If US Attacks Iran, Human Survival May Be at Risk (Part II)

Iran and the Dollar

Iran wants to make its oil sales in currencies other than the dollar. Although the dollar amount circulating in the world does not reflect any real wealth anymore, as the United States has used “the machine of making bills” whenever they have needed it for the past 40 years, most economic transactions in world trade are made in dollars. This is the only “strength” that remains for that currency. If at any time the dollar ceases to be the benchmark currency for international trade, the global economy would collapse. And not only is the dollar threatened as a currency, but it also suffers from endless speculation. Almost all the oil futures exchanges have their headquarters in New York and London and both places work in dollars. In these futures, increases in oil prices are made to benefit a handful of speculators.

Iran began accepting euros in oil sales since 2003. This is one of the main causes of the U.S.-Iran crisis. Recall that Saddam Hussein wanted to do the same with Iraq’s oil in 2000 and what happened then.

Since 2008, Iran is slowing its sale of oil in dollars and choosing to complete the transactions in euros and yuans. Let’s say, on the other hand, this measure allowed him to win in one year $7 million. Since 2006, Iran is transferring its foreign currency reserves from European banks to Asian banks.

Iran Has No Nuclear Weapons

Although Western propaganda tries to hide the fact, Iran is perhaps the most watched country, under the supervision of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). Moreover Noam Chomsky wrote that, “[in] 2003 a reasonable proposal to this end was put forward by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency: that all production and processing of weapon-usable material be under international control, with ‘assurance that legitimate would-be users could get their supplies.’ That should be the first step, he proposed, toward fully implementing the 1993 UN resolution for a fissile material cutoff treaty (or Fissban). ElBaradei’s proposal has to date been accepted by only one state, to my knowledge: Iran, in February, in an interview with Ali Larijani, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator. The Bush administration rejects a verifiable Fissban — and stands nearly alone. In November 2004 the UN committee on disarmament voted in favour of a verifiable Fissban. The vote was 147 to one (United States), with two abstentions: Israel and Britain. Last year a vote in the full General Assembly was 179 to two, Israel and Britain again abstaining. The United States was joined by Palau.”

Three countries have not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): India, Pakistan and Israel. All three are nuclear military powers (Iran is not), a status achieved by all three with the help of the United States. None of the three represent a “danger” to the international community either (Iran itself is a danger). In particular, Israel has 200 to 300 nuclear weapons and does not allow IAEA inspection. In addition, Israel violates the 1991 Security Council resolution which calls for the entire Middle East to be free of nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

A few months ago, Iran announced that it had a budget of $250 million for nuclear research intended for peaceful purposes. Against this, the United States has $81 billion not only for research, but also for increasing its nuclear arsenal, which currently stands at 5,000 nuclear bombs.

The way Islam is understood in Iran stands against nuclear weapons. [According to the Voltaire Network,] “The Ayatollah Khomeini and his successors condemned the manufacturing, stockpiling, utilization, and threat of utilization of nuclear weapons for being contrary to their religious values. It their view, it is morally unacceptable to deploy weapons of mass destruction which kill indiscriminately both civilians and military forces, government supporters and opponents alike. This prohibition became legally binding through a decree issued by the Supreme Guide of the Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei, on 9 August 2005.

“[During] the war triggered by Iraq (1980-88)… Saddam Hussein ordered unguided missiles to be fired against Iranian cities. The Iranian army retaliated in the same fashion until Imam Khomeini intervened to prohibit, on ethical grounds, the indiscriminate firing of missiles against enemy cities. The country preferred to endure a longer war rather than to win by employing arms aimed at random.”

In 2006, Iran resumed its nuclear research program, which had been interrupted in 2003 after international pressure. Russian technical support is important, both for personnel and the construction of nuclear power plants like Bushehr, which has a cost of nearly one billion euros. “The Iranian nuclear project is based on three main aspects: the construction of nuclear reactors, nuclear fuel production, and developing through this energy medicine, industry and agriculture. Nuclear reactors for the production of electricity total more than 430 worldwide and produce 16 percent of the world’s electricity.”

Iranian uranium is enriched to 3.5 percent. For military use, it must be enriched to an 80-90 percent. As we can see, the “dangers” of Iran is building atomic bomb is simply a big lie.

Since 2006, Americans have gotten several convictions against Iran in the Security Council of the U.N. and promulgated international boycott measures against the country that have seriously harmed it economically (prohibition of sales of goods and technology, asset freezes…). The report of the IAEA that facilitated the U.N. Security Council’s condemnation of that year contains such memorable phrases as: “While the Agency was able to verify the nondiversion of declared nuclear material… [the Agency has limited ability] to clarify outstanding issues with a view to drawing a conclusion regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran.”

The reality is that a 2006 report of the Intelligence Committee of the House of Representatives said that the U.S. has no real information of an Iranian nuclear program. There is no evidence. Another 2006 report by the IAEA to the Security Council says that there is no evidence that Iran’s nuclear program is pursuing the manufacture of nuclear weapons. The same was said again in 2008, when a report of the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) of the United States recognized that Iran has no nuclear weapons program at all, since at least 2003. In 2010, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran’s permanent ambassador to the IAEA, recalls that after eight years of inspections, there is no evidence of atomic weapons being built. A total of 16 intelligence agencies of the United States (including the CIA) have produced reports in the same direction in two National Studies of Intelligence.

As Mohamed El Baradei, head of the IAEA did not keep exactly to the thesis of the United States, the Western powers forced his resignation. A U.S. report in 2006, presented before a parliamentary committee, contained so many lies that the IAEA itself had to protest, and that is not liked in Washington. Recently, Baradei, free of commitments, has put the cards face up: “[The] Americans and the Europeans withheld important documents and information from us. They weren’t interested in a compromise with the government in Tehran, but regime change — by any means necessary.”

El Baradei has been replaced by the Japanese Amano, a faithful dog of imperialism. According to Wikileaks, Amano, providing documents to the U.S. Embassy in Vienna, has pledged allegiance to the United States. From 2010-11, the theses of the IAEA are in perfect harmony with Western interests.

Amano’s first report is dated February 2010. In November 2011, a report by the IAEA says, despite possessing no known evidence, that Iran “has carried out… activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device” with “possible military dimensions.” It is a false report. [According to an Asia Times article,] “Experts and analysts from around the world have questioned the report, claiming the support of it is based on information from some secret services of all countries close to the regime in Tehran. Also, some photographs provided are from early in the current decade, referred to Iran’s missile program that has been abandoned for years or are trying to link the nuclear program to a Ukrainian specialist who worked in the country in the nineties. As noted by these sources, the bulk of the report refers to activities prior to 2003. It ignores what one U.S. intelligence acknowledged in 2007, that the Iranian nuclear program has ‘been peaceful since 2003’ and intentionally concealing the Iranian government’s collaboration with the aforementioned agency.”

In the United States, it is indicated that the research that will allow Iran to have nuclear weapons is headed by a prominent Russian scientist, once identified as Vyacheslav Danilenko Danilenko is one of the world’s most important minds in the production of nanodiamonds, which has nothing to do with nuclear energy.

And, to sum this all up, last December, a court in Manhattan came to the wise conclusion that Iran was behind the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Iran has again requested that the IAEA send a group of technicians to the country to inspect their nuclear research. There has been no response. The Iranian representative to the IAEA, Ali-Asghar Soltanieh, said that after eight years of inspections and hundreds of unplanned visits, there is no proof that Iran is producing nuclear bombs. In the same respect and opinion, the former secretary general of the IAEA, Hans Blix, can relate.

Is it so difficult to know whether Iran is developing nuclear weapons? First, if they were doing so, it would divert uranium for these purposes. But the IAEA report denies this, because uranium movements leave a trail easily detected with Geiger counters. Second, there are technical means (radioactivity counters and meters) to measure radioactivity levels, but all investigations in this direction show that Iran enriches uranium for peaceful purposes. And third, [investigative journalist Seymour Hersh told Democracy Now] “…we also have incredible competence at looking for air holes from the air, from satellites. If you’re building an underground facility, you have to vent it. You have to get air into it. You have to find a way to remove bad air and put in fresh air…. Nada. We came up with nothing.”

Editor’s Note: Tomorrow: “United States: Arming Their Allies in the Region to the Teeth,” the second in a three-part translation of Miguel Giribets’ “If US Attacks Iran, Human Survival May Be at Risk.”

Read Part I here.