What could have been the next stage in the plot of the time turned into an anti-climax. Those of us who had expected some firework at the IAEA meeting last weekend, can only be disappointed with the outcome. The waiting game continues.
That the Iranians -notably as a founding member of the IAEA- have thought it necessary to build up their atomic project in secrecy, is something that cannot be easily overlooked and forgiven. It certainly gives a hint about the nature of this regime and one can only wonder what to expect from this regime when it really gets under pressure.
As a founding member of the IAEA, the IRI should be forced to declare all its nuclear sites, then -in cooperation with the IAEA and its member states- all nuclear material should be cleared and cleaned. If, and only if, all conditions are met, the world community may in the future consider assisting Iran with setting up a new nuclear industry. Of course, only long after this regime with its secret programs and horrific reputation on Human Rights has been removed. One does not trust a criminal and hand him a gun.
All the more questionable is the position of the European Union. For seven years we now have this dialogue with the Iranians and every now and then we produce a report on the Human Rights situation to the IRI but in the mean time they get away with what they want and atomic espionage and other criminal activity is not being brought to justice.
One wonders what can be the exact motives for the 'European three' to get fooled like this: or could it be that there are points on the agenda that the public doesn't know? Just why are France and Germany so eager to trust the untrustables? It cannot be that they are satisfied only with the smiles that they receive from the designer Beards, whenever these feel the need for showing their teeth in a friendly manner. Could it have anything to do with lucrative oil deals that the IRI is known to have given to these European nations? These deals that supply the Europeans with cheap oil and the mollah with cash?
And what is the role played by Great Britain? How much stretch does one need to have to be able to on the one hand be part of the 'invading enemy forces' in Irak and on the other hand sit at the dinner table in Tehran, holding hands with Mr. Rowhani? What is the purpose of this policy? Can it really only be the cheap oil? Are there maybe other policies at work, for example to prevent too much political leverage of the US in the region? A well calculated gamble in a global power game? When is the European public going to hear their politicians pay their reponsability for the policies that were opted for in the Iran Nuclear Scandal?
Do we really need a A-bomb to wake up and see that now is not a time for gambling? I remember a film clip of Adolf Hitler after the Munich talks with Chamberlain, the then Foreign Secretary. When, in front of an audience of party members, Hitler was commenting on the Munich talks, he took out a piece of paper and then tore it to pieces while saying: Tear to pieces this little paper!
The Iranians, with their rich history, culture and literature, should know better than to opt for a nuclear deterrent in this whole story. There is a story in the Mathnawi, one of the great works of the Farsi literature in which a derwish warns a man by the road side not to put trust in the bear next to him that this man considers as his friend. 'I know it is a bear but it is also my best friend' he exclaims. A while later the same derwish sees the bear again by the road side, next to him lays the man, dead. It turns out that the bear saw a fly on the nose of his sleeping friend, and picked up a stone in order to kill it. In that act he also cracked the skull of his friend. Now who is who in this story? Who is the man, who is the bear and what about the stone?