Latest news with #Blix

Al-Ahram Weekly

The non-existent bomb - World - Al-Ahram Weekly

Attacking Iran on a presumption that it is developing a nuclear bomb bears many similarities to what happened in Iraq and Libya, argues Ahmed Mustafa It is not clear if this weekend's American attack on three Iranian nuclear sites has ended Iran's nuclear programme permanently. The US bombed those sites a week after Israel started attacking Iran, targeting nuclear sites, energy infrastructure and military positions. It all took place on the pretext that Iran was 'very close' to producing a nuclear bomb; an Israeli claim Tehran categorically denies. Even though Iran started enriching uranium to 60 per cent purity after America withdrew from the 2015 agreement, at least ninety per cent is required to produce warheads. Many around the world are thinking, 'we've seen this before,' drawing analogies with false pretexts for the attack on Iraq. Analysts and commentators are revisiting the fabrications spread regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the infamous intelligence dossier Tony Blair used in misguiding British Parliament into war in 2003. The then UK prime minister repeated that Iraq can make a bomb in 45 minutes. That was proven to be an outright lie. Others reminded the world of the shameful show by the US secretary of state at that time, Collin Powell, exhibiting fabricated images at the UN to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Later, Powell, a decorated soldier, regretted what he had done and blamed others in the George W. Bush administration for tarnishing his military career by making a joke of him. Ironically, almost the same happened this week with the director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. When she briefed President Donald Trump that their information and analysis conclude that Iran is years away from producing a bomb, should they choose to do so, Trump said she was wrong and adopted the Israeli claim that the bomb is within a day's reach. In 2002, Benjamin Netanyahu testified before Congress, making a case for attacking Iraq. He was not in power then, but his testimony was influential. He bragged this week that he told then-US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld that 'you will finish this very quickly. But your primary goal is the Iranian regime. And the Iranian regime is trying to develop a nuclear weapon.' This week, iPaper (published by the Daily Mail and National Trust) quoted the famous former chief UN weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix drawing comparisons between the targeting of Iran and the case of Iraq. Blix told the paper, 'The US risks repeating the 'awful' results of the Iraq War if it joins Israel in trying to destroy the Iranian regime.' Though Iran started enriching uranium far above the 3.67 per cent needed to generate electricity, it is still far below the purity required to produce a nuclear weapon. Blix doubted 'the regime in Tehran intended to go ahead in building a bomb before it was attacked'. In 2017, media reports carried leaked emails by Collin Powell, including one he sent to a colleague in 2015 refuting what Netanyahu – then opposition leader – told Congress in an attempt to push for the US to not join the accord with Iran on its nuclear programme. Powell wrote: 'They [the Iranians] say, correctly, that they have every right to enrich [uranium] for energy. Russians helped build a power reactor at Busher. Can't get enough sanctions to break them. Lots of bs around about their progress. Bibi [Netanyahu] likes to say 'a year away' as do our intel guys. They say it every year. [It] ain't that easy to do.' He concluded, 'anyway, Iranians can't use one [a nuclear weapon] if they finally make one. The boys in Tehran know Israel has 200, all targeted on Tehran, and we have thousands.' Collin Powell was referring to the Israeli arsenal of nuclear warheads, estimated by some to be about 400 bombs. Israel is not part of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or subject to any inspection from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The latter provided a pretext to the Israeli attack last week by declaring Iran in violation of its commitments by increasing enrichment. The IAEA didn't mention any bomb-making; it was the Israeli assumption that Washington acted on. This goes back to the early 1980s. Looking into the archives, the Israeli daily Maariv carried a front-page headline saying that producing Iranian nuclear bombs is at its 'final stage' with the help of Germany. A veteran Western diplomat stressed the fact that the Americans rely heavily on the Israelis in their information and analysis of the region. Though some agencies would still gather intelligence without Israeli involvement, decision-makers always take the Israeli view into account. 'Even as President Trump might look like he is acting on a gut instinct he still needs justifications within the administration's traditions,' the former diplomat told Al- Ahram Weekly. The buildup to invading and occupying Iraq in 2003 was mainly based on such falsifications. Not only Iraq but Libya had to announce ending its WMD programme, which nobody proved it was there in the first place. In a BBC interview in 2012, the late Libyan prime minister Shukri Ghanem denied all Western accusations against his country and said his government accepted to 'settle' the issues by paying billions of dollars to lift sanctions imposed on the country. He literally said: 'We thought it was easier for us to buy peace.' He was later found dead in a small canal in Vienna, a suspected assassination by Western intelligence agency operatives, with some reports accusing former French president Francois Sarkozy of commissioning the hit out of the fear Ghanem would disclose what he knew of the millions he received from Gaddafi as a political bribe. Before that, Ghanem confided to close friends that all that was said about a Libyan nuclear programme was not true, but again Gaddafi announced dismantling non-existent weapons programmes. So far, the Iranian official position is that its doctrine does not include producing a nuclear bomb. It seemed increasing enrichment to a higher level was a retaliatory measure since America's withdrawal in 2018 from the 2015 deal. It might have done that to improve its negotiating stance with world powers in a bid to seek lifting sanctions. Whatever the damage to its nuclear facilities, and whether it managed to move what is supposed to be a half tonne of highly enriched uranium from the targeted site before the strike, the consequences of the US involvement in the war on Iran are still to come. Some analysts are suggesting that Iran is not Iraq or Libya, but no one can clearly prophesy what will happen. British political commentator Owen Jones wrote in the Guardian: 'The warmongers were wrong about Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Now watch them make the same mistake about Iran… Israel is the main source of terror and instability in the Middle East. But the West continually turns away from this reality.' Even in the Israeli media, many are questioning the logic of repeating the mistakes of Iraq and Libya. John Spencer, the executive director of the Urban Warfare Institute, wrote in the Jerusalem Post this week that 'Iran is not Libya. And it is not Iraq either'. He was following the notion that the Israeli-American mission is confined to the destruction of the nuclear programme. Though the US didn't discuss regime change publicly, Israel was not too shy to suggest it. * A version of this article appears in print in the 26 June, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly Follow us on: Facebook Instagram Whatsapp Short link: