agenda at the IAEA.”
The American government’s agenda has never been in doubt, not since the days of George W. Bush, and that is “regime change” in Iran by any means necessary. The War Party has been building up to this climactic moment the way a composer slowly but surely works his way up to a crescendo – and we are nearly at the crest of the wave with the release of this report.
All we need now, to provoke World War III, is a proper Sarajevo, an incident that will spark a regional war, and eventually a global conflagration.
10, 9, 8, 7, 6 ….
In the context of the long propaganda war the neocons have been faithfully waging over the past decade or so, we’re five minutes to zero hour.
The key to understanding the fraud at the heart of the IAEA report is the first paragraph of the summary:
“While the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at the nuclear facilities and LOFs declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement, as Iran is not providing the necessary cooperation, including by not implementing its Additional Protocol, the Agency is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.”
Translation: the Iranians have no suitably enriched fissile material – but because they won’t surrender their sovereignty and allow us to occupy their nuclear facilities at will, there is no “credible assurance” of this. Iran is guilty, and must prove its innocence: that’s what the justice of the West means in the context of its relations with Iran.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
- Edward Snowden vs. the Sovietization of America – June 18th, 2013
- A Note to My Readers – June 16th, 2013
- Datagate and the Death of American Liberalism – June 13th, 2013
- Smear Brigade Goes After Snowden – June 11th, 2013
- Edward Snowden, American Hero – June 9th, 2013





guest
November 8th, 2011 at 10:41 pm
The American Government is under the control of evil people.What can you do about it?Duck and cover?
skulz fontaine
November 8th, 2011 at 10:48 pm
And so the real crime here is, Iran "won't surrender their sovereignty." Oh ye bad Iranians!
Bill the Butcher
November 8th, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Time for Russia and China to flatly state that an attack on Iran will be considered a declaration of war on them, which it is, and will retaliate accordingly. You'll see how Ohbummer's warrior spirit disappears like a pricked bubble then.
Johnny in Wi.
November 8th, 2011 at 11:22 pm
It doen't look good. That is for sure. The only hope is that the Russians, and Chinese put their feet down and stop it. Their is a sleight possibility that the American military would refuse to follow orders and attack in an obvious illegal agressive war. I do remember one American commander saying that there would be no attack on Iran during his watch. Of course he was soon replaced.
pete I
November 9th, 2011 at 3:11 am
Neither China nor Russia will lift a finger to help or fight for Iran. No one will fight with Iran. Syria maybe but they have their own issues at the moment. They will complain and grumble but once Oil guarantees are put before them even that will be manufactured complaining and grumbling. Nope if you want to stop this war it must be by putting pressure internally on the (nobel peace prize winning) Obama regime to not do so. Good luck on that.
Phil Giraldi
November 9th, 2011 at 5:19 am
As the IAEA has no intelligence element, it relies on reports from member states to supplement what its inspectors actually see and are told. I would bet most of the incriminating information was provided by the United States and Israel, both of whom would have been quite capable of fabricating evidence or making sure that everything is described in "worst case" terms. Iran cannot win this argument as the terms are constantly shifting – first they were told they would not be allowed a nuclear weapon, then it was breakout capability meaning that they cannot have the necessary technology, and now they are being told that even the ability to enrich uranium is forbidden to them.
sherban
November 9th, 2011 at 5:51 am
Very interesting your remark.But how could be Israel ,a country which didn't sign NPT treaty be a member of IAEA and ,more than it,she gives informations about other countries which signed the treaty.This is the peak of absurd.The same should be say about US and all "free world in head with France ,all of these are in breach with NPT giving military supportweapon and military technology) for an unsigned country-Israel-of NPT treaty.
Dahoit
November 9th, 2011 at 6:45 am
And has anyone ever fingered the responsible party for the Yellowcake forgery?The trail died at the mention of Italian intelligence services.
baz
November 9th, 2011 at 9:57 am
THe plan for Iran is not regime change. After the fall of the shah, it was determined by the US that Iran is too dangerous to try and control through political means and that the country should ultimately be broken up into ethnic divisions.
The Israelis had been pushing the US to break up Iran since 1974 and have always said publicly that they will never allow Iran to industrialize and become a world power.
None of this BS has anything to do with nukes or mullahs or terrorism. These are simply excuses used to dupe the american people into following the line on an otherwise innocent country that just wants to take its natural place in the world. The fact is that Iran should be a rich and powerful country but Israel is scared to death of this because of the political (not military) power Iran would yield over UN member states, the way China and Russia do today, and therefor force Israel to comply with international law and give up this racist dream of a jewish utopia cleansed of all arabs and muslims
For the US, they are naturally worried about oil supplies, but a war with Iran would guarantee we lose, even if we flatten iran like a pancake.
We should be allies with Iran. They are our natural partner. Not those crazy wahabi cultists of Saudi arabia. Iran and the US together can partner to guarantee global oil supplies, forment regional stability and maintain the US qualitative edge in the world for centuries.
Iran should be our closest ally, not that cancer called Israel
ML3
November 9th, 2011 at 10:25 am
"Do not make light of the AIPAC to get use involved in wars which will get our kids killed in large numbers."
Is life in the US that cheap to Peace Prize winning President Obama? How many more people will this guy kill or allow to be killed? He really makes me sick.
Hammon Wry
November 9th, 2011 at 10:27 am
The policy goal is obvious, as is the method. Within that, there may be some small disagreement inside the elite as to timing and specific strategy. The outcome of the application of violence to Iran cannot be predicted – (that's the trouble with violence…) but it seems to be assumed that Iran will sit and take whatever attacks come their way. It is assumed that Iran will not take any action in response to a campaign to liquidate their sovereignty and establish the mechanisms to loot that vast country.
Iran, or Persia, has been a State for thousands of years. Maybe they've learned something about survival, war, and peace, eh?
The assumption that they will be passive may be rash. Strategists in Oz and Wonder-land seem to believe their policy to be without risk or cost, indeed they seem to believe the policy of obliterating Iran to be profitable. Contrariwise, rational strategists would expect Iran to take very effective measures for self-defense. Rational strategists would expect a classical Iranian strategy – and by definition that means indirect. Repeat: Indirect.
Possible "targets" exist as a list of relationships. The cooperation of UK with US would, some might say, be at the top of such a list. Similarly, using Russia and/or China to throttle US ambitions – the other side of the coin – would go with such a policy. Many other indirect goals and pathways are obvious.
Withal, don't bet on easy "victory" against Iran. In fact, don't bet on any victory at all. Those among the elite who have reservations, doubts, are right to try to slow this dangerous and irresponsible (not to say illegal) move toward war.
Duglarri
November 9th, 2011 at 10:49 am
Yeah, but what would happen then is that the neocons would all erupt in joyous elation. You see! We were right all along! They're all against us! So now let's do what we've always predicted we'd have to do some day: take 'em all on! Goodbye, offshore balancing, hello, world conquest. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan: we can beat them all, simultaneously!
Fortunately I think the Russians and Chinese would say no such thing. They'll just continue to quietly try to keep the US from destroying itself, because they seriously need the customers.
baz
November 9th, 2011 at 11:17 am
Can i just say that ISrael knows an attack on iran will elicit minimal damage on themselves, because the resulting impact on oil prices is guaranteed to draw the US in within hours if not days and leave the resulting war to be fought between the US, Iran and the gulf arabs while Israel quietly leaves the room and watches the carnage on TV.
andy
November 9th, 2011 at 11:53 am
The only 'crime' Iran is guilty of is that it won't accept American-Israeli-AIPAC hegemony over the middle east.
Generalissimo X
November 9th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
i find this interesting: The Agency was also informed by a different Member State that Iran may also have experimented with such components in order to assess their performance in generating neutrons.
exactly who is the "member state" in question here? since israel isn't a signatory i'd venture to guess it's the good ol' u.s. of a. and certainly no conflict of interest here..i mean the neocon warmonger scumbags would never fix facts around a policy? except they already did with iraq.
and sorry for playing the cynic here but they'll have their war. i'd like to think cooler heads will prevail but after the last 10 years of sheer madness i can't see that happening. if people are stupid enough to believe the 9-11 fairy tale they'll believe anything. no, things will blow up like it did back in 1914. one random stupid event will lead to a conflagaration and open world war. all this saber rattling is just the precursor. much like a certain heston movie some 40 years ago, the neocons are in charge..the apes have become our masters.
Generalissimo X
November 9th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
well i'd tend to disagree with that on the basis that iran has a ton of medium range, sophisticated cruise missles and a lot of proxies in lebanon and gaza. were a full on israeli assault to go down, i'm sure the iranians would retaliate as massively and as effectively as they could muster. this is not iraq, a country decimated by decades of sanctions. while they stand no chance in a protracted conflict against the west, they would be able to exact a serious toll on the aggressors.
baz
November 9th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
yes, it is true that they could level israel with their missiles. Indeed they could rain down hundreds of missiles down on israel per day..
but..
1) their missiles are mostly liquid fuel which require almost a full day to prepare for launch
2) the US is likely to get involved very quickly and take most of them out with cruise missiles and airstrikes
3) irans focus would shift from blindly launching missiles at israel to actually trying to inflict damage by attacking military sites and oil production facilities in KSA and Kuwait…meaning that they would be forced to abandon targeting Israel.
4) I dont think hezbollah would get involved knowing Israel would raze lebanon to the ground and that the lebanese people would be infuriated by fighting a war for Iran
Sam
November 9th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Russia ,China ,Turkey and others will not allow an attack on Iran to happen.
@Unforgiven_01
November 9th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
"China is the number one oil and gas importer from Iran. The two countries are bound by energy deals reaching a total value of $120 billion and growing. …"
http://www.iags.org/china.htm
pete I
November 9th, 2011 at 2:53 pm
So? China has far to much to lose in any war with the US not started by the US. And others would be prepared to take up Irans's oil commitments to China. China is searching the globe for all sorts of oil consessions. Having oil for your economic engine is critical, having the US as a market for your economic output is imperative. No china will not go to war for or over Iran. And eventually Iran's oil will flow again no matter what kind of strike hits the nuclear program.
hass
November 9th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
IranAffairs.com explains the "absence of undeclared facilities" language – the IAEA does not verify the absence of undeclared facilities in ANY COUNTRY – not just Iran – unless that country has signed and implemented the Additional Protocol treaty. So the same language would appear in the IAEA reports of Argentina, Brazil, Egypt etc.
Hammon Wry
November 9th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
"baz" makes a good point about ethnic divisions and break-up. let's assume that we're Iranians looking at the Empire – wouldn't we then want to explore using the same strategy against the Empire? Iran has managed to hold things together for a very long time…maybe they know how to manage…I wouldn't want to bet they don't. And exploiting ethnic divisions doesn't always work, ask the klan… But exploiting fiscal and power divisions – ah! That works! Ask any Capitalist…
mahtay
November 9th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Amazing work on Monday, Justin! No sooner had you supposed that all is required now is a trumped up IAEA report than voila! Thank your mother for the rabbits, thar she blows! (I can mix my metaphors with the best of them.)
If only some 'mainstream' media types looked through the last exit bovine pile like you and Antiwar.com do.
Once again well done!
mahtay
November 9th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
And how dare they?
baz
November 9th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
russia could care less about a war on iran. frankly, they hate iran. For russia, an american war on iran would be a godsend. It would make them the kingpin of the eastern hemisphere as the energy mafia don. Also, they could pund Chechnyan rebels to pieces as an excuse.
China, however, would be wiped out..they have BY FAR the most to lose of anybody, even us
John_Muhammad
November 9th, 2011 at 9:45 pm
I don't have a nuclear bomb hidden under my garage. Prove it.
pete I
November 10th, 2011 at 4:09 am
Just like they won't allow an attack on Iraq? Nonsense, none of those countries will do anything but verbally protest, to much to lose, nothing really to gain. Won't allow? Wishful thinking.
Unjust Wars, Then and Now « Mktgeist blog
March 16th, 2012 at 4:52 pm
[...] Iran is considered a threat to peace and stability because the International Atomic Energy Agencyissued a report last November saying it very definitely might or might not be building a nuclear [...]
Guest Post: Unjust Wars, Then and Now | Bogpaper.com
March 18th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
[...] Iran is considered a threat to peace and stability because the International Atomic Energy Agencyissued a report last November saying it very definitely might or might not be building a nuclear [...]
Truth is Treason
May 25th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
[...] warmongering storytellers. This is important when we think about the hearsay about Iran. Iran is not seeking weapons of mass [...]