Iran Press: Europeans Have “Lost” in Nuclear Talks

Text of report by Iranian newspaper Keyhan on 25 July

In the next week, the deadline for the three European countries to present the final proposal to Iran in the course of the nuclear talks will expire. Britain, France, and Germany have extended this complicated game for 21 months in order to avoid a checkmate in this political chess game and prevent the victory of Iran by staging a waiting game and wasting time, which has been observed since long months ago.

In this period, the Iranian party decisively pursued its strategy and tried to diversify tactics and proposals in bargaining and deprived the Europeans of their excuses. Iran’s strong logic is completely obvious; enrichment of uranium and having the nuclear fuel production cycle is our right based on the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), and if there is worry that there may be a drift towards the production of nuclear weapons, we accept that the International Atomic Energy Agency must be allowed to perform supervision on and inspection of nuclear facilities as much as it likes.

Surely, this generous argument cannot be called into question. Europeans promised to settle the nuclear dispute in the IAEA that has remained open only for political reasons without having any legal ground in order to help Iran accelerate technological progress and development, but every time they entered a new debate and discussion in order to evade their obligations.

Twenty-one months have passed with the political frivolity of the Europeans and now they have no more than one week, while a mountain of obligations left from talks and agreements of Tehran, Vienna, Geneva, Brussels, and Paris is on shoulders of the European party. Entangled in this diplomatic dilemma like a pinned chess piece, they do everything to find a loophole, but the more they endeavour the less they find.

In Paris talks (late last year), with various stratagems, they could buy time until late Esfand [March], and when late Esfand was reached, they requested to be given an opportunity until the beginning of Farvardin [ 20 March]. They did not accept Iran’s practical proposals for giving clear guarantees and restarting uranium enrichment, and Iran threw the ball in their court and told them: Do your stuff! Offer a proposal that both recognizes Iran’s right and assures that the Iranian nuclear programme would not deviate.

These lengthy discussions continued until the presidential election, and this time they used the election as an excuse to defer making a decision until the election’s outcome was known. This is like a lazy pupil who wastes time until a day before the examination and then he hopes that a snowfall or the illness of the teacher or some other event will cause the postponement of the examination. However, he doesn’t know that the final examinations will be held sooner or later.

Europeans, haunted by their illusions, thought that an administration would come that would readily make concessions and ignore the Iranian nation’s right. But, bad luck! Contrary to anticipation by embassies and intelligence services, the outcome of the election created the most horrible nightmare for the Europeans. The outcome of the election enhanced Iranian national power, though if any other person had been elected as president, the Europeans’ dreams could not come true either! The European Union, with all its crises and shortcomings ranging from economic crises and a slump in some countries to the French and Dutch peoples’ opposition to the European Constitution has put all its political prestige and honour at stake in the course of the diplomatic competition with Iran. Challenging and talking to Iran is not the world’s end. They must have a particle of honour and credit before states and nations of the world would engage in talks on various issues. However, the Europeans’ failure to fulfil their obligations to Iran will deprive them of their remaining honour and credit.

The reason they don’t have the determination to change their attitude and policy despite knowing the enormous costs they will have to pay for breaching the promises given to Iran resides in the fact that Europe, 60 years after the end of the World War II, has not been able to get rid of its debt to America and international Zionism. The Germans are ceaselessly reproached by other Europeans, Americans, and Zionists for the issue of fascism, and the French are always scorned and are told that they would not have been able to be rescued from fascism without the assistance of the Americans. The British dependence on the land beyond the Atlantic is well known, and exactly for this reason after British Prime Minister Tony Blair said “we won’t allow Iran to use nuclear technology because of our commitment to Israel,” German Foreign Minister Fischer made similar statements to show how Germany is indebted to Israel, and some while later French President Chirac, after his meeting with the prime minister of the Zionist regime and in an interview the Zionist daily Ha’aretz, emphasized that Iran should not restart uranium enrichment.

Yes, it is a reality that the French, Germans, and even the British have not been able to get rid of international capitalism, which is mostly controlled by Zionist Jews; otherwise they would have protested against the recent nuclear agreement between America and India, which was reached during the visit of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Sing to Washington, and Washington’s decision to help New Delhi to develop its nuclear technology outside of the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (India is not a member of the NPT and has tested various atomic bombs), or put a hundredth of the pressure it exerted on Iran on the Zionist regime to persuade Israel to accept at least inspections and supervision.

Whatever it is, the Europeans have lost a game that as been directed by Iran cleverly and patiently. Now, what is to be done? This is a big problem for not only the Europeans but the Americans, who have observed during the last 21 months that Iran’s arguments have convinced different states and nations of the world. Surely, using terrorism and human rights to launch a campaign against Iran means nothing but the West’s empty-handedness and incapability in the face of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Historical experience shows that controversy on terrorism and human rights has always served as a barometer of a strategic disorder and logistical vacuum in the West. When the barometer shows high numbers it means that the basis of the West’s authority influence has been challenged; otherwise everybody knows they have nothing to do with human rights and terrorism!! Nowadays, the end of the Europeans’ deadline is approaching, and this expiration coincides with the 60th anniversary of the explosion of the first – and the last – atomic bomb in the world. Sixty years ago on these days (6 and 9 August 1945), in the thick of World War II, the American government dropped two atomic bombs on the people living in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to close a barbarous war that had been ignited with the Western civilization, taking the lives of 231,000 innocent people. On those days, the world’s people could understand that the atomic technology may be misused to develop weapons of mass destruction. Principally, that event provoked the idea of preventing production and proliferation, though not even preparation of the related treaty was immune to unfair discrimination. Thus, can America sit on the seat of a judge and police and frighten others off Iran’s access to nuclear technology? Surely, it is America that must sit on the seat of the defendant; and we, beside all oppressed nations of the world, have claims on America.

Nowadays, clouds of terrorism are hanging over the whole world. Madrid, London, Beirut, Baghdad, Sharm al-Shaykh in Egypt and similar points have been the scenes of brutal terrorist attacks in recent months. The latest instance of terrorist operations left 98 killed and several hundred wounded, while the shock caused by the London bombings had not been forgotten. Really, what is going on? Who is behind these events? Which experienced intelligence gangster networks have a hand in serial incidents that can easily penetrate security barriers in a city like London, as it did in New York and Washington, and easily spread panic and kill people? Thus, those Egyptian analysts who hold the terrorist Mossad responsible for the bombings must be approved. They say the unusual concentration of Israelis in the Sinai Peninsula, where Sharm al-Shaykh is located, is a security threat. Why are they allowed to enter the peninsula without any control? At least one of the cars that exploded had arrived from Israel through the Taba border terminal in the Sinai Peninsula.

Let’s explore traces of these complicated incidents in the words of Henry Kissinger, a renowned old Zionist who served as the US secretary of state for long years. A few days ago, he betrayed a part of the secret in his interview with Foreign Affairs. Note his wording: “We are worried about the possibility of the proliferation of atomic weapons by Iran. If Iran succeeds to manufacture atomic weapons, the attempt to stop the proliferation of these weapons will become meaningless, and we will live in a world with several atomic centres. Therefore, we must ask ourselves what would happen to the world if the atomic bombs were used in London and thousands were killed. I favour Bush’s policy for expanding democracy in the Middle East, but we must be cautious in executing this policy. This is a difficult process. We must not forget Iran as a historical instance. The Carter administration’s attempt to nurture democracy led to (Imam) Khomeyni’s movement and helped its birth. Thus, we must take steps carefully.” You cannot find a proof clearer than this! The story is obvious. They don’t feel sympathy for democracy and human rights as much as a particle. However, by horrible terrorist blasts one can disturb diplomatic rules and international treaties. Sequential explosions in the most protected points of Britain and Egypt may be organized, and then frighten the world of Iran’s nuclear threat while the world has experienced the fear of nuclear explosions by America in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

However, none of these controversies can interrupt the Iranian- European game. Our strong logic is as described above; unlike many Westerners and their supporting states that don’t yield to minimum, we give our guarantees, but we never waive the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.