Check showtimes to see when Christiane Amanpour is on CNN where you are. Or watch online.
CNN's Christiane Amanpour speaks with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano.
This is about as hopeful as it gets. Just a few months back, the talk was of a preemptive strike. North Korea offers an example of what happens to a country that acquires nuclear weapons while seceding from the established global order. With enlightened leadership, Iran can become a stabilising force in a region that has been the source of much conflict and turmoil.
Yes, it is hopeful. But hopeful is what Iran wants us to feel while they proceed, unimpeded, with developing the bomb.
They have said, unequivocally, that one thing they will never negotiate away is their right to refine nuclear materials. I know of nothing that has moved them to even consider changing that posture. Which means, they're still working on the bomb.
Giving us this feeling of hope also gives THEM more time to develop it. And I think they're probably very close to it now. They may even HAVE it. That could explain their uncharacteristic international bonhomie. We can hardly expect them to pipe up and tell us they've got a nuke. N. Korea might, but never Iran. Iran prefers to keep its secrecy secret, whereas N. Korea loves to boast.
Whether Rouhani is a true moderate or not, nothing he says to the world would be allowed if the Supreme Leader did not permit it – and his posture has been clear all along, of course – he wants the bomb. The negotiations are merely a means by which they can stall, while they continue feverishly working on getting nukes. The negotiations give them more time and wiggle room, so they participate in them.
If Iran ever DID reach some kind of agreement on nukes, you can be sure that, at any time they wished, they would violate every promise or agreement they signed. This is considered righteous in their belief system. Participate in negotiations, stall for time, ultimately give an agreement or pact, then wait for the time when you will violate it. In the meantime, you've gained lots of things, especially the lifting of sanctions. Their M.O. ought to be clear enough to all of us by now.
Still, even Iranians aren't above boasting at times. They've claimed all along that all their activity with nuclear materials is strictly for peaceful purposes. If this were so, they'd have practically dragged in the inspectors, so they could show them how "modern" Iran is. They haven't, though, have they"? On the contrary, they've been visibly secretive about their activities, and have built much of their nuclear facilities underground so deeply that even bunker buster bombs wouldn't affect their operation. Does anyone NEED this expensive, secretive step in order to make fuel for nuclear reactors and medical equipment?
From doing research, I learned from the Reader's Guide at my library that Iran was slathering for nukes back in the early '90's, and made no bones about it. Today, they say nukes are against Islam. So were they lyin-g then or are they lyin-g now?
Secondly, even IF all their plans were peaceful, the very idea of constructing nuclear power plants in Iran should be unthinkable. Not because of them being an Islamic State, but because any such power plant that is constructed is another Fukishima, waiting to happen. Iran is one of the most active seismic areas in the world. Its earthquake history shows that most quakes they get are very severe, and that they occur very often. Imagine one of their power plants melting down? The effects could hit populations thousands of miles away. Radiation does NOT respect borders. Which makes it as much THEIR business as Iran's. Now imagine more than one such reactor melting down in the same quake...
I have to wonder why the international community has, to my knowledge, never made one PEEP against the building of those reactors. They have every right – indeed obligation – to do so.
The only feasible use by Iran of any nuclear materials is thus in the area of medicine and of making radium dials for clocks.
Iran says they seek the reactors in order to provide the people with advanced electrical infrastructure. That's inane. They're dripping in oil. If helping the people with that advanced infrastructure was really their intention, why didn't they build oil-based power plants DECADES ago? Since it's their own oil they'd be using, the cost would be minuscule, too.
They keep telling their people how "clean" nuclear energy is. You can believe they've gone out of their way to keep those same people from learning about Fukishima. I don't think they could have succeeded totally, though, and anything less than total suppression of that information will bode against popularity for Iran's nuclear reactors. But then, Iran rarely feels any of its policies are EVER destabilized by becoming unpopular with the people. Absolutism is an u-gly thing, but it does seem to work...
There isn't one single – and responsible – reason for Iran to "need" to refine nuclear materials. None.
Conclusion? They're working on the bomb, and they WILL have it.
>>They have said, unequivocally, that one thing they will never negotiate away is their right to refine nuclear materials.
They have no reason to. International agreements such as the NPT makes it very clear that Iran has the right to have a non-military nuclear program.
And according to the United Nations experts, there are no signs that Irans nuclear program has a military dimension.
So as long as they comply with the other NPT requirements (such as IAEA inspections), what they do is perfectly fine and legal.
>>Which means, they're still working on the bomb.
Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. Having a nuclear program does NOT mean, a nation is working on a nuclear bomb. Otherwise, pretty much every European country would be working on a bomb – because pretty much every European country has a nuclear program.
Monday – Friday:
1900 & 2200 London
2000 & 2300 CET
2:00pm & 5:00pm ET
Asia, Tuesday – Saturday: