Today, at a parliamentary session, Javad Zarif explored different parts of the recent Geneva Agreement. In this speech, Zarif emphasized on two important issues including the Heavy Water plant in Arak and Additional Protocol. With regards to Arak nuclear plant, once again, Zarif claimed that the construction of the Heavy Water plant in Arak will unstoppable continue the same is before. When it comes to the Additional Protocol, Zarif claimed that the approval of the Additional Protocol lies in the hands of the Islamic Parliament not the Government (Majles).
Given the fact that the both issues of the Heavy Water plant in Arak and the Additional Protocol supposed to be some important parts of this agreement, a question arises from Zarif's statement. Who is lying in these matters; Zarif or his counterparts within E3+3 group?
M. Sirani 27.11.2013
Reference:
Zarif's speech (2013). URL< http://www.tasnimnews.com/Home/Single/204247>. Accessed on: 27.11.2013.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Monday, November 25, 2013
An Important Missing Link in the Recent Geneva Conference!?
In the previous short note, I explored some differences between the details, which have been included in the recent Geneva Agreement and the details that Javad Zarif and Ali Akbar Salehi stated in their press conferences after this conference. However, as I reviewed the details of the Geneva Agreement once again, I understood that this Agreement is missing another important part. This important part is Iran's Laser Enrichment Activities. In the Geneva Agreement has not been written anything at all about this important issue. Based on this point and what I have explored in the previous short note, I can say: In the long run, Iran will be the real winner of the nuclear negotiation.
In sum: let be honest with ourself. Through the last three years, Iran has managed to survive devastating economic and political sanctions. The experience of last three years shows that Iran has learned to bypass some parts of the sanctions; otherwise, it would have not been able to survive up until this moment. In addition to these enormous pressures, Iran has been able to preserve its full hegemony in Iraq. Moreover, under the pressure of these enormous sanctions, Iran has managed
to save Asad's regime up until now, against the will and activity of the most powerful countries such as America, England, France and almost all Arab countries in the Middle East. Furthermore, we know; the Iranian Regime also knows that no country would be able to completely destroy Iran's nuclear facilities through any type of military strike. Considering these simple facts, we should ask ourself an important question as follows. Why should Iran retreat from its nuclear activity, while it has lots of winning cards in its hand at this stage?
M. Sirani 25.11.2013
In sum: let be honest with ourself. Through the last three years, Iran has managed to survive devastating economic and political sanctions. The experience of last three years shows that Iran has learned to bypass some parts of the sanctions; otherwise, it would have not been able to survive up until this moment. In addition to these enormous pressures, Iran has been able to preserve its full hegemony in Iraq. Moreover, under the pressure of these enormous sanctions, Iran has managed
to save Asad's regime up until now, against the will and activity of the most powerful countries such as America, England, France and almost all Arab countries in the Middle East. Furthermore, we know; the Iranian Regime also knows that no country would be able to completely destroy Iran's nuclear facilities through any type of military strike. Considering these simple facts, we should ask ourself an important question as follows. Why should Iran retreat from its nuclear activity, while it has lots of winning cards in its hand at this stage?
M. Sirani 25.11.2013
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Some Ambiguous Issues Within Recent Nuclear Agreement With Iran (Who Lies?).
As I review the details of current nuclear agreement between Iran and E3+3 group, I see some ambiguous issues as follows.
The official website of Voice of America (VOA) has published a Persian version of the current nuclear agreement in Geneva. According to this article, for example:
1- Iran should not enrich uranium above 5%.
2- Iran should either convert its 20% enriched uranium (Nearly 200 kg) into 5% enriched uranium or neutralize it or convert it into a form that cannot be enriched to higher level more than 20%.
3- Another part of this agreement is about the Heavy Water Plant in Arak. According to this part of the agreement, Iran should completely deactivate and dismantle Arak plant and don't proceed any activity or development at all in this nuclear plant (see link 1).
The ambiguous issues derive from Javad Zarif's press conference after the Geneva III agreement. In an interview, which has been published in iribnews website (an Iran's official news agency), Zarif claims something completely different than what has been mentioned in VOA website.
In this interview, for example, Zarif claims:
None of Iran's nuclear activities including Arak Heavy Water Plant will neither shut down nor stop . Furthermore, Zarif claims that Iran needs 20% enriched uranium for its research reactor in Tehran. As such, Iran will continue with this type of enrichment process in the future too; the same as it has done it in the past (see link 2).
By a simple comparison between these two versions (i.e. Zarif's press conference and the article published in VOA website), we come up with some questions as follows:
1- Does Javad Zarif lie in this matter?
2- Is there any misinterpretation in the Voice of America's article (from English to Persian)?
3- Is there any misunderstanding about the details of this agreement between Iran and E3+3 group?
Ambiguity with regards to Geneva Agreement tends to increase, when we pay attention to what Ali Akbar Salehi says. Today, Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization in an interview with ILNA claimed that Iran unstoppable will continue with its nuclear activities in all its nuclear facilities including the Heavy Water Plant in Arak.
We should bear in mind that Iran would be able to obtain nuclear weapons by using two methods. The first method is that Iran would be able to enrich uranium up until 90-95%. The second method is that Iran would be able to use some amount of plutonium, which would be produced from its Heavy Water Plant in Arak. As Zarif and Salehi after this agreement claim, , Iran still is able to enrich uranium up until 20% for its research reactor in Tehran and Arak nuclear facility would continue to work the same as before. A serious question arises from this short note. What does President Obama mean, when he claims "the deal includes "substantial limitations" on Iran?
In sum, it seems there is some misunderstanding or something wrong within the details of this agreement. The recent Geneva Agreement to some extent resembles me to another Munich Agreement.
M. Sirani 24.11.2013
References:
Link 1: Persian Version of the agreement published in VOA (2013). URL< http://ir.voanews.com/content/agreement-iran-5plus1-geneva/1796522.html>. Accessed on: 24.11.2013.
Link2: Zarif's press conference with iribnews (2013).
URL< http://www.iranpressnews.com/source/161857.htm>. Accessed on: 24.11.2013.
If my short note is not clear enough, perform a simple research in both links noted above and today's Ali Akbar Salehi speech in Tehran.
The official website of Voice of America (VOA) has published a Persian version of the current nuclear agreement in Geneva. According to this article, for example:
1- Iran should not enrich uranium above 5%.
2- Iran should either convert its 20% enriched uranium (Nearly 200 kg) into 5% enriched uranium or neutralize it or convert it into a form that cannot be enriched to higher level more than 20%.
3- Another part of this agreement is about the Heavy Water Plant in Arak. According to this part of the agreement, Iran should completely deactivate and dismantle Arak plant and don't proceed any activity or development at all in this nuclear plant (see link 1).
The ambiguous issues derive from Javad Zarif's press conference after the Geneva III agreement. In an interview, which has been published in iribnews website (an Iran's official news agency), Zarif claims something completely different than what has been mentioned in VOA website.
In this interview, for example, Zarif claims:
None of Iran's nuclear activities including Arak Heavy Water Plant will neither shut down nor stop . Furthermore, Zarif claims that Iran needs 20% enriched uranium for its research reactor in Tehran. As such, Iran will continue with this type of enrichment process in the future too; the same as it has done it in the past (see link 2).
By a simple comparison between these two versions (i.e. Zarif's press conference and the article published in VOA website), we come up with some questions as follows:
1- Does Javad Zarif lie in this matter?
2- Is there any misinterpretation in the Voice of America's article (from English to Persian)?
3- Is there any misunderstanding about the details of this agreement between Iran and E3+3 group?
Ambiguity with regards to Geneva Agreement tends to increase, when we pay attention to what Ali Akbar Salehi says. Today, Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization in an interview with ILNA claimed that Iran unstoppable will continue with its nuclear activities in all its nuclear facilities including the Heavy Water Plant in Arak.
