If this was a civilian program, where are the civilians?

[Caelius]

Link

Army takes control of Iran nukes
By David R. Sands
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published October 5, 2005

Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has placed the military firmly in control of his nation's nuclear program, undercutting his government's claim that the program is intended for civilian use, according to a leading opposition group.

Leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the force created specifically to defend the 1979 Islamic revolution, now dominate Iran's Supreme National Security Council, the country's top foreign policy-making body under the constitution.

Mr. Ahmadinejad, a little-known former mayor of Tehran before his surprise election in July, is a former IRGC commander, as is new council Secretary-General Ali Larijani, who has taken the lead in negotiations about Iran's nuclear programs.

Revolutionary Guard commanders also have taken charge of the council's internal security, strategy and political posts, according to a report issued by the Paris-based National Council of Resistance of Iran. A Revolutionary Guard veteran even serves as the council's press spokesman.

"The military under the new president is firmly in control of the nuclear program and the nuclear negotiations with the United Nations and the West," said Mohammad Mohaddessin, chairman of the NCRI's foreign affairs committee, in a telephone interview yesterday.

The personnel changes "make it less and less credible that Iran is pursuing nuclear programs for peaceful uses," he said.

The report, which also tracks Iran's extensive nuclear infrastructure and technical programs, charges that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamanei has turned to IRGC personnel in order to "eliminate all bureaucratic and political obstacles to obtaining nuclear weapons."

Iran, which claims the right to pursue a civilian nuclear program to meet its domestic energy needs, is in intense negotiations with European Union powers France, Britain and Germany over the fate of its nuclear programs.

The Bush administration is deeply skeptical of Tehran's ambitions. The board of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency last month threatened to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions if it does not allow tight international oversight of its programs.

The NCRI is the political arm of the People's Mujahadeen, a secular Iranian bloc that broke violently with the Islamic leaders of the revolution shortly after the ouster of the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

The opposition group has had a checkered and at times contradictory role. Branded a terrorist group by U.S. and European governments, it also has proven to be the single best intelligence source on Iran's clandestine nuclear programs, exposing in recent years massive research and testing sites inside Iran unknown to U.N. and Western monitors.

But other analysts also have reported a wave of senior appointments for Iran's military, especially from within the more ideological forces under the direct control of the ruling Islamic clerics.

Houchang Hassan-Yari, a political scientist at the Royal Military College of Canada, noted in a recent analysis that current and former members of the IRGC now can be found throughout Iran's political and administrative bureaucracy, from lawmakers in parliament to mayors, university officials and even managers of some of Iran's biggest business concerns

The corps is "on the verge of being transformed from a junior player in the country's military defense to a key factor in the country's military and security doctrine -- a rise that could come at the [traditional] army's expense," he noted.

Bill Samii, an Iranian analyst for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said a key factor in Mr. Ahmadinejad's surprise presidential election was the support of the Basij Resistance Force, a paramilitary force with extensive links to the Revolutionary Guards Corps.

The new president, with virtually no experience in foreign affairs when he was elected, named a senior Basij leader as a top adviser just after assuming office in August.

Anyone still want to back the Iranians in saying that it's a peaceful program? I'm almost certain someone is going to find a nice copout to use.

[imb39]

I seem to remember the Iraqi opposition saying alsorts of things about WMDs in Iraq... Infact, that is where most of the 'information' came from.

Yes, this is a copout!

[Tom Paine]

Let me see. The US puts its military in charge of civilian rescue operations, and so forth; and if you are worried abut nuclear material getting stolen, who is better to look after it: a load of civilians, or the military? Same goes for defence aginst Israel's threatened attack.

[Wicked]

Let me see. The US puts its military in charge of civilian rescue operations, and so forth; and if you are worried abut nuclear material getting stolen, who is better to look after it: a load of civilians, or the military? Same goes for defence aginst Israel's threatened attack.

Oh come on, most every country uses it's military to assist in large scale post-disaster aid...that was a rather poor showing there Squeak...

Also, their not worried about nuclear material being stolen to the best of my knowledge, if it was a simple nuke plant you would not have the military in control, my dad is a senior supervisor at a nuke plant, one of the top guys in his field in the nation, in fact he was recently consulted about the Iranian nuclear program by the IAEA, and his plant was inspected to provide an example of what a legitimate, peaceful nuke plant should look like as opposed to the Iranian version, through him I have some basic knowledge about what you'd expect in a civvie nuke plant...and military control isn't among the normal features of one.

