Is this why El-Baradei was awarded the Noble Prize for Peace?
By Hilmi Salem, PhD - Dec 6, 2005 ( salemh@chebucto.ns.ca )
Mr. Mohammad El-Baradei (IAEA Chief) expresses strong sympathy and understanding with and for Israel (which is, in the first place, a racist thug state, violating all aspects and standards of International Law and Geneva Conventions, and Human Rights), over Iran's ASSUMED nuclear weapons.
At the same time, Mr. El-Baradei has been NOT showing any sympathy or understanding with and for the whole Arab and Islamic world, regarding the ALREADY EXISTING huge amounts of nuclear weapons in Israel, which Israel itself has never denied having them.
I really wonder what kind of PEACE Mr. El-Baradei has achieved during his work in the last 10-20 years for the IAEA, in order to be awarded the Noble Prize for PEACE !!!
Does really he deserve it?
Even Mr. El-Baradei's position on the Iraq's issue, before GW Bush and Tony Blair launched their war against Iraq and that imposing on Iraq a 13-year long genocidal sanctions, was very weak, very doubtful, very questionable, and NOT firm at all, concerning the BIG fact that Iraq has NO nuclear weapons.
Indeed, one of the reasons of the ongoing Anglo-American- Zionist criminal, bloody and genocidal war against Iraq and the Iraqi people was the foggy position of Mr. El-Baradei over the Iraq’s nuclear weapons that had never existed.
While many UN and other experts clearly indicated that Iraq had absolutely NO nuclear weapons, what so ever, Mr. El-Baradei was NOT clear, NOT sharp, Not sure, and NOT forward in his position, regarding the lack of
Iraq of any nuclear weapons. Is Mr. Dr. El-Baradei presently doing the same thing with Iran ? Is he paving the road for another wave of genocidal sanctions that might be followed by another genocidal war against Iran, similar to the sanctions and war against Iraq ?
Is this why El-Baradei was awarded the Noble Prize for Peace? I leave this question for the conscience of people, which might be difficult for some and very easy for others.
See Ha'aretz article below regarding Mr. El-Baradei's concerns over Israel's fears, regarding Iran's weapons!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
UN nuclear watchdog shows greater understanding of Israel's concerns
By Yossi Melman
Ha’aretz – Dec.6/05
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/654054.html
Four days before he is to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is showing greater understanding toward the concern of Israel and the West about Iran's nuclear program.
ElBaradei said yesterday that he understands the West's fears of Iran's nuclear program. "I know it [Iran] is trying to acquire the full fuel cycle. I know that acquiring the full fuel cycle means a country is months away from nuclear weapons, and that applies to Iran and everyone else," he said.
He was referring to Iran's intention to enrich uranium on its land and on its strong refusal to any compromise that would prevent it from doing so.
Israeli intelligence believes if Iran is not stopped from enriching uranium, within a few months it would cross the "point of no return" and be on the verge of developing nuclear arms.
However, the CIA's evaluation as stated in a report a few months ago is that Iran is four to five years away from achieving the technology to build a nuclear bomb even if it had the know-how and materials.
In any case, ElBaradei's statement to the British Independent newspaper perhaps indicates a certain disillusionment on his part or maybe even a desire to move closer to the American administration's positions regarding the Iranian nuclear program.
In the interview ElBaradei called on Iran and all the relevant parties, especially the West, not to embark on a collision course and not to aggravate the crisis.
ElBaradei said he could see no victors in an escalation. "Everybody would be hurt," he said, referring to all parties in the dispute. "You would open a Pandora's box," he said. "There would be efforts to isolate Iran, Iran would retaliate and at the end of the day you have to go back to the negotiating table to find the solution."
For the past three years ElBaradei has urged Iran to cooperate with the international community. He encouraged it to display transparency and enable UN inspectors to examine its nuclear facilities. He also asked Iran for documents showing that the program is indeed intended for peaceful purposes. During these three years ElBaradei wrote reports exposing Iran's violations of its commitments to the international Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its safeguard agreements with the IAEA. But he described them as "technical" and always recommended continuing talks with Iran.
ElBaradei objected to any attempt to pass an IAEA resolution declaring Iran a noncompliant state, thereby referring the issue to the UN Security Council, which could impose sanctions on Iran. ElBaradei did so because he knew it would be difficult to muster a majority for such a resolution. Russia and China strongly objected to referring the issue to the Security Council. In any case, Russia and China are expected to veto any Western attempt to impose sanctions on Iran.
In September this year the IAEA finally passed a resolution against Iran, but without setting a date as to when the issue would be referred to the Security Council.
The decision to declare Iran a noncompliant state was made after the negotiations between the EU and Iran for about a year quagmired. The EU pushed for Iran to cease the enrichment of uranium voluntarily in exchange for economic incentives, negotiations for joining the World Trade Organization and advanced know-how and technology.
The West's dilemma is twofold. On the one hand, Iran may enrich uranium as long as it does so in keeping with its commitments and under supervision. On the other hand, it's clear it has plans to produce nuclear arms. The dilemma is enhanced because it is difficult to impose sanctions on it both because of Russia's and China's objection but also because it could lead to a world oil shortage, damaging Western economies even more.
Above all this hovers the question of whether the West, especially the United States, has the military capability to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, which are scattered throughout the state and are well fortified deep underground in bomb-proof bunkers.