Iran: Why aren’t you congratulating us for our transparency?
posted at 8:52 am on September 26, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It took Iran a day to find its public-relations footing after having its covert uranium enrichment site near Qom exposed. Today, Tehran announced that they would have the IAEA inspect the facility, that uranium enrichment had not yet taken place, and that they are surprised that the world is not tossing flowers towards them for their nuclear transparency:
Iran said on Saturday it would allow UN inspectors into its newly disclosed uranium enrichment plant, as US President Barack Obama led a global outcry against Tehran for building the facility.
“As the president (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) said, we have no problem for inspection within the framework of the agency (International Atomic Energy Agency) regulations,” Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran’s atomic energy chief, said on state television. …
Ahmadinejad denied Tehran was building the plant in secret, as charged by Western leaders, and told reporters in New York on Friday the facility was “completely legal.”
“We actually informed the agency (IAEA) 18 months ahead of time. Is this the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do? I thought we are supposed to be encouraged for taking this action.”
Iran also continued to insist that their program is meant for peaceful nuclear energy, which made this statement just a wee bit incongruous:
“God willing this new plant will become operational soon and make the enemy blind,” Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s chief of staff, was quoted by Fars news agency as saying on Saturday.
That’s a strange wish for an electrical generation plant, no? Besides, the blindness in this particular case got lifted quite a while ago, when the West discovered its existence.
Perhaps this could serve as a Road to Damascus moment for some of the nations that have been reluctant to squeeze Iran. France responded almost angrily yesterday, as Sarkozy threatened “rapid sanctions” in December if Iran did not comply with numerous UN Security Council resolutions. Earlier in the week, the Russians began talking about adding sanctions for the first time in a long while.
The only critical nation that hasn’t publicly scolded Iran is China, even after Obama shared the intel of the facility with Beijing. China has blocked tougher sanctions on Iran at the UNSC for years, and most suspect that they violate the weaker sanctions China allowed. Their silence on this issue hints that they may not be on board with a tough regime against Tehran.
There was also a note of discoordination in the diplomatic responses of the West. Obama talked about October 1st as a threshold date for Iran to respond to the UNSC, while France noted that sanctions could be applied in December. Obama claimed that the “international community is more united than ever before,” but are they united on the deadline? If it’s December, then the Iranians have two more months to weaken the response from China and Russia — and in this case, time is definitely the friend of the mullahs.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
We won’t do anything till we are badly hurt. Israel will be picking up the global moral slack on this one from here on out. A “disgrace” indeed…….
Ozprey on September 26, 2009 at 8:56 AM
did you ever get the feeling that all of our enemies are co-coordinating behind the scenes while we flounder about? As for the second facility being peaceful, yeah, that is why its buried in a mountain.
rob verdi on September 26, 2009 at 8:57 AM
All these countries are so mad, they may eventually allow santions on some ever expanding faraway date. How nice.
Laura in Maryland on September 26, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Another thought, pundits and news organizations are falling over themselves about how brilliant Obama has been, it reminds of how they gave Credit to him after the Lebanon elections for his Cairo speech, only to watch everything collapse on the streets of Iran. I fear the worst is to come.
rob verdi on September 26, 2009 at 9:00 AM
I can’t imagine Mr. Obama getting tough in the course of a week but the goofy way they do things in the diplomatic world would be decided on Oct. 1 and implement in December.
Obviously he meant with the amount of electricity pouring into the homes of Iran’s citizens. New neon signs, the place will be rocking./
Cindy Munford on September 26, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING, will come from this. Obama has the integrity of the house from “The Money Pit”. The new leader of the free world, Netanyahu, will have to see to it that this mess is cleaned up just like Israel did with Osirak in 1981. That is, assuming we don’t pull a ‘reverse Liberty’ on one of our closest allies.
LeBron on September 26, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Broken promise broken record Obama:
1. Iran has until the middle of September to show and tell.
2. Iran has until October to show and tell.
3. Iran has until…
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:03 AM
If this administration continues to treat these insane tyrants like they were sane and responsible world leaders, they are going to get us all killed. I now think it is inevitable that Iran will have a nuke, and that the world is going to sit by and watch it happen because that is easier than doing something about it. History is filled with such events, and so far none of them have ended in peace and prosperity without millions of people dying.