You could expect to find a military guard around one during a high alert level, such as post-9/11, where many plants had rapid reaction forces on call and ADA networks ringing the area, but it would remain under civvie control, and any type of negotiations would also fall under civvie bureaucracy, not military.

And as for former military personnel, if they had specific nuclear experience (my dad for instance worked in nuclear engineering in the Navy for a good while prior to moving to the private sector) then that'd make sense...but Iran has no such personnel, they've never had a nuclear navy, so any former military personnel perforce cannot have much experience in that area, not to mention these guys all seem to be ex land forces.

Meaning...why the hell would you want a bunch of guys who know next to nothing about nuclear power overseeing a peaceful nuke plant? If, on the other hand, it turned out that these guys had previously had something to do with ballistic missiles...that could make sense, but not for peaceful use...

-Wicked

[PacSubCom]

Well of course they want to obtain nuclear weapons. The Bush admin is right to be deeply sceptical.

[Tom Paine]

"Of course"? I love this assumption being bandied around. "Of course" Iraq had WMD, "of course" ObL was in Afghanistan/Iraq/whereever...

[PacSubCom]

"Of course"? I love this assumption being bandied around. "Of course" Iraq had WMD, "of course" ObL was in Afghanistan/Iraq/whereever...

It's the only way to keep the US away. You would try to get his hands on these weapons if you are surrounded by your mortal enemy, an enemy who has an abundance of military power and an equal abundance of wmd himself. It could be they postponed it a little, because now they see the US is not able to take action immediately, due to the foulup in Iraq. But the threat is always there, and in the long run, they will execute their plans.

ObL is in Pakistan now. I've seen a documentary once where some journalists (I think french, but in any way muslim) went on the road to find him. With contacts and an extreme amount of sweet talk and outright lies they were able to talk to al quaida members all over the world, in Europe and Afghanistan/Pakistan. They filmed their interviews with a hidden camera. In the end, they were pointed to the tribal areas on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. They even went there, to find out more, but were stopped by "friendly" Mujahedin militias who told them it wouldn't be a wise move to investigate further.

So they were able to pinpoint Osama's location on a pretty small area in Pakistan, maybe 100 x 150 km in size. It is obvious that if these guys could find that out, the Pakistanis know it and the CIA knows it too.

[Tom Paine]

It was an example of a recent usage of the military on a civilian project, and I note you did not adress the concerns over Israel's threat and the requisite military defence. What is it with people and seeing nukes everywhere?

[Wicked]

It was an example of a recent usage of the military on a civilian project,

Although not a valid example...gotta make sure that it actually helps your argument before using one.

and I note you did not adress the concerns over Israel's threat and the requisite military defence. What is it with people and seeing nukes everywhere?

Israel's current potential threat I'd rate as low, for the time being its saber rattling, not a great surprise with Israel, their letting them know that their not pleased with the situation in a somewhat diplomatic manner. As for military defense, that was addressed in my previous post in case you overlooked it, and that still doesn't explain why you'd have current or former military personnel without a background in nuclear power in the program itself, or having anything to do with negotiations except as the obligatory attaché.

Case in point, post-9/11 they had at varying times between a company & a battalion of NGs camped out around the indirect approaches to the local nuke plant, prepared fighting positions, command detonated mines, ADA, patrols etc, with over flights of fighters round the clock, and a rapid reaction team based nearby with troop & attack choppers, all standard, all reasonably justified at the time. They did not however have senior military personnel having a say in plant operations or anything else to do with the site, except as liaisons coordinating with the on-site security force, again, standard.

And the American government, and most others with nuclear plants, do not have the degree of military oversight in what is normally a Ministry/Dept. of Energy area of control that Iran seems to be going for. The military also has no jurisdiction over the building of a nuclear plant, again, it's not their area of expertise.

Just seems a bit suspect to me, if it is nothing more than a nuclear power plant then common sense would urge them to accommodate inspections to the fullest extent possible, and then some, and avoid trying to get political about it (i.e. stop playing grab-ass with Russia & France), nor would they want even a hint of military around that area, Israel would take a worse hit diplomatically than they already have if they nailed them when there was clearly nothing military to do with the site...instead their making a point of it, seems rather shortsighted.

-Wicked

[Tom Paine]

So why haven't they dealt with him? Seriously, with pakistani co-operation, the CIA could easily spirit him away to America... they did it in Italy without the co-operation of the government!

[PacSubCom]

So why haven't they dealt with him? Seriously, with pakistani co-operation, the CIA could easily spirit him away to America... they did it in Italy without the co-operation of the government!

I guess it would get Musharraf, US ally, into trouble. The islamist movements (Taleban drekcetera) are strong in Pakistan, and they wouldn't be happy if their godfather-idol would be handed over to the enemy. Musharraf is hanging on to kind of a whispy string. One move in the wrong direction, and the very real islamist danger in Pakistan could boil over into revolution. And Pakistan has nukes. It would change the balance of power quite considerably, a) because then US enemy Iran would not be the only one surrounded, but also US friendly Afghanistan (now with nukes!) and b) Pakistan is unfriendly to India, who also have nukes. That would be quite a situation. To let ObL live merrily in some remote area is a much happier thought, especially if Musharraf could hold onto power. He seems to be a rather sane and controllable General who likes power and is ready to cooperate with the US to keep it that way.

He is a symbol, yes, but the network is decentralized, so operations wouldn't be hindered. Another reason is that the Bushies simply don't care that much about Al Quaida. If they would care about islamist terror foremost, they wouldn't have invaded Iraq, since that would lead to a strengthening of Al Quada and Co., as it was expected by virtually everyone on the green planet, including their own intelligence services. And that's exactly what happened. Islamist terror is taken into consideration by the US, but it's secondary at best. Oil is primary.*

It would be a nice PR gag, though.


*Btw, have you heard that "Operation Iraqi Freedom" wasn't the first name the Bushies thought of? Allegedly (I think Amy Goodman said it), the first was "Operation Iraqi Liberation". Operation Iraqi Liberation. One of the think tanks came up with a better name very quickly...

[Tiwaz]

So why haven't they dealt with him? Seriously, with pakistani co-operation, the CIA could easily spirit him away to America... they did it in Italy without the co-operation of the government!

Or possibly they were totally wrong. To assume AQ members are not intelligent enough to understand importance of subterfuge and misinformation is big mistake.

Besides which, area of 100km*150km is in total 15 000 square kilometers. It is HUGE piece of land to search. In Italy they had exact location of the target (I doubt they get such information anymore. International community doesn't tend to let others betray them many times)

[Marshal Qin]

Look at any other country with a military thats involved in the political scene to see how unqualified military personel can be placed in charge of various operations. Its got less to do with qualifications than it has to do with personal power, cronyism and faction manoevering. If this group in Iran is making a move on power you can be sure that they would want their people in influential positions in the nuclear program. The normal safety issues that we have in the west don't apply in situations like this. Though I think they probably are developing or want to develop neclear weapons, its not surprising that the military would be involved in this even if it was purely for civilian purposes.

[Erik]

Look at any other country with a military thats involved in the political scene to see how unqualified military personel can be placed in charge of various operations. Its got less to do with qualifications than it has to do with personal power, cronyism and faction manoevering. If this group in Iran is making a move on power you can be sure that they would want their people in influential positions in the nuclear program. The normal safety issues that we have in the west don't apply in situations like this. Though I think they probably are developing or want to develop neclear weapons, its not surprising that the military would be involved in this even if it was purely for civilian purposes.

Exactly.
The fact that the Iranian military is involved says nothing.
In Iran it's NORMAL for the military to be involved in ALL important projects.
It would be surprising if the military wasn't involved.

I think Americans are just looking for "evidence" that Iran is developing nukes.
But this one is realy weak.
Just keep looking and you wil find the necessary "evidence", just like you did in Iraq.
Or you could learn from your mistakes.....

[Kanaric]

IDK why the US & friends are the only countries that are entitled to have nukes. Reeks of hypocrisy.

[Tom Paine]

IDK why the US & friends are the only countries that are entitled to have nukes. Reeks of hypocrisy.

Because they had them when the NPT was signed; it also allowed the USSR to have nukes, but the USSR is now broken up so no former Eastern Bloc can have nukes under it... except none are signatories...

[Erik]

Because they had them when the NPT was signed; it also allowed the USSR to have nukes, but the USSR is now broken up so no former Eastern Bloc can have nukes under it... except none are signatories...

But the NPT also states that it's signatories have the right to produce nuclear power.
Since Iran is being denied of this right they now have the right to develop nuclear weapons.

[Tom Paine]

Yes, that is a perfectly good reasoning. However it only applies if a) they are being denied that right (which they are) and b) if they can still get nuclear power.