So, even though Iran has demonstrated continuous bad faith and broken undertakings to halt its nuclear programme, the pusillanimous Europeans and IAEA have papered over the chasm and the IAEA has 'welcomed' Iran's worthless promises. As the New York Times reports:

'In a nine-page statement to the closed-door session of the board after the resolution passed, Jackie Wolcott Sanders, the head of the American delegation, accused Iran of deceit and the board of the I.A.E.A, the United Nations' nuclear monitoring organization, of irresponsibility. She also charged that Iran's assertion that it wants to produce only nuclear energy, not bombs, is untrue, and that Iran has a clandestine nuclear weapons program that "poses a growing threat to international peace and security."'

And how the Iranians are gloating over humiliating the Great Satan -- and getting away with it. As BBC Online reports, Hassan Rohani, the cleric who heads Iran's security body, not only boasted that Iran had won 'a great victory' over the US but also made clear that the agreement was worthless:

'According to Mr Rohani, Iran's offer to suspend uranium enrichment would only apply for the duration of talks with the EU."We are talking months, not years," the cleric and head of Iran's top security body said.'

An article in the Weekly Standard further amplifies Iran's uncompromising position. Itquotes Richard Russell, a professor of near-East and south-Asian security studies at Georgetown university, who says that having seen how Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea have developed clandestine nuclear programmes with little protest from world powers, the mullahs will not stop until they have developed the bomb. The article then spells out the nature of the threat this will pose to the west:

'Iran will continue its nuclear weapons program until it obtains the bomb once and for all--it is seen as a matter of military necessity and the key to Tehran's influence in the region--while hiding behind ambiguity and concealment. A nuclear Iran, however, cannot be tolerated. Iran is well known for its sponsorship of terrorist organizations and has conducted a foreign policy of violence by proxy. The risk that Iran will transfer its nuclear technology to groups such as Hezbollah, whom Iran supports with an estimated yearly stipend of more than $100 million, is great. Additionally, a nuclear-armed Iran would be emboldened to strong-arm America's regional allies into pulling away from the United States or run the risk of an atomic attack by terrorist proxies.'

With one bound, it seems, Iran has escaped referral to the UN Security Council. But according to the NYT, America can unilaterally refer Iran to the UN. So will it now do so? What's to lose? Yes, Appeasenik Global will blow a fuse. But better that than the Iranians light their own.

Posted by melanie at November 30, 2004