The War Mongers are beating the drums to bomb Iran because of the annual "Iran's building a nuclear weapon" threat (I'll show how this is an annual drum beat, amplified during elections at the end of the diary.
Frustrated by the now obviously false roll out campaign for war against Iraq, I wanted to know more about this Iranian nuclear threat. I was surprised to learn that we, the US, launched Iran's nuclear program in the 1950s.
I felt that the media wasn't providing context. This is an effort to present the context. We launched Iran's nuclear program. I'll try to keep this concise. If you want more details, click on the brown or orange text to read the cited documents.
QUICK HISTORY
In August, 1953 the U.S. and the UK gained control of Iran via the reluctant Shah and the successful CIA/MI6 choreographed coup.
The US and the UK got to be the recipients of Iran's oil as well (no pun) as opening the door for Iranian nuclear energy.
1953 ATOMS FOR PEACE
A short four months after the successful overthrow of Iran's pro-oil nationalization democratically elected leaders Eisenhower launched Atoms for Peace in his 1953 speech.
Iran's first nuclear research plant was completed by the early 1960s by an American company.
American Machine and Foundary built the first Iranian and Pakistani nuclear power plants in the late 1950s.
After the Atoms for Peace program was signed, a lot of "research rectors" were built including the AMF Tehran Nuclear Reserch Center. If you click this link and search for 195 (to find reactors built in the 1950s) you will find 40 reactors built in the 1950s. A new boom business is launched.
In 1970, after a decade or more of running the 40 research reactors, the stage is set and The Non-Proliferation Treaty is written.
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 and ratified it in 1970, making Iran's nuclear program subject to International Atomic Energy Agency verification.
The Shah of Iran was brought on board because it was obvious that, at some point, Iran wouldn't have any oil left and would need energy.
Apparently there was also a perceived need for a multi-national nuclear fuel reprocessing plant and it appears that Iran was the chosen host.
Read the 1970s memos provided below. It appears that the goal was to have Iran provide a multi-national approach to fuel cycle activities in Iran and its readiness to exercise leadership in this regard (Page 3)
In the 1970s, Kissinger, Brent Snowcroft, and President Ford worked with the Shah to implement Iran's nuclear program with plutonium provided by the United States. They even asked the Shah for $300,000,000 to help build a facility IN the USA.
The Memos
December 6, 1974 Department of State memo outlines the thought process for negotiating the U.S. - Iranian Nuclear Agreement.
To understand the launch of the U.S. - Iranian nuclear agreement process, this memo is a must read. Henry Kissinger approves this memo.
On page 2 of this memo it states
Also, at our instigation, approaches have been made by the Bechtel Corporation to Iran to encourage the Shah's investment (on the order of $300 million) in a private uranium enrichment plant to be built in the United States.
According to the memos, the U.S. had already entered into agreements with Israel and Egypt although I couldn't find them in a quick search. This diary isn't about Israel/Egypt; however the memos demonstrate how important the context of the US/Israel/Egypt nuclear agreements were to the Iranian negotiations in the 1970s. Therefore, the US/Israel/Egypt proposed nuclear agreements must at least predate 1974, the date of the first memo.
If you read the memo, you will find that Congress was interested in adding more US control of nuclear materials in the Iranian Agreement. Specifically, more control is safeguarding nuclear materials in Iran from theft by potential terrorists. Apparently, the IAEA Standard Agreement did not address security at that time.
The concluding Recommendation paragraph states
We recommend that we include a set of special conditions in the Agreement with Iran which go beyond the standard agreement but are less stringent than the agreements for Israel and Egypt.(Emphasis mine)
Specifically, we recommend, and the Atomic Energy Commission concurs, that you approve submitting to Iran for negotiation the standard agreement for cooperation with the additional bilateral controls set out in Option Three.
Option Three: Standard Agreement with Addition of Some of the Bilateral Controls over Materials Proposed for Egypt/Israel
Advantages: This option would deal with certain of the Congressional concerns that might arise from the sale of U.S. reactors or nuclear fuel to Iran.....
Disadvantages: The Shah might strenously object to having Iran, an NPT signatory and a nation with which we have a special relationship, treated differently from the countries with which we have standard agreements, although we could again present these features as less restrictive than the proposed Egypt/Israel agreements....
This option or one more severe might alienate him toward the U.S. as a supplier of enriched fuel and nuclear power plants.
We would take some risk that we would
lose Iran's investment IN a U.S. private enrichment plant
might lose the sale of enrichment services and leverage...