We should bear in mind that Iran would be able to obtain nuclear weapons by using two methods. The first method is that Iran would be able to enrich uranium up until 90-95%. The second method is that Iran would be able to use some amount of plutonium, which would be produced from its Heavy Water Plant in Arak. As Zarif and Salehi after this agreement claim, , Iran still is able to enrich uranium up until 20% for its research reactor in Tehran and Arak nuclear facility would continue to work the same as before. A serious question arises from this short note. What does President Obama mean, when he claims "the deal includes "substantial limitations" on Iran?
In sum, it seems there is some misunderstanding or something wrong within the details of this agreement. The recent Geneva Agreement to some extent resembles me to another Munich Agreement.
M. Sirani 24.11.2013
References:
Link 1: Persian Version of the agreement published in VOA (2013). URL< http://ir.voanews.com/content/agreement-iran-5plus1-geneva/1796522.html>. Accessed on: 24.11.2013.
Link2: Zarif's press conference with iribnews (2013).
URL< http://www.iranpressnews.com/source/161857.htm>. Accessed on: 24.11.2013.
If my short note is not clear enough, perform a simple research in both links noted above and today's Ali Akbar Salehi speech in Tehran.
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Important Message To South Korea, Japan and India
Those South Asian countries that are importing their oil, gas and other important natural resources from Iran, should find a new reliable, stable and secure supplier, no matter what the outcome of current Geneva Conference would be. The politicians and policy- makers in these countries should understand that the Iranian Regime cannot be trusted in this important matter based on two main reasons including 1- Iran's adventurous behavior at the local, regional and global level. 2- Iran's close, inseparable and unlimited ties with China, North Korea and Russia. Based on these reasons, it would be wise that some countries such as South Korea, Japan and India do not put their eggs in Iran's basket specially when it comes to some important and vital resources such as oil and gas. These countries should not put their security, security of their economy and more importantly their level of vulnerabilities at risk with regards to adventurous and unpredictable behavior of the Iranian Regime.
M. Sirani 23.11.2013
M. Sirani 23.11.2013
Friday, November 22, 2013
Sending A Man Into Space.
Yesterday, in an interview with IRNA, Hamid Fazeli (2nd Name: Mohsen Kafi) the current head of the Iranian Space Agency (ISA) claimed that Iran is preparing to send a man into space somewhere in the future.
The nature of this move i.e. sending a man into space, is pure scientific and peaceful as Hamid Fazeli claimed. This move, however, is exactly the same as peaceful nuclear activity of the Iranian Regime. I emphasize on these two issues; because I don't want anyone think that Iran is trying to develop long range nuclear warhead secretly under the name of peaceful and scientific activity. To put it simply, every move of the Iranian Regime is pure peaceful and scientific. In this respect, establishment of Hezbollah, supporting different radical Shiite groups around the world, arms trafficking, different activities of the IRGC and Quds Force around the globe could be mentioned. All these activities have peaceful, scientific and progressive nature.
I believe this is the time that we should change the name of Iran to: The Peaceful Islamic Republic of Iran.
M. Sirani 22.11.2013
The nature of this move i.e. sending a man into space, is pure scientific and peaceful as Hamid Fazeli claimed. This move, however, is exactly the same as peaceful nuclear activity of the Iranian Regime. I emphasize on these two issues; because I don't want anyone think that Iran is trying to develop long range nuclear warhead secretly under the name of peaceful and scientific activity. To put it simply, every move of the Iranian Regime is pure peaceful and scientific. In this respect, establishment of Hezbollah, supporting different radical Shiite groups around the world, arms trafficking, different activities of the IRGC and Quds Force around the globe could be mentioned. All these activities have peaceful, scientific and progressive nature.
I believe this is the time that we should change the name of Iran to: The Peaceful Islamic Republic of Iran.
M. Sirani 22.11.2013
Thursday, November 21, 2013
What Have We Missed?
Almost three months ago, when the horrific chemical attack was occurred in Syria, I wrote many short notes repeatedly and claimed: "I have a solution for the Syrian civil war"; "we can use this disastrous inhuman event and turn it into a golden opportunity"; "we can completely change the direction of the Syrian civil war, etc. (See my short notes from 24.08.2013 from over). I didn't publish the whole my plan in my blog due to the fact that I didn't want to see that Iran and its allies use this horrific chemical attack in their benefits. All of you remember that the situation was totally critical. It was a moment that the US and France had decided to launch a military strike on Syria. That critical situation finally forced me to publish the short note titled "A plan that might save the world from an additional disaster" in my blog on 07.09.2013. If we could implement my plan earlier than Russia and Iran, we might have been able to decrease the influence or dismantle the roles of Hezbollah and Iran in Syria; we might have been able to use that opportunity in order to get a upper hand with regards to Iran's nuclear negotiation; we might have been to change the direction of the Syrian civil war in a positive way. Now, the international community has lost the battle in Syria to the group of Asad's regime, Iran, Hezbollah. This event has given Iran an extra upper hand or a winning card with regards to its nuclear activity. As such, the politicians in Tehran think that they are really untouchable in the Middle East; because they have saved Asad's regime against the rest of the world in different critical occasions. Therefore, I believe the chance that Iran would retreat from its nuclear activity at this particular time is very low. As I have mentioned in my earlier short notes, Iran is following the two paths and methods of North Korea and Israel parallel to each other with regards to its nuclear activity. Iran might give up one of these two nuclear projects (Israeli or North Korean model), in order to ease or lift the sanctions. But the chance that Iran would simultaneously give up both these nuclear projects (i.e. Israeli and North Korean Model) is almost impossible. And, this subject is something that Israeli intelligence service is fully aware of that more than any other intelligence services around the world. They know exactly which types of methods Iran is pursuing.
In sum, the international community has missed that historical event with regards to the Syrian civil war. Thus, let us don't miss another historical event once again. In order to avoid another failure, we should force Iran to accept the Additional Protocol. We should remember that any agreement with regards to Iran's nuclear activity without the Additional Protocol (Imposed and monitored by IAEA) is worthless and useless. We should not repeat another Munich Agreement.
M. Sirani 21.11.2013
In sum, the international community has missed that historical event with regards to the Syrian civil war. Thus, let us don't miss another historical event once again. In order to avoid another failure, we should force Iran to accept the Additional Protocol. We should remember that any agreement with regards to Iran's nuclear activity without the Additional Protocol (Imposed and monitored by IAEA) is worthless and useless. We should not repeat another Munich Agreement.
M. Sirani 21.11.2013
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Geneva Meeting 3 between Iran and the E3+3.
Based on the comments and discussions of different politicians in Iran, It seems the genie is (or I might say the genie is already) out of the bottle. If the E3+3 do not want to have any direct military confrontation with Iran in the near future, they should force Iran to accept the Additional Protocol at this stage. Otherwise be prepared to accept everything in the Middle East, except peace and stability in the future.
M. Sirani 20.11.2013
M. Sirani 20.11.2013
Sunday, November 17, 2013
Without The Additional Protocol (Imposed & Controlled by IAEA), Any Agreement about Iran's Nuclear Activity Would be Worthless and Useless.
The additional protocol, which allows IAEA's inspectors for unannounced and unexpected visit, should be the first article in the statute of the IAEA. To put it simply, every country, which would decide to build a nuclear plant, should mandatory sign this agreement from the beginning; in the first step of its nuclear activity. The UN should get good lessons from North Korea and Iran in this matter.
So is the case of chemical weapons. A new member of the UN should sign different agreements with regards to the Convention of Chemical Weapons. If the UN would manage to act in this way, the international community would get less conflict in the future. The Republic of South Sudan is a clear example in this particular matter. The South Sudan was recognized as a new Member State by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 July 2011. Yet, the country has not signed and ratified the Convention of the Chemical Weapons. Something, which we could have done it easily during a one day negotiation on July 2011 without any time, energy and money wasting. We should not forget: prevention is better and cheaper than cure.