The monster in Iran must not only be chained, it must be destroyed. Literally, and utterly destroyed.But it is not going to happen. The monster is being allowed to grow ever stronger.
MikeA on September 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM
…and just like Israel did in 1967.
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM
Insanity. Obama would have “pets” who own him, ready to eat us alive.
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:07 AM
A bit different, yes, but if history tells us anything, it’s always better for Israel when they preempt their enemies as opposed to waiting to get attacked. In this case, if Israel doesn’t preempt, there might not be much of an Israel left to defend. This is my #1 nightmare and, although I’m not a religious man, I pray every day that this horror doesn’t come true.
LeBron on September 26, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Sanctions are worthless,..just another mild obstacle to be overcome by profit and political motives while the centrifuges spin. Now is when Obama’s dithering during the Iranian post election turmoil bears spoiled fruit. That was the time to take down the regime internally and he was afraid to give support to the opposition.
a capella on September 26, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Believe I read an Iranian resistance group outed this new site, as they did with Natantz.
Tom
marinetbryant on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Netanyahu won’t wait for our President to vote present.
yoda on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Dave742 will be along to defend these barbarians in just a minute. He still stating his position on the other thread now that everybody’s left.
kingsjester on September 26, 2009 at 9:10 AM
LeBron on September 26, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Well, that record’s been written in stone. God help us.
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:12 AM
ot 9:10
Deprive malignancy what it seeks to acquire, acknowledgment as legitimacy.
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:15 AM
In a related subject: To our Jewish friends, have a blessed Yom Kippur.
kingsjester on September 26, 2009 at 9:16 AM
More important, they have two more months to bring a bomb online. Then it’s too late and the whole dynamic changes. Playing out the string and shining on the weenies has always been a core part of Iran’s strategy.
This isn’t like Monaco getting a nuke. These lunatics really want to use it ASAP. Our only hope is that Israel takes them out.
This isn’t like
RadClown on September 26, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Blessed? More like HUNGRY. Thanks though, I’ll do my best to atone for all my sins, such as disagreeing with Dear Leader and being totally RAAAAAAACIST for it!
LeBron on September 26, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Perhaps ABC News or The New York Times could publish their names, photos, and all other personal info, so that the Iranian authorities can “interview” them and get back to us on the matter….
Ozprey on September 26, 2009 at 9:17 AM
yoda on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Netanyahu is the only credible leader.
He owes Obama nada.
maverick muse on September 26, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Sarkozy Mocks Obama at UN Security Council: Hello, Big Media?
petefrt on September 26, 2009 at 9:21 AM
MikeA on September 26, 2009 at 9:22 AM
This entire episode with Iran and which nations will join together to impose sanctions is laughable.
Sanctions don’t work against tyrannical nations. Never have, never will.
There are always some nations or private entities who will figure out ways around them.
Or, as in the case of Iraq and the Oil fo Food debacle, the UN itself will come to the aid.
The only thing tyrants understand is overwhelming military force.
Anything less than that is a waste of time.
TXUS on September 26, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Netanyahu has been a hero of mine for years. I admire men and women with strenth….if you say it, you mean it. We are stuck with President who can’t even change his underware without asking his advisors if he should wear briefs today.
yoda on September 26, 2009 at 9:28 AM
strenthstrengthyoda on September 26, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Actually when dear leader was holding the office of “President Elect”, this “secret” site was already identified.He will try to take credit for his “hard” work etc etc see here—
Ladywolfnl on September 26, 2009 at 9:31 AM
The inaction on Iran goes way back — but now is not the time for the “blame game” — sanctions? please spare us . . . like threatening a rabid pit bull with a rolled up newspaper — UN action? NATO action? oxymoronic and moronic — Israel has the motive and the “stones”; If BHO had any sense at all (I know . . . I know . . .) he’d call Bibi and say “Do it!”
rebuzz on September 26, 2009 at 9:32 AM
This is so painful and frustrating to watch unfold. Anyone with half a brain can plainly see the writing upon the wall. Why the continued moral reletivism? Our country has a eunuch as a president (certainly not a leader) while the rest of the world has a vested interest in not stopping Iran.
That leaves the response to this situation to the man who has a nuclear weapon threat pointed straight at him – Bibi.
I think he knows what needs to be done, otherwise there isn’t going to be an Israel. Its just as simple as that.
The problem is that as soon as that happens, the Iranians start the scorched earth scenario. Oil prices skyrocket. Depression deepens. Then things really start getting interesting…
Those protesters in Iran that we have been hearing about through back channels better hurry up.
turfmann on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Iran will soon make Obama look like a weak, flailing fool.
Wonder which side the press will be on?
If they go to bat for Obama and his getting tough, then this strengthens the Israeli argument (which the press does not support).
If the press leans to a more sympathetic line to Iran (so as not to give Israel credibility), then they make Obama look weak.
Scapegoat time for the press! Go for alternative 3: Blame Bush for not starting talks earlier and being too distracted in Iraq.
albill on September 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
“If you don’t meet our deadline , well we have others”
the_nile on September 26, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Yes. We should appreciate the Iranian government for being so transparently evil, showing no effort to hide.
bayview on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Obama didn’t sound tough to me. The Israeli Prime Minister sounded tough.
I think they all looked a little silly, myself And all I could think was, you’ve known about this for HOW long? And we’re just now hearing about it? And we’re just now saying the IAEA needs to inspect it? And we’re just now going to get “tough” on Iran? By what, putting more sanctions on them? Excuse me, but can someone tell me when sanctions have ever worked against any country? The only thing sanctions do is cause suffering for the people, not the leaders.
scalleywag on September 26, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Nice piece from the Weekly Stamdard.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000%5C000%5C017%5C007wxlum.asp
a capella on September 26, 2009 at 10:03 AM
OK, congratulations Iran…..
Your awards/prizes should be arriving any day now courtesy of our competition’s sponsor, “The 72 Virgins Travel Agency” (a.k.a. The IDF and IAF).
We sincerely “hope” you enjoy the “change” that’s coming.
Cheers !
Kenny Solomon
South Flori-duh.
E T Cartman on September 26, 2009 at 10:03 AM
And where is Hillary? CNN is asking what Bill thinks but I haven’t seen anyone ask Hillary about this?
scalleywag on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Notice how the nuclear blackmail has already begun, even though the project isn’t yet completed? Iran knows the rest of the world doesn’t want all the nasty repercussions from a military stike to take out the facilities, so is holding that as its hole card. They take advantage of our weakness.
a capella on September 26, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Why would we believe anything this lying little tyrant says about anything? Why do we let him speak at the podium of the UN? We should be slamming doors in his face, not extending a hand. He has an agenda, and nothing the U.S., France, Britain or any other country does is going to make him change his agenda. Impose the “sanctions” now, if you’re going to do that. Why wait? He’s lied over and over and over again. Being “tough” would be to actually do something, not threaten to do something. What are you waiting for, a bomb to land somewhere and wipe out a people?
scalleywag on September 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM
I’m sure old dinner jacket is shivering in his dinner jacket after Obama spoke!!!! sure…
right4life on September 26, 2009 at 10:20 AM
I am pretty sure that, as a 16 yr old, I pioneered this defense:
Yeah Dad, I snuck out, stole the car, backed into a pole, then parked illegally outside of that punk club you banned me from going to, and got the car towed and impounded. But I am telling the truth! Should I have just lied to you? I thought I was supposed to tell the truth.
bitsy on September 26, 2009 at 10:20 AM
thx for this link. Heard “no drama” Obama mention banning the nukes, but forgot about it and never saw it reported. Breitbart is becoming a much needed force of media accountability.
Ozprey on September 26, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Because you are trying to kill me. I have no doubt that I am included in the category of “enemy” that your Supreme Leader’s spokesperson was referring to: “God willing this new plant will become operational soon and make the enemy blind….”
I’m thinking that “blind” is a one of those clever Koranic euphemisms for “dead.”
blueguitarbob on September 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Hey Bossman: Absolutely great comment, but I can’t figure out if you’re talking about Iminthemoodfor Abigwhompinjihad or our own Dictator-In-Training-Pants.
;-)
Cheers !
Kenny Solomon
Doing my part in ‘coarsening the political dialogue’.
E T Cartman on September 26, 2009 at 10:26 AM
Green.
LibTired on September 26, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Lots of people in that pic that shouldn’t have their eyes open right now in my pinion.
johnnyU on September 26, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Iran should really be living in fear. Obama has a plan to slap down any nuclear ideas they might have.
mizflame98 on September 26, 2009 at 11:12 AM
I don’t think Obama is on Iran’s side. If he were, he would have sat on this — and then it would be just the word of the (nongovernmental) MEK against the Iranian government. Instead, he’s done significant damage to the Iranian position by briefing other Security Council members about the capabilities of the new plant.
The actions necessary to increase/tighten sanctions are also the same actions necessary to justify going to war. The act of officially verifying what the MEK has stated gives Israel a fair amount of additional justification should they choose to attack.
The FARS News Agency article is here.:
One begins to wonder how many “pilot fuel enrichment plants” are needed for one reactor. The LA Times is thinking the same thing. The Times has a front page article entitled Time for talk may be over with the subtitle Obama’s hope of engaging Iran appears to be fading
It appears that the argument is no longer over talks with no preconditions but, rather, whether or not Iran’s ignorance of international concerns calls for force to be used. The Times article mentions “tough economic sanctions” but does not mention
Given that Israel has been directly threatened by several top officials in Iran’s government, they are in a unique position under the UN Charter to assert a claim of self-defense.
unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 11:27 AM
…but does not mention use of force. The omission is particularly glaring.
unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 11:27 AM
I disagree. Obama has gone out of his way to show a friendly face to the people who overtly want to destroy Israel; and to show indifference to Israel itself.
MikeA on September 26, 2009 at 11:36 AM
So the inspectors are going in? A UN operation led by a man called Mohammed Baradei who has in the past insisted there is no nuclear issue as far as Iran is concerned.
Fantastic. I take great comfort from this development.
Anders on September 26, 2009 at 11:37 AM
The IAEA inspections and resulting reports have been exposed as a sham and a waste of time. We need a strong leader for our CIC, not a pantywaist.
It’s a sad indicator of the times when our president compares unfavorably on defense matters to the French president.
hillbillyjim on September 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM
You know you’re a pansy when the French call you a girl.
jimmy2shoes on September 26, 2009 at 11:54 AM
No gratitude . Maybe he should try saying at least I am not George Bush .
borntoraisehogs on September 26, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Obama stands for a weaker America
Or perhaps cringes would be more accurate.
I only hope those endangering us are the ones who suffer from this folly.
Let the delusional walk off the cliff of their own idiocies.
No reason we all need to pay for Obama’s gutlessness, brainlessness and a-historical childishness.
profitsbeard on September 26, 2009 at 12:36 PM
The Iranians had already agreed to IAEA inspection prior to Obama’s announcement. The dimwit is demanding something that’s already given. Once the site’s secrecy is compromised, it’s useless to Iran. There’s a reason why even under Bush, we didn’t reveal our knowledge of its existence. We want to bust them in the act of the crime. Now IAEA inspectors will show up and examine an empty space. If the Iranians had installed equipment there, it’s all gone by now.
As I said before, China won’t do jack. Unlike our foreign relations elite, theirs focus on their national interests and not what other people think of them. Anyone outside of China is one sort of silly devils or another anyway. Trouble for Uncle Sam elsewhere in the world means we aren’t going to bother them.
We’ll probably see the UNSC approve some tough-sounding sanctions that have no verification mechanism (let alone enforcement). They will be completely ineffective, amounting, in fact, a monopoly to the Iranian market for Russian and Chinese merchants. For this empty charade we’ll probably pay a handsome random to China. Not sure what we can concede at this point. Weapon sales to Taiwan are de facto frozen already. The Dalai Lama was already given the cold shoulder. Whatever turns out, it’s all for the glory of the One and His alone.
year_of_the_dingo on September 26, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Mr. Obama is stalling on sanctions in order to give Iran time to place nuclear missiles in Venezuela. Once that is accomplished he can use the threat to put the U.S. military in permanent stand-down mode lest Iran nuke us in retaliation for anything we do. Americans will buy it.
America will be weaker and Mr. Obama will be happier.
lonesomecharlie on September 26, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Comment pages: