Vital to our future
Iran should have access to safe civilian
nuclear technology
September 10, 2004
iranian.com
Regarding Shahriar Zanganeh's "Nuclear
Roulette", I
thought it be necessary to voice some comments:
He is making the right arguments for the wrong reasons. No one is happy with Iran's
current state of affairs. Yet trying to base a con argument based on Iran's quest
to master nuclear technology will hit serious polemical obstacles. Allow
me to elaborate:
1. Shahriar keeps putting "peaceful applications" in quotations,
as if he really knows for a fact Iran's intentions. As I stated in my last
article, "Cool
it", trying to cover-up a clandestine weapons program is incredibly difficult,
if not impossible from IAEA inspections. And besides, why go to such pains
of concealed enrichment when one has the black market?
2. As far as I know, when the NCR first made their discovery, the IAEA did
not have any mandate to do any full inspections in Iran; the IAEA inspectors
are very adept at what they do.
3. There is nothing inherently wrong with enriching Uranium by itself. You
need enriched Uranium to fuel a reactor anyway. Enrichment to +15%ish values would
be weapons oriented. And there is no way in hell you can hide that type of enrichment
operation. Therefore the UK's demand that Iran not be allowed mastery of any
part of the fuel cycle is simply ridiculous.
4. Shahriar keeps ignoring the fact that Iran is mainly after the technology,
not just building a few reactors per se. What can you do with nuclear technology?
Food irradiation, law enforcement, even the oil industry, space technologies,
archeology, and farmers and manufacturers of common consumer products, all frequently
use nuclear technology. Not to mention the advanced imaging techniques and advanced
radioisotope products that stem from this technology. (see detailed
list here) All in all saving an economy billions.
 5. Shahriar mentions the cost analysis argument against nuclear energy for
Iran. If nuclear energy today does not seem as a feasible option to many, it's
because it is highly politicized, not because nuclear energy is not a competitive
source of future energy, which it definitely is. For example, president Carter's
restriction on spent fuel reprocessing puts heavy restrictions on efficient waste
managemnet methods.
In fact, an MIT study recommends that despite the unattractive cost obstacles
of nuclear energy, "nuclear energy could be a vital option for generating
electricity in the future". The study claims: "We believe the
nuclear option should be retained, precisely because it is an important carbon-free
source of power that can potentially make a significant contribution to future
electricity supply." (source: e11th-hour.org)
Thus to dismiss the nuclear option and its associated myriad of beneficial tchnologies
is plain shortsighted, if not reckless for a developing country like Iran. To NOT
invest, obtain, and use such technologies would be a disaster to future generations
of Iranians, not the other way around. For the many benefits of nuclear technology,
see: nei.org.
6. Shahriar mentions the supposedly "environmental dangers" of
nuclear plants. Surprisingly, nuclear plants are the safest
plants in the world by record, especially when it comes to global
warming. How many nuclear plants do we know in Japan that have
been adversely affected by Japan's famous 7 richter tremors? See
here. OK, so a Russian reactor is not Japan. But isn't
that what Iran is in fact asking for? Access to such safe and advanced
civilian
technologies?
7. Shahriar's statement that "the current fundamentalist regime's priorities
do not suite the needs of the nation or the security of the world" is
however one worth reflecting. I too can't help think how a regime
change in Iran would help us all (Iranians, Americans, Islam, and the
world).
Everytime I hear news about Zahra Kazemi, the apathy and
treason of officials in Iran on the theft of cultural heritage
artifacts, or when I see the latest supermodern developments of
Iran-hating Dubai, or some incredibly
stupid economic move by the incompetent conservative establishment that continues
to bestow Iran "pas-raft" (regress) instead of "pish-raft" (progress).
God, I don't wanna even get into that.  Conclusion:
1. Nuclear technology is vital to the FUTURE. No ands, ifs, or buts.
2. Iran's current authorities however, dont have any idea or dont seem
to care an epsilon about the meaning of FUTURE, as demonstarted by their miserable
conduct of political/socio/economic affairs in the past.
.................... Spam?! Khalaas!
*
*
|