M. Sirani 17.11.2013
So is the case of chemical weapons. A new member of the UN should sign different agreements with regards to the Convention of Chemical Weapons. If the UN would manage to act in this way, the international community would get less conflict in the future. The Republic of South Sudan is a clear example in this particular matter. The South Sudan was recognized as a new Member State by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 July 2011. Yet, the country has not signed and ratified the Convention of the Chemical Weapons. Something, which we could have done it easily during a one day negotiation on July 2011 without any time, energy and money wasting. We should not forget: prevention is better and cheaper than cure.
M. Sirani 17.11.2013
Friday, November 15, 2013
Do You See Any Correlation Or Not Yet?
The recent U.N. atomic watchdog report claims that Iran has not made radical changes in its nuclear activity since three months ago.
The chemical attack in Syria, which killed more than 1400 innocent people, was occurred almost three months ago.
Do you see any correlation between these two events or not yet?
These are just two simple sentences, but the correlation between them describes lots of things, which should not be ignored.
You might think you are smarter than the Iranian Regime. You might think that you can play the game of stick and carrot with the Iranian Regime in the next couple of years up until the end of your presidency without having any military confrontation with Iran. In response to these assumptions, I can say: you are in the wrong direction. Iran does not need three or four years to pursue its main goal.
It should be mentioned that I'm totally against the Iranian regime and at the same time against any military confrontation against the Iranian Regime. Because based on many reasons, I know clearly that even an extensive military strike cannot stop Iran's nuclear activity.
M. Sirani 15.11.2013
The chemical attack in Syria, which killed more than 1400 innocent people, was occurred almost three months ago.
Do you see any correlation between these two events or not yet?
These are just two simple sentences, but the correlation between them describes lots of things, which should not be ignored.
You might think you are smarter than the Iranian Regime. You might think that you can play the game of stick and carrot with the Iranian Regime in the next couple of years up until the end of your presidency without having any military confrontation with Iran. In response to these assumptions, I can say: you are in the wrong direction. Iran does not need three or four years to pursue its main goal.
It should be mentioned that I'm totally against the Iranian regime and at the same time against any military confrontation against the Iranian Regime. Because based on many reasons, I know clearly that even an extensive military strike cannot stop Iran's nuclear activity.
M. Sirani 15.11.2013
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
At The Present, A Peace Agreement Between Israel and Plestine is Possible.
Against All odds, I claim:
Such a peace agreement to large extent will paralyze Iran and Hezbollah, if (I emphasize If) the politicians and policy - makers in Palestine, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states would design and perform it in an appropriate manner. The result would be much more beneficial for all the people in the Middle East, particularly for Palestinian and Israeli people in the long term. the Israeli and Palestinian authorities should sign a fair and sustainable agreement. Saudi Arabia and Qatar should disarm Hamas. Other Arab States should also help in this matter.This is a good historical moment to heal this 50 years old wound once and for ever. By this, the international community would put an extra pressure on Iran and Hezbollah with regards to their terrorist activities. By this move, Iran and Hezbollah would be paralyzed to some extent in the region, if the politicians and policy-makers in Israel, Palestine and other Arab States would play the game in an appropriate and fair manner.
M. Sirani 13.11.2013
Such a peace agreement to large extent will paralyze Iran and Hezbollah, if (I emphasize If) the politicians and policy - makers in Palestine, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states would design and perform it in an appropriate manner. The result would be much more beneficial for all the people in the Middle East, particularly for Palestinian and Israeli people in the long term. the Israeli and Palestinian authorities should sign a fair and sustainable agreement. Saudi Arabia and Qatar should disarm Hamas. Other Arab States should also help in this matter.This is a good historical moment to heal this 50 years old wound once and for ever. By this, the international community would put an extra pressure on Iran and Hezbollah with regards to their terrorist activities. By this move, Iran and Hezbollah would be paralyzed to some extent in the region, if the politicians and policy-makers in Israel, Palestine and other Arab States would play the game in an appropriate and fair manner.
M. Sirani 13.11.2013
Monday, November 11, 2013
Building a Sustainable Peace Between Israel, Palestine and Other Arab States.
