July, 22 2015, 02:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Iraqi Nuclear Scientist Debunks Nuclear Myths
President Obama stated Tuesday: "The same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would only take a few months." [In fact, many who he has appointed to top foreign policy positions voted for the Iraq war.]
WASHINGTON
President Obama stated Tuesday: "The same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would only take a few months." [In fact, many who he has appointed to top foreign policy positions voted for the Iraq war.]
On Thursday, Secretary of State John Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew will discuss the new Iran nuclear deal before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. See accuracy.org/calendar for critical upcoming events.
IMAD KHADDURI, imad.khadduri at gmail.com
Currently in Toronto, Khadduri is author of the books Iraq's Nuclear Mirage: Memoirs and Delusions and Unrevealed Milestones in the Iraqi National Nuclear Program 1981-1991. He now runs the "Free Iraq" blog.
He has closely followed the Iran nuclear deal and has a 30-page paper forthcoming from the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Doha: "The Iranian Nuclear Project: Military or Civilian?"
Khadduri can address a number of myths on these issues. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, Khadduri argued that, contrary to what the Bush administration was claiming, the Iraqi nuclear weapons program had been dismantled since the 1991 attack on Iraq. In a November 21, 2002 article, a few months before the occupation, "Iraq's nuclear non-capability," he wrote: "Bush and Blair are pulling their public by the nose, covering their hollow patriotic egging on with once again shoddy intelligence. But the two parading emperors have no clothes."
Max Fisher claimed in Vox recently that if "Iran tried to block inspectors...that would blow up the deal. ... This was something that so infuriated the world when Iraq's Saddam Hussein tried it in 1998 that it ended with his country getting bombed shortly thereafter."
Said Khadduri: "This doesn't reflect what actually happened. The U.S. used inspectors as a method of espionage, not for legitimate arms inspections purposes. Scott Ritter notes in a recent article titled 'We ain't found shit' why the Iranians shouldn't accept 'no notice' inspections of its nuclear sites. The 'no notice' inspection on Iraq didn't help with the disarmament process, but they were a gold mine for illegitimate espionage. The Iranians learned from our mistakes and they were much better negotiators." See from FAIR: "It's Simple, Face the Nation: Iran Doesn't Trust U.S. Inspectors -- and Shouldn't."
The New York Times earlier this year published a piece by John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006 and now with the American Enterprise Institute. In the piece, 'To Stop Iran's Bomb, Bomb Iran,' he claims: "The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel's 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor in Iraq." It's a claim that's long been made by war hawks, for example, Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic has claimed: "In 1981, Israeli warplanes bombed the Iraqi reactor at Osirak, halting -- forever, as it turned out -- Saddam Hussein's nuclear ambitions."
Khadduri said: "This is nonsense. I worked on the pre-1981 nuclear program and I was certain it would not be used for military purposes. But after the 1981 bombing, we were so angry that we were ready to work on a military program. The Israeli attack didn't end the nuclear weapons program, it began it." See IPA news release: "Myth: Israel's Strike on Iraqi Reactor Hindered Iraqi Nukes."
Khadduri added: "The Iranian nuclear program is peaceful. Their nuclear program started in the 1950s under the U.S. government's Atoms for Peace project, which sent Iraq, Iran and other counties nuclear plans. In the case of Iraq, it was a gift from the U.S. for joining the Baghdad Pact. After the revolution in Iraq ended the monarchy, the U.S. built for Iran the plant they were going to build for us. ...
"The Iranian nuclear program really took off in the 1970s after the U.S. convinced the Shah that he could be a regional power only if he embraced the atom. But the U.S. was trying to gouge the Shah, so he had the Germans build his reactors. A main component of the Iranian program is a research reactor used for medical purposes -- even Iranian Americans frequently go back to Tehran for chemo because it's provided for free. ...
"When Ayatollah Khomeini came to power, he stopped work on Iranian nuclear facilities. He had already come to the position that having nuclear weapons was religiously prohibited and the financial costs were enormous. But he eventually allowed it to be restarted for peaceful purposes since the costs of cancelling the contracts were high. During the war with Iran, Iraq attacked the Iranian nuclear facilities more than 12 times, but they were minor attacks. But after the Iranians bombed Iraqi oil refineries, Saddam ordered the destruction of two Iranian reactors in 1987, killing 14 people including one German and the Germans withdrew.
"Since then, the Iranians have been struggling to have a serious nuclear program for civilian purposes, and the U.S. has continuously put up road blocks. The recent deal compromises Iran's notion of nuclear sovereignty, but gets the Iranians what they really wanted."
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.
LATEST NEWS
Democrat Flips Seat in Alabama House After Running on Abortion Rights
Democrats see the win in Alabama as a sign that supporting reproductive rights will make a difference in November.
Mar 27, 2024
Marilyn Lands, a Democratic candidate for a state House seat in Alabama, won a special election on Tuesday, defeating Republican Teddy Powell.
Lands focused her campaign on reproductive rights, including support for access to in vitro fertilization and abortion. The election was for a seat in Madison City, and it was previously held by a Republican.
"Today, Alabama women and families sent a clear message that will be heard in Montgomery and across the nation. Our legislature must repeal Alabama's no-exceptions abortion ban, fully restore access to IVF, and protect the right to contraception," Lands said in a statement.
Congrats to my friend Marilyn Lands on her resounding victory in the Alabama House District 10 special election. She campaigned on women’s reproductive freedom and pushing back on the culture wars being waged by AL Republicans. This is a big win for a better, stronger Alabama.…
— Doug Jones (@DougJones) March 27, 2024
Alabama has a strict abortion ban, and a February Alabama Supreme Court ruling declared that frozen embryos are people, imperiling access to in vitro fertilization in the state following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. Lands' opponent supported the state's abortion ban.
"This special election is a harbinger of things to come—Republicans across the country have been put on notice that there are consequences to attacks on IVF—from the bluest blue state to the reddest red, voters are choosing to fight for their fundamental freedoms by electing Democrats across the country," Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, told Politico.
Democrats see Lands' win as a sign that supporting reproductive rights could continue to be a winner in November, even in deeply red states like Alabama. President Joe Biden voiced his support for access to IVF and abortion in his State of the Union address earlier this month.
"Marilyn Lands' victory demonstrates that voters aren't going to sit idly by while MAGA Republicans lay the groundwork for a national abortion ban," Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison said in a statement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Another State Department Official Resigns Over Biden Gaza Policy
"I wasn't able to really do my job anymore," said Annelle Sheline. "Trying to advocate for human rights just became impossible."
Mar 27, 2024
Saying her job at a State Department office that advocates for human rights in the Middle East has become "impossible" as the Biden administration continues to back Israel's assault on civilians in Gaza, foreign affairs officer Annelle Sheline resigned from her position on Wednesday in protest of President Joe Biden's policy in the region.
Sheline noted in an interview with The Washington Post that quitting her job in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor was not something she took lightly, with "a daughter and a mortgage"—but said her day-to-day work on human rights had become ineffectual "as long as the U.S. continues to send a steady stream of weapons to Israel."
Despite the fact that U.S. law prohibits the government from arming countries that violate human rights—as Israel has long been accused by the United Nations of doing in its policy toward the occupied Palestinian territories—the Biden administration has approved the transfer of bombs and other weapons to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) since the military began its relentless bombardment of Gaza and blockade on nearly all humanitarian aid.
Sheline told the Post that as the news out of Gaza has grown more dire since October—with at least 32,490 Palestinians killed, at least 74,889 wounded, and parts of northern Gaza now facing famine conditions due to Israel's blocking of aid—some of her bureau's partners in the Middle East have stopped engaging with the State Department.
"If they are willing to engage, they mostly want to talk about Gaza rather than the fact that they are also dealing with extreme repression or threats of imprisonment," Sheline told the Post of the activists and civil society groups her office routinely worked with to further human rights in the region before Israel's assault began. "The first point they bring up is: How is this happening?"
"I wasn't able to really do my job anymore," Sheline added. "Trying to advocate for human rights just became impossible."
Sheline is just the latest official to resign in protest of Biden's approach to Israel and Gaza.
In October Josh Paul resigned from his position as director of congressional and public affairs for the State Department's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, where he oversaw weapons transfers to U.S. allies.
Paul told the Post that Sheline's decision "speaks volumes about the Biden administration's disregard for the laws, policies and basic humanity of American foreign policy that the bureau exists to advance."
A policy adviser in the Education Department, Tariq Habash, also stepped down from his role in January, saying he could no longer be "quietly complicit" in the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians.
The State Department's internal dissent channel has also been used by numerous officials to voice outrage over the Biden administration's continued defense of Israel's actions.
Stephen Walt, professor of international affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School, called Sheline's resignation "courageous."