...run the risk of alienating other NPT parties, deterring future signatures or ratifications by establishing a precedent of requiring supplementary bilateral provisions for an NPT signatory, and being seen as calling IAEA safeguards into questions.
April 22, 1975 Memo
National Security Decision Memorandum 292, Page 1 of 2
Subject: U.S. - Iran Nuclear Cooperation
.... Permit U.S. material to be fabricated into fuel in Iran for use in its own reactors and for pass-through to third countries with whom we have agreements.
.... Agree to set the fuel ceiling at a Level reflecting the approximate number of nuclear reactors planned for purchase from U.S. Suppliers.
.... Continue to require U.S. approval for reprocessing of U.S. supplied fuel,...
A year later, Brent Scowcroft writes this April 20, 1976 memo which is focused on the Multinational/Binational Reprocessing plant. It's a short memo. Here are a few snippets:
Negotiation of a Nuclear Agreement with Iran
The U.S. side should:
Seek a strong political commitment from Iran to pursue the multinational/binational reprocessing plant...
....offering Pakistan the possibility of participation in a multational plant as an alternative to a national reprocessing facility.
....the U.S. should have the option to recover the plutonium produced in U.S.-supplied reactors or from U.S.-supplied fuel either on the basis of buy-back or a fuel exchange...
Henry Kissinger, Scowcroft, and the budding Cheney Cabal lost their lead role in the U.S.- Iran nuclear negotiations when Jimmy Carter became President.
President Reagan doesn't seem to pursue the US-Iranian nuclear program. Instead, Reagan launched the Iran–Contra affair
senior Reagan administration officials secretly facilitated the sale of arms to Iran, the subject of an arms embargo
There's not a lot of information regarding any interaction between the US and Iran regarding nuclear programs. I did, however, find this fascinating 1982 document:
Obstacles To U.S. Ability To Control And Track Weapons-Grade Uranium Supplied Abroad in which Iran is mentioned on the list of U.S. SHIPMENTS OF HEU (highly enriched uranium) SINCE 1954:
Page 23 ... With the exception of Iran,which has received 5.2 kilograms, the others have each received no more than a few grams in total shipments. NRC noted that physical security visit are not required for gram quantity amounts and that the shipment to Iran was made before the United States established physical security requirements for exports.
1986 - Mordechai Vanunu, a young Israeli nuclear technician, went to London to reveal the secrets of his country's atomic weapons programme to the world
The US Iranian Tussle during the Clinton Administration:
Eventually, President Clinton did ease restrictions on export of food and medical equipment to Iran. Albright announced in 2000 that the U.S. would begin to "enable Americans to purchase and import carpets and food products such as dried fruits, nuts, and caviar from Iran" and also was confident that Iran would provide cooperation with the United States in the battle against narcotics and international drug abuse.
The Iranian Nuclear Threat and the Media
UPDATED ADDITION, 1/18/2012 7:30 PM EST
Christian Science Monitor produced a great timeline in this article:
Imminent Iran nuclear threat? A timeline of warnings since 1979. The details for the following items are in the article.
2. Israel paints Iran as Enemy No. 1: 1992
3. US joins the warnings: 1992-97
4. Rhetoric escalates against 'axis of evil': 1998-2002
5. Revelations from inside Iran: 2002-05
6. Dialing back the estimate: 2006-09
7. Israel's one-year timeframe disproved: 2010-11
Breathless predictions that the Islamic Republic will soon be at the brink of nuclear capability, or – worse – acquire an actual nuclear bomb, are not new.
For more than quarter of a century Western officials have claimed repeatedly that Iran is close to joining the nuclear club. Such a result is always declared "unacceptable" and a possible reason for military action, with "all options on the table" to prevent upsetting the Mideast strategic balance dominated by the US and Israel.
And yet, those predictions have time and again come and gone. This chronicle of past predictions lends historical perspective to today’s rhetoric about Iran.
I have done a Google search for "Iranian Nuclear Threat" for each year beginning in 1995 because 1995 was an election year.
1995 - Don't Exaggerate Iranian Nuclear Threat; Not to Worry? A letter to the Editor of the New York Times.
From 1996 - 2002, the media doesn't have much to say about the Iranian Nuclear Threat.
2002 - How Iran Entered the Axis of Evil. This is a very important turning point. And this article is the most concise and informative I have found to date. It's a must read in order to understand how we got to where we are with Iran.
In the aftermath of Sept. 11, relations between the United States and Iran seemed -- remarkably -- to be warming up, as Iran quietly offered support for the U.S. campaign in Afghanistan. In November, Secretary of State Colin Powell shook hands with the Iranian foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, at the U.N. headquarters in New York City -- a simple yet historic gesture that seemed the most tantalizing hint of rapprochement between the U.S. and Iran since the Islamic revolution and the hostage crisis in 1979.
But on Jan. 29, 2002, in his State of the Union address, President George W. Bush branded Iran and its "terrorist allies" as part of "an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world." And on Jan. 31, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice summed up the administration's position on Iran. "Iran's direct support of regional and global terrorism," she said, "and its aggressive efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, belie any good intentions it displayed in the days after the world's worst terrorist attacks in history."
Since this dramatic turnabout, press reports have tried to piece together the trail leading from the Powell-Kharrazi handshake to the "axis of evil" speech.
2004 - Is an election year.
Letter to the Editor of New York Times from Senator Jon Kyl.
2005 - Experts warn Senate of Iranian nuclear threat / State Department official sees no signs Tehran is easing off
2005 - Council of Foreign Relations - IRAN: The Nuclear Threat
2007 - (Avigdor) Lieberman: Israel can handle the Iranian nuclear threat on its own
2008 - An election year. Lots of Iranian Nuclear Threat Talk from all sides.
2008 - Re-Thinking the Iranian Nuclear Threat
2008 - Obama Stands by Israel, Calls Iranian Nuclear Threat 'Grave'
2008 - The now infamous McCain reponse:
2008 - Both McCain, Obama exaggerating Iran's nuclear program McClatchy news
2009 - Iran has been caught red-handed The Guardian
2010 - A Congressional election year.
2010 - West needs new missile shield against Iranian nuclear threat, Nato chief says The Telegraph
Things really begin to heat up in 2011 as we approach yet another Presidential election year. It is interesting to note that Google doesn't pull up many news stories from traditional media in the off-election years. That's not to say the media didn't cover the issue.
If you choose to follow up on your own, you will find articles from many pro-Israel sources like ADL and Israeli papers.
I am choosing to focus on US media mostly, and have included a couple of UK articles when none were found for the US.
2011 finds no lack of Iranian Nuclear Threat articles. The think tanks are really active. I am listing these as they appear in the Google search result, not by any preference.
Carnegie Endowment - Containing the Iranian Nuclear Threat
American Progress - Taking the Iranian Nuclear Threat Seriously Obama Administration Approach Strikes the Right Balance
American Thinker - The case of the missing Iranian nuclear threat in new NIE
Today's Zaman - The so-called Iranian nuclear threat by Mehmet Kalyoncu*
Mondoweiss - Mossad chief’s statement removes Iranian nuclear threat (Will the ‘Atlantic’ report it here?)
The Mondoweiss article above was written in response to this September, 2010 article in The Atlantic: The Point of No Return
C-SPAN Iranian Nuclear Threat, U.S. and Israel Views (video)
CNN - How Iran bomb could threaten peace November, 2011
Fox News video w/Lindsey Graham War Necessary to Stop Iranian Nuclear Threat?
Christian Science Monitor - Europe to Israel: Military strike on Iran nuclear program not an option
Realite EU - Iranian Nuclear Threat Continues Despite Technical Setbacks
Rueters - Analysis: Not-so-covert Iran war buys time but raises tension
2012 - Election year
Santorum Says He Would Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Plant
OH, HERE'S THE "TICKING CLOCK" news, January 15, 2012
The ticking clock of Iran's nuclear threat CBS
January 19, 2012 - PM in Amsterdam: Iran is our biggest threat The Jerusalem Post
AMSTERDAM – Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called the Iranian nuclear threat “the issue that most concerns Israel” and said that the Netherlands and Israel “stand together in opposing Iran’s feverish pursuit of nuclear weapons while declaring its intention to wipe Israel off the map.”
“Nuclear arms in Iran are a threat to Israel, the region and the world,” he said in a speech in Amsterdam. “Sanctions should be applied to Iran’s central bank and its oil exports – and they should be applied now.
Oddly, not getting hits for Google search for 2012 "Iranian Nuclear Threat" and granted "Iranian Nuclear Threat" might be too limiting a search parameter.
However, it feels like Iran's nuclear threat is being used to roll out the drums of war again.
Maybe my computer, google, or I am too tired.
What I hope you will take away from this diary is some context of the Iranian Nuclear program.
Thank you for tuning in.
________