Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
According to this article Uranium is usually mined where concentrations are 0.1 to 0.5 percent of ore.  In the case of the Iranian mines of Saghand the concentrations seems to be in the upper stratas of 0.5 percent of the ore, more specific 0.533, and thus can be sent directly to the Uranium mill being buildt 35 km north of Ardakan city, without further exploitation.  

Keeping the whole process from extraction of uranium, milling to enrichment within the country would of course make it much easier to control and possibly easier to manipulate.  

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.

by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 05:05:08 AM EST
Given the record of foreign dealings with Iran, from an Iranian perspective, would you, even if you were solely interested in a civilian programme, allow yourself to be forced to carry out enrichment that you're legally entitled to by treaty outside your borders? Would the US? France? Britain? Russia? I think not.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 05:12:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, from an Iranian official perspective probably not, but from a people's perspective I am not that sure, if it meant they could go ahead with their nuclear program without further delay.  Britain and France are depending on outside suppliers of Uranium and thus have some of their process outsourced from the start already.  

The key word here is confidence and with the confidence level Iran has vis-à-vis the West, it is not at all an improbable thought that the theocratic regime might develop nuclear weapons. The Iranians themselves have time and time again shown through policies that they are deeply sceptical to the West and the natural consequence of this is of course to develop the ultimate weapon in order to feel more secure.  The paranoia seems to have increased especially after the hardliners took over the presidency, and the negative rethoric escalated.  

If the Iranians are serious about their civil nuclear program it would only be perceived as a confidence builder to let the enrichment process be done by outsiders.  After all the escalation of this matter are partly at the hands of the Iranian hardliners, spearheaded by the President.  By outsourcing the enrichment process they would also neutralize the criticism coming from Washington and secure their program from further delays by splitting the unity between Europe, the US and, now lately what could be, Russia.  

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.

by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 05:50:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The paranoia of course ratchets up if you compare what has happened to Iraq vs. what has happened to N. Korea.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 06:02:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, that is exactly my point so the logic would be to aquire nuclear weapons wouldn't it?

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.
by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 06:05:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
On a more general note I do believe that the Iranian regime knows, at least for the moment, that the US will not engage into a new invasion and especially not of Iran.  That would mean disaster both economically and militarily for the US.  The hardliner stand of the Iranian regime is pointing to the fact that they have calculated along those lines and thus can act so defiantly.  This is both a propaganda stunt and a political strategy stunt from the Iranians in order to rally support for the hardliner stands among the Iranian population and a political test to see how far the Western countries are willing to go in such a showdown.  

The rallying of the population to the hardliners stands seems so far to have failed.  Even if the majority of the population are for the nuclear program, there are signs that they are getting tired of the hardliner stands and have come to rather like the reformists way. The rather meagre support the violent demonstrations in Teheran had during the cartoon incident, point towards such a conclusion, the demonstrators, consisting of mostly young conservative males and members of the Pasdaran, and being only in the hundreds/thousands(?).  

Concerning their political strategy it also seems as if this was a miscalculation, with the hardliners threatening to walk out of possible negotiations if Iran was referred to the UNSC by the IAEA.  The tough rhetoric backfired and the UN process started.  Still, the Iranians keep sending mixed signals, defiance in order to save face and being willing to still negotiate with the Russians in order to keep the only option left open and not politically humiliating the Russians.    

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.

by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Wed Mar 15th, 2006 at 07:29:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series