Yes, Iran is really worried . "The meeting between Pakistan and Israel is a great blow to the policies of the Islamic republic based on an unabated antagonism with Israel and the 'Palestiniation' of its diplomacy which, in the past two decades, were the cause of many crises in Iran's foreign relations and increases in tensions with the United States, resulting in huge damage to our national interests," commented Iran Emrooz, a Persian-language Internet news website based in Germany.
 
While , there has been no comment from Tehran, a source close to the new government of Ahmadinejad said, "They are shocked to the point of being choked off," referring to the Iranian leaders. "As usual, when Iranian officials are jolted and horrified to the point of being astounded at some news they are not ready for, they keep silent until the oracle comes from the leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei," the source added, speaking on condition of not being named.
 
"As a result of a foolish diplomacy based on the destruction of Israel, Iran has suffered enormous diplomatic humiliations and economic losses," said Dr. Shahin Fatemi, a professor of Economy at the American University of Paris. "The biggest danger for the Islamic republic is that the Pakistanis, under growing pressures from Washington, might inform Israel on the extent of cooperation offered by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the so-called father of Pakistan's atomic bomb and the materials he sold to Tehran secretly," said Hassan Shari'atmadari, a member of the Iranian Republican Movement based in Hamburg, Germany. It is silly pro-West assessment.
 
Throughout history Iran has always existed as a powerful state in the region and would continue to aspire and do so , whatever USA and its brutal Sheriff  Israel might want to do in the region.  This is not the first time in history that Iranians are controlling Iraq. The Sassanians controlled Mesopotamia and battled with the Romans and Byzantines and later against the Ottoman Turks. The Sunni Ottomans could reach Vienna but were stopped at the present border by Persian Shiia Safavids.

Power flows through a nuclear Missile;

 "The US only takes countries seriously that have reached a certain degree of technological and economic power (hence the cooperation with India)," says Bijan Khajehpour, an analyst and chairman of the Atieh Group of companies in Tehran. "This fact certainly motivates Iran to become ... more powerful."

To dispel fears of Iran's nuclear intentions, Mr. Ahmadinejad spelled out acceptance of broader oversight, suggesting the involvement of third countries such as South Africa, or even private companies working with Iranian scientists. He also appeared to indicate that Iran was constrained by Islam in developing weapons. "[I]n accordance with our religious principles, pursuit of nuclear weapons in prohibited," he said.

Iran bid for more support from nonaligned countries - and sought to counter the US push to isolate the Islamic Republic - when Ahmadinejad promised to share its nuclear knowledge with other Muslim countries.  "We believe that atomic energy is a blessing given by God; it is an opportunity given to all nations," the staunchly conservative leader said.

"Ironically, those who have actually used nuclear weapons, continue to produce, stockpile and extensively test such weapons ... [and] are not only refusing to remedy their past deeds, but in clear breach of the NPT, are trying to prevent other countries from acquiring the technology to produce peaceful nuclear energy."
The offer to share nuclear technology has "changed the dynamics," says Mr. Khajehpour, because "some Western players now see more reason to stop Iran's efforts to enrich uranium." However, the offer was likely "targeted at Iran's neighbors to give them assurances that Iran is not planning to deprive the region of nuclear technology."

Still, the offer has set off alarm bells in Western capitals. "That's red meat for anyone concerned with nonproliferation and security threats," and may prove to be "another bargaining chip to give away," says Natalie Gold ring, at the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University in Washington.

However, the inability of the US and EU to muster sufficient votes at the IAEA or Security Council to sanction Iran, for a combination of reasons, points toward a shifting nonproliferation framework.

"The US has very little leverage with potential proliferates," says Ms. Goldring. "When headlines in the US talk of preemptive attacks on countries without nuclear weapons, and that [the US] will improve its tactical nuclear arsenal, our leverage is zero or negative."

"We've given the message to Iran that we will not do a whole lot to stand in their way," says Goldring, noting that India and Pakistan, after detonating secret nuclear devices in 1998, survived sanctions and are now being courted by the US. "If I were in Iran, I would see a US tied down in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Mississippi, so Iran has some freedom of movement now."

In Tehran, says Chubin, "they talk about the rising East, the rising Asia - this is the old multiplicity: 'If we get Iran tied to Russia, China, and India, then the US would not be able to do anything.'" "And the Russians almost say the same thing," adds Chubin, who visited Moscow earlier this month. "They do it politely, but they are constantly complaining about US influence.... The Russians are not going to annoy the Americans by supporting Iran, but they are not going to make it easy for them, either."

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his opening address at the UN session said that the consensus underlying the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was badly frayed but nations would rather point fingers at each other than work for solutions. "We face growing risks of proliferation and catastrophic terrorism, and the stakes are too high to continue down a dangerous path of diplomatic brinkmanship," he said.

Henry Kissinger gets hillbillies;

The cold warier  who called Indira Gandhi and Indians names  in a meeting with President Nixon , thinks that if Bush's first term was dominated by the war against terrorism, the second would be preoccupied with the effort to stem the spread of nuclear weapons.

”This challenge is more complex than the first. Do we oppose proliferation because of the rogue quality of the two regimes - Iran and North Korea - furthest advanced on the road towards acquiring nuclear weapons? Or is our opposition generic; does it extend to fully democratic countries?

“During the Cold War, all of the principals who might have to decide on the issue of nuclear war faced the dilemma that such a decision could involve millions of casualties, yet a demonstrated willingness to run this risk was necessary if the world was not to be turned over to totalitarians. “

“”All Cold War administrations navigated these shoals. Deterrence worked because there were only two main players in the world. Each made comparable assessments of the perils to them of the use of nuclear weapons.

“But as nuclear weapons spread, the calculus of deterrence grows increasingly ephemeral. It becomes ever more difficult to decide who is deterring whom and by what calculations.” Finally, the experience with the proliferation network demonstrates the consequences to the international order of the spread of nuclear weapons even when the proliferating country does not meet the formal criteria of rogue state.

“For these reasons, it is the fact, not the provenance, of further proliferation that needs to be resisted. The loathsomeness of a regime that undertakes proliferation compounds the problem and provides a sense of urgency, but in this analysis, it is not the decisive factor. We should oppose nuclear proliferation even to a democratic Iran.

“How do we prevent the diplomatic process from turning into a means to legitimize proliferation rather than avert it? We must never forget that failure will usher in a new set of nuclear perils dwarfing those that we have just surmounted.”

Recently the doddering warrior , accused by many as a war criminal ,was put on an American Channel .The very idea of Iran having a bomb gave him the hillbillies .

In 1970s when my son in school first learnt what getting hillbilly’s means ,a  good actor , he tried to express it by facial and voice contortions like some cartoon characters . But he was no match for Henry Kissinger ‘s act of fear , which most of the world or any one “who is not with us , is against us” has lived with , since USA dropped two Atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki .

(K Gajendra Singh, served as Indian Ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan in1992 -96. Prior to that, he served as ambassador to Jordan (during the1990 - 91Gulf war), Romania and Senegal . He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies, in Bucharest . The views expressed here are his own.-

Recommend this article...

Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment

Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4