Feds United for Peace, a group of government workers across nearly two dozen federal agencies which organized a daylong fast in January to protest the U.S.-backed slaughter of Palestinians, expressed solidarity with Sheline.
"That decision comes at a personal and real cost to her, and is a loss of a patriotic and deeply qualified employee for the Department of State," said the group in a statement. "Every arms shipment to Israel by the Biden administration and every one of the three vetoes of U.N. cease-fire resolutions has enabled Israeli impunity in its rampage across Gaza... Thousands of innocent lives are in President Biden's hands; the time has come to translate gentle requests for the protection of civilians into concrete action to stop the killing."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Support for Israel's War on Gaza Plummeting Among Key Biden Voters: Poll
"Given these numbers," said one progressive campaigner, "I don't know how President Biden can reconcile his stalwart support for Israel with the clear preference that his core constituents have for an end to this war."
Mar 27, 2024
A Gallup survey released Wednesday shows that U.S. public support for Israel's military assault on Gaza has plummeted since November, with the decline particularly sharp among Democratic voters whom President Joe Biden will need to turn out to win reelection against presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump.
Just 18% of Democratic voters currently approve of "the military action Israel has taken in Gaza" and 75% disapprove, according to the new poll, which was conducted between March 1-20. In November, 36% of Democratic respondents expressed approval of Israel's war and 63% disapproved.
"The crosstabs are even more striking—nearly two-thirds of people under 54, people of color, and women disapprove of the military action in Gaza," Sam Rosenthal, political director of the progressive advocacy group RootsAction, told Common Dreams in response to the new poll. "That is effectively the Democratic Party's base."
"Given these numbers," Rosenthal added, "I don't know how President Biden can reconcile his stalwart support for Israel with the clear preference that his core constituents have for an end to this war."
Overall, Gallup found that 55% of the American public—including 60% of Independents and 30% of Republicans—disapproves of Israel's military campaign in the Gaza Strip, up from 45% in November. Just 36% of the U.S. public approves, down from 50% four months ago.
"Biden is risking his second term and our democracy by continuing to support the kind of violence and cruelty that is being perpetrated in Gaza right now."
Observers
noted that Gallup's new poll was conducted after the Israeli military's February 29 massacre of Palestinians seeking food aid. Since October, according to one human rights monitor, Israeli forces have killed more than 560 people waiting for humanitarian aid, the delivery of which Israel's government has intentionally hindered—fueling the spread of famine across the territory.
The Biden administration has backed Israel's assault from the beginning, providing the Netanyahu government with billions of dollars worth of weapons and diplomatic cover despite widespread and growing protests at home and abroad. Gallup's survey found that 74% of U.S. adults say they are following developments in Gaza "closely."
Political analyst Yousef Munayyer wrote on social media that "Biden's policy of continued support for Israel's war on Gaza is in line with the views of the right-wing Republicans," noting that 64% of GOP voters still approve of the Israeli assault—down slightly from 71% in November.
"Just to emphasize how extreme his position is and out of line with his voters," he added, "more Republicans disapprove of the war than Democrats who approve."
Growing Democratic opposition to Israel's military action in Gaza has fueled grassroots campaigns across the country urging voters to mark "uncommitted" on their Democratic primary ballots to pressure Biden to change course ahead of the general election against Trump, who has voiced support for Israel's devastating assault on Gaza.
"Uncommitted" campaigns won 11 Democratic National Convention (DNC) delegates in Minnesota and two in both Michigan and Washington state.
"Biden is risking his second term and our democracy by continuing to support the kind of violence and cruelty that is being perpetrated in Gaza right now," Faheem Khan, president of the American Muslim Advancement Council and a lead organizer of Uncommitted WA, said earlier this week.
Rosenthal of RootsAction told Common Dreams on Wednesday that the U.S. decision to abstain and allow the U.N. Security Council to pass a cease-fire resolution earlier this week was "a step in the right direction, and a clear indication that domestic pressure from campaigns like Listen to Michigan and other uncommitted voting efforts is working."
"However, actual policy towards Israel has changed very little," said Rosenthal. "Biden is still clamoring for more military aid to be sent, and the U.S. still largely supports Israel's line, i.e., that military operations in Gaza are solely aimed at rooting out Hamas. What is manifestly obvious to the rest of the world, that Israel is committed to the wanton destruction of the Gaza Strip, is somehow escaping the administration's notice."
"President Biden should decide quickly whether he wants to continue to uphold policy that is increasingly associated with the opposition party," Rosenthal added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular