The US, weapons of mass destruction and the politics of fear
Regional-USA, Analysis, 9/24/2003

Iran has been given a deadline of October to meet more stringent and intrusive examination into its nuclear program. This comes as the US has and continues to see any hint of development in the nuclear area by third world countries as a threat to its strategic interest, especially in the middle east as it relates to its ability to control the oil rich region.

The US had falsely accused Iraq before of being a nuclear threat with vague and unsubstantiated claims which are typically used by the US against such countries that it has political opposition with. Phrases such as "nuclear development" "Nuclear technology" "potential nuclear weapons" "intention to develop nuclear programs" etc. are brandished frequently and without any supporting evidence.

When the US made these claims against Iraq, the International Atomic Energy Agency (AIEA) investigated and found nothing.

It is easy to make accusations that someone is developing or has "intention" or "potential" to develop nuclear weapons, but it is impossible to prove a negative, and defend against such accusations. The US can always claim that Iran must be developing nuclear weapons. They must be hiding these programs somewhere, or their intentions are hidden in their minds, in a mountain, or someone's kitchen sink; as the AIEA also will be afraid, as it did in Iraq, to say that a country is completely compliant. Because if it did so, it would loose:
1. ability to pressure the country in the future, and
2. what if the organization did miss something? Always play it safe, as this costs the AIEA nothing by keeping cases in an indetermined status.

That is what happened in Iraq. The AIEA and other organizations after endless searching and investigations, found nothing. But they were never able to issue a conclusive statement that there were absolutely no such weapons in Iraq. But they came close enough to doing so. And when the US heard what it did not want to hear from the AIEA, the US started a war, anyway, and when it occupied Iraq, the US prevented the AIEA from further investigations in Iraq! This is the oddest behavior, it may seem to some, coming from the USA. But like the UN and other international institutions, the US uses them when it suits its purpose, and prevents their function when they do not follow US interests and dictates.

In playing the politics of fear, as a political instrument to divide and conquer, the US has become a master. It scares China and Japan about North Korea. It scares Europe and Russia about Iran and Iraq. And, in the process gives these major countries, especially the permanent members of UN Security Council, all the reasons for not changing the structure of the international institutions.

Now Iran is in the cross hair of the US, and for strategic geopolitical reasons, Iran was and is under US constant pressure to be subdued, and the AIEA is one of the tools. The AIEA reports on Iraq that said they found nothing of the alleged claims by the US on nuclear weapons; but this did not save Iraq from the US attack. This was another clear case of where facts do not guide US policy; rather, US policy is determined by its interests, and will use or distort facts regardless of reality to achieve it objectives.

Now that Iran has figured out that it may be a very wise move to pull out of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, the pressure is on the US and AIEA to outflank such a move by imposing even a faster deadline on Iran, in order to quickly bring the issue before the Security Council and bring the ultimate weapon of economic sanctions on Iran, before Iran pulls out of the agreement and stops from being subject to its rules and sanctions.

Iran, a country that knows that international law is meaningless and is applied selectively, with the US at the helm of international institutions, may quickly end up pulling out of the AIEA and Nuclear Non Proliferation meeting, realizing that the consequences are much better than the alternative.

In a world where the countries who tell the third world that nuclear weapons are a bad thing to have, while they themselves spend billions of dollars to developing, amassing and refining such weapons, such arguments should sound hollow to anyone with any bit of logic. As a matter of fact, the small guys maybe in even greater need for such weapons; logic being, if it is good enough for them, why not for us, especially since we, being more vulnerable, should aim for even better nuclear weapons than the big guys. This may be a great reply by countries accused of nuclear weapons development, especially, in the world we live in, where only might makes right and makes the rules. Next time a country is accused of developing nuclear weapons, should reply: indeed we are, and we hope that will be mighty powerful, to keep the bullies away, until the world becomes a safer place from such bullies by having effective international institutions and international law that we can trust and respect, and is obeyed by everyone.

It is time to unravel the ligitimacy of these flawed international institutions. Many will be fearfull and hassitant, and others will find excuses as to why change can't happen; they will say: we are poor; we have no alternatives at present, etc. These argument are nothing but a call for maintaining the status quo. Fundamental change is needed.

Let us start to disassemble and change the structure of these flawed international institutions and create institutions that will take us where we want to go; into a bright and hopeful future away from international dictatorship, and into peace and prosperity that should be the right of everyone, to be pursued, away from coercion and fear.

How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace?

The WorldPeace Banner

The WorldPeace Insignia : Explanation 

To order a WorldPeace Insignia lapel pin, go to: Order  

To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page

To the WorldPeace Peace Page