Briefly:
As I have repeatedly mentioned in some previous short notes, Iran is going to win the war in Syria. In addition, Iran was close to win a perfect deal with regards to its nuclear activity in the recent P5+1 negotiation in Geneva. If the situation continues the same as it is now, the Arab States and Israel will face a huge disaster somewhere in the future. I believe it will come a moment that none of these states will be able to directly or indirectly control or prevent Iran's expansion. Thus, it would be wise for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other Arab States to build a sustainable peace with each other with regards to Palestine. Such a peace agreement would be beneficial for all of them and at the same time would isolate Iran more than ever in The Middle East. All Arab states should understand that they cannot simultaneously continue with their hostility against Iran and Israel. So is the case of Israel. Israel cannot also fight in different battlefields. More importantly, Israel and the Arab States should understand that such a fragmentation and hostility would weakened all of them in any confrontation against Iran. We should not forget that Iran has won the war in Syria up until this moment partly due to these types of fragmentations within the Syrian oppositions, within the super powers and within the Arab States. I fully aware that this is not an easy task. But I know it is not impossible. The timing is suitable. Some other issues and goals with regards to this peace plan are also negotiable and possible to achieve. The authorities of Israel, and the Arab States including Palestine should ignore the negative voices of the extremists and the military corporations in this important matter; instead, they should focus on a long term benefit; they should spare their powers and resources for major challenges in the future.
Those, who are responsible for a real peace process between Israel and Palestine should use this historical moment.
M. Sirani 11.11.2013
As I have repeatedly mentioned in some previous short notes, Iran is going to win the war in Syria. In addition, Iran was close to win a perfect deal with regards to its nuclear activity in the recent P5+1 negotiation in Geneva. If the situation continues the same as it is now, the Arab States and Israel will face a huge disaster somewhere in the future. I believe it will come a moment that none of these states will be able to directly or indirectly control or prevent Iran's expansion. Thus, it would be wise for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other Arab States to build a sustainable peace with each other with regards to Palestine. Such a peace agreement would be beneficial for all of them and at the same time would isolate Iran more than ever in The Middle East. All Arab states should understand that they cannot simultaneously continue with their hostility against Iran and Israel. So is the case of Israel. Israel cannot also fight in different battlefields. More importantly, Israel and the Arab States should understand that such a fragmentation and hostility would weakened all of them in any confrontation against Iran. We should not forget that Iran has won the war in Syria up until this moment partly due to these types of fragmentations within the Syrian oppositions, within the super powers and within the Arab States. I fully aware that this is not an easy task. But I know it is not impossible. The timing is suitable. Some other issues and goals with regards to this peace plan are also negotiable and possible to achieve. The authorities of Israel, and the Arab States including Palestine should ignore the negative voices of the extremists and the military corporations in this important matter; instead, they should focus on a long term benefit; they should spare their powers and resources for major challenges in the future.
Those, who are responsible for a real peace process between Israel and Palestine should use this historical moment.
M. Sirani 11.11.2013
Friday, November 8, 2013
Iran's Nuclear Negotiation in Geneva (08.11.2013).
I think the most important issue at this stage is a strict system of unannounced inspection and supervision amid Iran's nuclear activity. Such an additional protocol, which would allow IAEA to have comprehensive surveillance over Iran's nuclear activity, should be part of any agreement between Iran and P5+1 group at this stage. Without such a comprehensive control, any agreement about some issues such as heavy water reactor in Arak, 3.5 % , 5% or even 20% enriching uranium would be worthless; just a piece of paper without any legal, reliable and real value. The international community will regret in less than one year, if Iran would not sign such an additional protocol at least at this stage.
If Iran would manage to obtain nuclear warhead, the international community should close its eyes to every event, which would occur in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Instead, the whole world should focus on the second phase of Iran's expansion. The second phase would forcefully begin step by step from Bahrain, Yemen, Somalia, Djibouti, Sudan and consequently would spread to the rest of Africa. These events could also be understood as the beginning of unlimited arms race and increasing numbers of interstate war in the Middle East and Africa for many years to come.
Different evidences, however, indicate that Iran is following the two paths and methods of North Korea and Israel, parallel to each other with regards to its nuclear activity. In this respect the two examples of Fordo underground nuclear plant and Heavy water reactor in Arak could be mentioned. My anticipation is that at this stage, Iran might gives up one of these two types of nuclear projects in order to get rid of some of the sanctions, but the chance that Iran gives up both these two types of nuclear projects simultaneously is very low or i might say almost impossible. In sum, it seems, the genie is gradually going out of the bottle. However, At the present, the international community has just three limited options and nothing more. These options are as follows.
1- Accepting a nuclear-armed Iran. (The international community cannot accept this option based on many reasons).
2- Launching military strike on Iran's nuclear plants. (In addition to enormous collateral and environmental damages, the military strike can cause temporary delay in Iran's nuclear activity, but it cannot completely stop it).
3- Supporting the third wave of Iranian opposition, those, who want to overthrow the entire Islamic Regime and establish a real democratic and secular political system in Iran. (By third wave of Iranian opposition, I don't mean those Iranians that you have supported during the past 34 years; I don't mean those Iranians that you have promoted in your ministries or institutions during the past 34 years. Because you have reached at this critical point with regard to Iran's nuclear activity mostly based on wrong analyses (intentionally or unintentionally) of these types of Iranians).
If we analyze these three options from different angles (security, economic, political, social, cultural, environmental), we will see that the third option is the best one. By implementing this option, the international community would be able to put an end to Iran's nuclear ambition. This is the only reliable option.
I don't believe to miracle, but please leave a comment for me, if you think there is a fourth option in this regard.
M. Sirani 08.11.2013
If Iran would manage to obtain nuclear warhead, the international community should close its eyes to every event, which would occur in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Instead, the whole world should focus on the second phase of Iran's expansion. The second phase would forcefully begin step by step from Bahrain, Yemen, Somalia, Djibouti, Sudan and consequently would spread to the rest of Africa. These events could also be understood as the beginning of unlimited arms race and increasing numbers of interstate war in the Middle East and Africa for many years to come.
Different evidences, however, indicate that Iran is following the two paths and methods of North Korea and Israel, parallel to each other with regards to its nuclear activity. In this respect the two examples of Fordo underground nuclear plant and Heavy water reactor in Arak could be mentioned. My anticipation is that at this stage, Iran might gives up one of these two types of nuclear projects in order to get rid of some of the sanctions, but the chance that Iran gives up both these two types of nuclear projects simultaneously is very low or i might say almost impossible. In sum, it seems, the genie is gradually going out of the bottle. However, At the present, the international community has just three limited options and nothing more. These options are as follows.
1- Accepting a nuclear-armed Iran. (The international community cannot accept this option based on many reasons).
2- Launching military strike on Iran's nuclear plants. (In addition to enormous collateral and environmental damages, the military strike can cause temporary delay in Iran's nuclear activity, but it cannot completely stop it).
3- Supporting the third wave of Iranian opposition, those, who want to overthrow the entire Islamic Regime and establish a real democratic and secular political system in Iran. (By third wave of Iranian opposition, I don't mean those Iranians that you have supported during the past 34 years; I don't mean those Iranians that you have promoted in your ministries or institutions during the past 34 years. Because you have reached at this critical point with regard to Iran's nuclear activity mostly based on wrong analyses (intentionally or unintentionally) of these types of Iranians).
If we analyze these three options from different angles (security, economic, political, social, cultural, environmental), we will see that the third option is the best one. By implementing this option, the international community would be able to put an end to Iran's nuclear ambition. This is the only reliable option.
I don't believe to miracle, but please leave a comment for me, if you think there is a fourth option in this regard.
M. Sirani 08.11.2013
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Iran's New Trick Within 5+1 Group.
It seems Iran would try to involve Italia in the nuclear negotiation. By this, Iran would try to create more fragmentation within 5+1 group. Should this happen, Iran would earn enough time to achieve its main goal with regard to its nuclear activity.
M. Sirani 8.11.2013
M. Sirani 8.11.2013
Recent Gallup Research About Iran's Nuclear Activity Reminds Me to Dewey&Truman (1948) Ellection.
Gallup company has recently performed a research about Iran's nuclear program. In this research, Gallup employees have collected the data through telephone interviews with nearly 4500 Iranians, who live inside Iran. The result, however, indicates that most Iranians back Iran's nuclear program as Gallup claims. Honestly, this event reminds me to the presidential election of 1948 in the US, when Gallup predicted that Thomas Dewey would defeat Harry Truman.
Given the fact that the Islamic Regime is one of the worst violators of basic human rights in the world, shouldn't we have doubt about the reliability, credibility and validity of recent Gallup research? Do Iranian people, who live inside Iran, dare to neutrally and honestly answer some questions about a sensitive and important issue such as Iran's nuclear activity,without any fear from the regime through a telephone interview with someone outside Iran?
Dear Gallup: are you kidding me? We are Erthian not Marsian. You are free to make a nuclear deal with the Islamic Regime; this is your choice. But please do not damage the reputation of statistics subject with this type of clear failure, because we have suffered a lot to learn this subject during our study.
M. Sirani 07.11.2013
Given the fact that the Islamic Regime is one of the worst violators of basic human rights in the world, shouldn't we have doubt about the reliability, credibility and validity of recent Gallup research? Do Iranian people, who live inside Iran, dare to neutrally and honestly answer some questions about a sensitive and important issue such as Iran's nuclear activity,without any fear from the regime through a telephone interview with someone outside Iran?
Dear Gallup: are you kidding me? We are Erthian not Marsian. You are free to make a nuclear deal with the Islamic Regime; this is your choice. But please do not damage the reputation of statistics subject with this type of clear failure, because we have suffered a lot to learn this subject during our study.
M. Sirani 07.11.2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
Khamenei's Recent Speech.
Yesterday, Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei delivered a powerful speech to a group of students. His speech illustrates Iran' foreign policy with regard to some important issues including: nuclear negotiation with 5+1 group, Israel and the relationship between the US and Iran in a clear and comprehensive way. The international community should pay attention to this speech word by word; because this speech clearly indicates Iran's future moves with regard to many issues.
Briefly:
The most important parts of Khamenei's speech are as follows.
1- Iran would not retreat from its nuclear activity.
2- The US is at weakest economic and political conditions, whether in domestic as well as international arena. Contrary to the US, Iran has become stronger than before in different terms, as Khamenei claimed.
3- The conflict between the US and Iran is not just about nuclear issue; it is inherent and antagonistic, which has begun from 1979. The US would try to prevent Iran's hegemony in the Middle East, as Khamenei stated. Therefore, Iran should not trust the US.
4- Regarding Israel, Khamenei said: we have said it before; we say it today, and we will say it in the future too that "the Zionist regime is an illegitimate and bastard regime".
As I anticipated before, major changes are under way in the Middle East. These changes will impact the whole world from different angles.
These are the important issues, which the BBC Persian has not expressed any of them in its article published yesterday.
M. Sirani 04.11.2013
Briefly:
The most important parts of Khamenei's speech are as follows.
1- Iran would not retreat from its nuclear activity.
2- The US is at weakest economic and political conditions, whether in domestic as well as international arena. Contrary to the US, Iran has become stronger than before in different terms, as Khamenei claimed.
3- The conflict between the US and Iran is not just about nuclear issue; it is inherent and antagonistic, which has begun from 1979. The US would try to prevent Iran's hegemony in the Middle East, as Khamenei stated. Therefore, Iran should not trust the US.
4- Regarding Israel, Khamenei said: we have said it before; we say it today, and we will say it in the future too that "the Zionist regime is an illegitimate and bastard regime".
As I anticipated before, major changes are under way in the Middle East. These changes will impact the whole world from different angles.
These are the important issues, which the BBC Persian has not expressed any of them in its article published yesterday.
M. Sirani 04.11.2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)