Ron Paul raps US hostility toward Iran

US Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219725.html

US Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has lashed out at Washington's hostile policies toward Iran, saying there is no evidence that Tehran is making nuclear weapons.

Iranians are "planning to be bombed" and would understandably make the necessary arrangements to counter the threat, even though there is "no evidence whatsoever" that they have "enriched" uranium, Paul said in a recent speech.

Washington and Tel Aviv have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, based on the allegation that Iran's nuclear work may consist of a covert military aspect.

Last week, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said the US military is ready to launch a military strike against Iran, if occasion necessitates.

Dempsey's warmongering tirades came on the heels of equally aggressive remarks by US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta that "no options were off the table" regarding Iran's nuclear program.

Paul also noted that Iran's anti-US stance stems from Washington's interference in Tehran's internal affairs.

He referred to the 1953 coup d'état against then Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, explaining that the US forcefully replaced Mosaddeq with a ruthless dictator to secure its own interests, including oil benefits.

Paul also criticized the US sanctions against the Islamic Republic, describing them as “acts of war” which can pave the way for a real conflict in the Middle East.

"Sanctions were the first step in our wars against Iraq and Libya, and now more sanctions planned against Syria and Iran are leading down the same destructive path," he warned in a recent article titled The Folly of Sanctions.

On December 31, US President Barack Obama signed into law fresh economic sanctions against Iran's Central Bank in a bid to punish foreign companies and banks that do business with the Iranian financial institution.

The United States has already barred its own banks from dealing with the Iranian Central Bank. Thus, the new US sanctions are intended to dissuade other foreign banks from doing transactions with Iran's Central Bank by threatening to cut off their access to US financial institutions.

The US, Israel and their allies accuse Iran of pursuing a military nuclear program and have used this allegation as a pretext to push the UN Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran.

Tehran has categorically refuted the Western allegations, saying that as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), it has the right to acquire and develop atomic technology for peaceful purposes.

China dismisses US's Iran oil embargo

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219763.html

China has dismissed the new US sanction against Iran's oil sector, saying that the commercial ties with Iran are totally legitimate and should not be subject to any punishment.

“China maintains normal and transparent energy and economic cooperation with Iran which does not violate UN Security Council resolutions and these interactions should not be affected,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a daily news briefing on Thursday.

“China opposes the placing of one's domestic law above international law and imposing unilateral sanctions on other countries,” he added.

Hong went on to say that sanctions are not the correct approach to easing what the US calls tensions over Iran's nuclear program, adding that, “Dialogue and negotiation is the right way out.”

Iran exported about 622,000 barrels of oil per day to China in November, maintaining its place as the third largest crude supplier to the East Asian country.

According to the Chinese General Administration of Customs (GAC), the figure indicates a 5.3 percent growth over the corresponding number for the previous year.

South Korean and Japanese officials are also mulling plans to ignore the US sanction against Iran.

South Korea has recently announced that it will buy around 10 percent of its needed crude from Iran in 2012, which will be slightly higher than last year.

South Korea, which is the world's fifth largest oil importer, is planning to buy 200,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian crude this year, more than the 190,000 bpd figure in 2011.

The United States is mounting pressure on foreign firms to stop buying Iranian crude in a bid to force Tehran to end its peaceful nuclear energy program.

On December 31, US President Barak Obama signed into law fresh economic sanctions against Iran's Central Bank in an apparent bid to punish foreign companies and banks that do business with the Iranian financial institution.

The bill requires foreign financial firms to make a choice between doing business with Iran's Central Bank and oil sector or with the US financial sector.

US sanctions, as well as unilateral embargoes imposed on Iran's energy and financial sectors by Britain and Canada came after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report on Iranian nuclear program early November, accusing Tehran of seeking to weaponize its nuclear technology.

Tehran argues that as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

US warns LatAm states over Iran ties

US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219744.html

The US has warned Latin American states against a further expansion of diplomatic and business ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“We are making absolutely clear to countries around the world that now is not the time to be deepening ties, not security ties, not economic ties, with Iran,'' US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said on Friday.

The US State Department statement comes ahead of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's planned visits to Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Ecuador next week.

Meanwhile, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen stated that the forthcoming Iranian president's tour of Latin America is proof of Tehran's expanding interest in the region.

“Ahmadinejad's desire to strengthen ties with anti-American rulers and expand Iranian influence in the Western Hemisphere directly threatens US security interests,” she said in a statement.

“This is a threat which we cannot ignore,'' Ros-Lehtinen noted.

She also pledged the Obama administration to hold hearings on the matter to discuss what Washington is doing to “counter Iranian outreach in the Western Hemisphere.”

This is while Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Friday criticized the United States for deliberately and recklessly raising tensions in the Persian Gulf.

“The Yankees are determined to provoke wars, provoke tensions,'' Chavez said on television during a visit to the central state of Portuguesa.

President Ahmadinejad will kick off a four-nation trip to Latin America next week.

During his five-day trip, the Iranian president will discuss "bilateral ties and regional and international issues" with Latin American leaders.

President Ahmadinejad is also scheduled to attend the inauguration ceremony of the recently re-elected Nicaraguan leader Daniel Ortega. Stops in Cuba and Ecuador will round off the tour.

Leaders in all the four Latin American countries have in recent years built up diplomatic and trade ties with Iran, while their relations with the United States have become frosty as their people have been demanding an end to dependence on Washington.

'Iran prepared for US miscalculation'

Seyed Mohamed Marandi, an Associate Professor at the University of Tehran and a regular commentator on various international news channels

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219695.html

senior political analyst says while the recent spike in US and Israeli threats and allegations against Iran are “unlikely” to translate into an attack on the country, Tehran is geared up for any “American miscalculation.”

“The United States and Israel, along with other Western countries have repeatedly made military threats against the Iranian people, while the Iranians have never made threats of their own,” Professor Seyyed Mohamed Marandi told Press TV on Friday.

Nevertheless, the prominent political commentator added it's unlikely that the US would venture on a military confrontation with Iran, “Because even senior American leaders admit that the consequences would be highly detrimental to the United States and its interests.”

Washington and Tel Aviv have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, based on the allegation that Iran's nuclear work may consist of a covert military aspect.

Last week, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said the US military is ready to launch a military strike against Iran, if occasion necessitates.

"We are examining a range of options. I'm satisfied that the options that we are developing are evolving to a point that they would be executable if necessary," Dempsey said.

Dempsey's warmongering tirades came on the heels of the equally aggressive remarks by US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta that "no options were off the table" regarding Iran's nuclear program.

The Israeli officials have also recently stepped up their war rhetoric against Iran. On November 21, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that "time has come" to deal with Iran.

Israeli President Shimon Peres also threatened on November 6 that an attack against Iran is becoming "more and more likely."

“The mere threats themselves are seen as inhuman and irrational; because of such American behavior, Iran has prepared itself for any potential American miscalculation,” Marandi asserted.

He added though the Iranians are firmly committed to the peace and stability of the region, “A look at a map makes clear that Iran has the ability to respond to threats throughout the region and beyond.”

“If there is no security for Iranians or for Iranian oil exports, then, in Iranian eyes, there will be no security for Iran's antagonists in the region,” the political analyst said.

On New Year's Eve, US President Barack Obama signed into law fresh economic sanctions against Iran's Central Bank in an apparent bid to punish foreign companies and banks that do business with the Iranian financial institution.

The bill aims to prevent refiners across the world from paying for Iran's oil. The European Union is also considering measures that would forbid its member states from importing the crude

Iran's First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi has warned that imposing sanctions against the country's energy sector will prompt Tehran to prevent oil cargoes from passing through the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

“If they impose sanctions on Iran's oil, not even a drop of oil will be allowed through the Strait of Hormuz,” he warned.

Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari has also reiterated that Iran has complete command over the strategic waterway and that “closing the Strait of Hormuz is very easy for Iranian naval forces.”

“Under such conditions, the United States and its allies should not expect oil or gas to flow out of the Persian Gulf, northern Iraq, or Central Asia,” Marandi said.

“It would be a grave mistake to underestimate the Islamic Republic's military power and resolve as well as the region's popular response to yet another western act of aggression in a very unstable region,” the senior political analyst concluded.

UK rules out preemptive strike on Iran

UK Defense Secretary Philip Hammond

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219646.html

The British Defense Secretary says London is against preemptive military action against Iran as it will threaten the global economic growth by disrupting oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz.

Addressing a conference on "NATO and the Case for Collective Defense in the 21st Century" at Atlantic Council in Washington, Philip Hammond noted, “We would not be in favor of a preemptive strike on Iran.”

"It is in all our interests that the arteries of global trade are kept free, open and running,” he added.

Hammond emphasized that the disruption of oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz would threaten regional and global economic growth.

The British minister added that his government follows "a strategy of pressure and engagement with Iran,” which is similar to the Obama administration's approach in its early days in office.

He said that in line with that strategy, the British government has “largely, and quite reasonably, put the engagement half of that [strategy] on the back burner.

Hammond said that despite the saber-rattling and talk about a nuclear Iran being unacceptable, the military option has merely theoretically been on the table in the past years with regards to Iran.

He stressed that “It would seem obviously in the interests of all concerned to avoid war in Iran.”

On Saturday, December 31, 2011, US President Barack Obama signed into law fresh economic sanctions against Iran's Central Bank requiring foreign financial firms to make a choice between doing business with Iran's Central Bank and oil sector or with the US financial sector.

Iran has warned that it can respond to the proposed Western oil sanctions and threats against the Islamic Republic by choking the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi said on Tuesday, December 27, 2011, that the imposition of oil sanctions against the Islamic Republic will prompt Tehran to prevent oil cargoes from passing through the strategic route.

“If they impose sanctions on Iran's oil, not even a drop of oil will be allowed through the Strait of Hormuz,” he added.

Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari also announced on December 30 that the country's naval forces can readily block the strategic Strait of Hormuz if need be.

“Our (Iran's) intention is to bring stability and security to the region and we would like to show everyone that we can provide the security of the region without needing extra-regional powers,” he said.

Japan mulls ignoring US oil ban on Iran

South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak (L) igreets Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda. Both countries have expressed their intentions to disregard US-led sanctions on Iranian oil.

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219634.html

Japan has become the latest country to hint at its intention to ignore US-led oil sanctions on Iran, after South Korea's recent dismissal of Washington's bid to boycott the Iranian crude.

"We are not considering banning imports," Japan Times quoted a Japanese Foreign Ministry official as saying on Friday.

On New Year's Eve, US President Barack Obama signed into law fresh economic sanctions against Iran's Central Bank in an apparent bid to punish foreign companies and banks that do business with the Iranian financial institution.

The bill aims to prevent refiners across the world from paying for Iran's oil. The European Union is also considering measures that would forbid its member states from importing the crude.

Iran's Central Bank has accounts at major Japanese banks for oil trade settlements. If US sanctions are implemented, the Japanese government may have to freeze those accounts. It means Japan's oil imports from Iran would "completely stop," a Finance Ministry official said, suggesting this is a situation the government wants to avoid.

Japan's Finance Minister Jun Azumi, who is due to meet with US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner during an upcoming Tokyo visit, is now expected to call for the exemption of Japanese banks from US penalties.

On Thursday, Japanese officials also expressed their concern about the possible negative global economic impact of increasing US and European pressure on Iran over its nuclear program.

An official at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry said an embargo on Iranian oil would lead to a sharp rise in crude oil prices, adding that the US must consider the negative impact of such a development on the global economy.

Tokyo's wariness over any escalation of pressure on the Islamic Republic echoes South Korea's earlier announcement that it would purchase around 10 percent of its needed crude from Iran in 2012, exceeding Seoul's oil imports from Iran in 2011.

South Korea, which is the world's fifth largest oil importer, announced plans to buy 200,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian crude this year, a little more than the 190,000 bpd in 2011.

US sanctions, as well as unilateral embargoes imposed on Iran's energy and financial sectors by Britain and Canada came after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report on the Iranian nuclear program early in November, accusing Tehran of seeking to weaponize its nuclear technology.

Despite the widely publicized claims by the US, Israel and some of their European allies that Iran's nuclear program may include a military diversion, Iran insists on its civilian nature, arguing that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and an IAEA member it has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Iran warns US carrier off Persian Gulf

Commander of Iran's Army Major General Ataollah Salehi

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219094.html

Commander of Iran's Army Major General Ataollah Salehi has warned a US aircraft carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf, adding that the warning comes “only once.”

On December 30, 2011 the Iranian Navy identified and recorded footage and images of the USS John C. Stennis in the area where Iran is currently holding naval military exercises.

General Salehi said on Tuesday that we recommend and warn the aircraft carrier not to return to its previous position in the Persian Gulf, “since we are not in the habit of repeating a warning and we warn only once.”

The USS John C. Stennis has left the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. It is one of the US navy's biggest warships. The nuclear-powered vessel carries around 3,300 personnel most of whom are air crew. It can also carry 50 fighter jets and 6 helicopters. The carrier passed through Forouzan oil platforms and Farsi Island.

Iran's Navy launched a massive 10-day naval exercise, codenamed “Velayat 90”, on December 24. The drill covers an area stretching from the east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden.

Major General Salehi said the experiences of Iran's Navy such as its presence in the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea have enhanced the combat power of the Iranian forces.

“Our actions in sea are neither passive nor aggressive, but are rather aimed at training in free waters and safeguarding the interests of Iran and Islamic countries,” the Iranian commander added.

Over the past years, Iran has made important breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing important military equipment and systems.

The country has repeatedly clarified that its military might is merely based on the nation's defense doctrine of deterrence and poses no threat to other countries.

Iran to deny Hormuz oil to war engines

An Iranian navy vessel launches a missile during the Velayat 90 drills at the sea of Oman, on Sunday, Jan. 1, 2012

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/218869.html

A senior Iranian lawmaker says the country will not allow any oil to reach the “war engines of Iran's enemies” through the Strait of Hormuz if its oil is subjected to sanctions.

“Iran will never allow the Strait [of Hormuz] to be used against it and for the benefit of its enemies,” Head of Majlis Internal Security Committee Parviz Sorouri said on Sunday.

Sorouri added that Iran considers the strategic waterway as a “Strait of Peace,” but would undertake any “fundamental measures” to ensure the security of itself and the entire region.

He went on to say that the US is currently pursuing the project of “Iranophobia,” as the recent developments in the Middle East have led to the “divergence of regional counties from the US and a convergence with the Islamic Republic.”

Last Wednesday, Michael Mann, the spokesman for EU's Foreign Affairs Chief Catherine Ashton, said, "The European Union is considering another set of sanctions against Iran.”

He added that the decision would be taken in the next meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on January 30, 2012.

The EU foreign ministers failed in their attempts to enforce an embargo on Iran's oil exports during a December 1 meeting in Brussels.

The EU's anti-Iran move came after the United States, Britain, and Canada imposed unilateral sanctions on the Islamic Republic's energy and financial sectors over Tehran's nuclear program.

Iran's First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi warned on December 27 that imposing sanctions against the country's energy sector will prompt Tehran to prevent oil cargoes from passing through the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

“If they impose sanctions on Iran's oil, not even a drop of oil will be allowed through the Strait of Hormuz,” he warned.

Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari also announced last Wednesday that the country's naval forces can readily block the strategic Strait of Hormuz if need be.

The US, Israel, and their allies accuse Iran of pursuing a military nuclear program and have used this allegation as a pretext to convince the UN Security Council to impose four rounds of sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Iran has refuted the allegations, arguing that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Iran war to ruin Israel, global economy

Obama should put an end to Iran war threats, if it doesn't want the destruction of Israel, former CIA analysts say.

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/218860.html

Two former CIA analysts have advised US President Barack Obama to immediately put an end to the “torrent of war propaganda against Iran” as this will lead to the destruction of Israel and devastation of world economy.

Ray McGovern and Elizabeth Murray wrote on the consortiumnews.com that Obama's “repeated use of the bromide that 'everything is on the table'” indicates that the US president does not fully recognize the consequences of a military confrontation with Iran.

They said a war with Iran would be to the advantage of “no one but the arms merchants,” adding, “If your advisers have persuaded you that hostilities with Iran would bring benefit to Israel, they are badly mistaken.”

War with Iran is likely to bring the destruction of Israel in the long term, “not even to mention the disastrous consequences for the world economy, of which you (Obama) must be aware,” the duo contended.

Washington and Tel Aviv have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, based on the allegation that Iran's nuclear work may consist of a covert military aspect.

Last week, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said the US military is ready to launch a military strike against Iran, if occasion necessitates.

"We are examining a range of options. I'm satisfied that the options that we are developing are evolving to a point that they would be executable if necessary," Dempsey said.

Dempsey's warmongering tirades came on the heels of the equally aggressive remarks by US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta that "no options were off the table" regarding Iran's nuclear program.

This is while the Israeli officials have similarly stepped up their war rhetoric against Iran. On November 21, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that "time has come" to deal with Iran.

Israeli President Shimon Peres also threatened on November 6 that an attack against Iran is becoming "more and more likely."

Iranian officials have promised a crushing response to any military strike against the country, warning that any such measure could result in a war that would spread beyond the Middle East.

McGovern and Murray described the claims about the diversion of Tehran's nuclear program to a militarized dimension, the pretext for the war threats against Iran, as “incendiary but false,” which are propagated “fast and furious.”

Iran argues that it has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The ex-CIA analysts have urged Obama to “be up-front with the American people,” and publicize the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program.

“You (Obama) know that the Herculean efforts of US intelligence to find evidence of an active nuclear weapons program in Iran have found nothing.”

'Invading Iran is invading Russia, China'

Russia and China will be a headache for US President Barack Obama if he decides on a military confrontation with Iran.

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/218815.html

A political analyst says Russia and China consider a US military action on Iran as an attack on their own borders and a threat to their own national security.

“The US is assuming that Russia or China will not respond militarily, but they've been wrong before,” Shamus Cooke wrote on the Global Research website.

Cooke explained that when former US president George W. Bush gave the green light to the then President of Georgia Mikheil Saakahvili to attack South Ossetia in 2008, “Russia surprised everyone by responding militarily and crushing Georgia's invasion.”

“Attacking Syria and/or Iran opens the door to a wider regional or even international war,” Cooke stressed.

Last Month, Major General Zhang Zhaozhong, professor from the Chinese National Defense University, said China would not hesitate to protect the Islamic Republic against a military strike, even if this means the start of the Third World War.

Also last week, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin vehemently criticized any plans of attacking Iran, describing the measure as “a very dangerous scenario” which could lead to a “regional catastrophe.”

The United States and Israel have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, based on the allegation that Iran's nuclear program may consist of a covert military agenda.

Iran has refuted the allegations, saying that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Over the past weeks, Israel has renewed its aggressive rhetoric against Iran. On November 21, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that "time has come" to deal with Iran.

Israeli President Shimon Peres also threatened on November 6 that an attack against Iran is becoming "more and more likely."

Iranian officials have promised a crushing response to any military strike against the country, warning that any such measure could result in a war that would spread beyond the Middle East.

“If the US becomes militarily involved with Syria and Iran, it is up to the working people of the US to mobilize in massive numbers in the streets to prevent such an attack,” Cooke concluded.

Pakistan defies US, honors Iran gas deal

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/218383.html

Islamabad has stepped up work on its bilateral agreements with Tehran including the implementation of a Pak-Iran gas pipeline project despite US threats.

“Construction work on the pipeline in Iranian area was completed. And on remaining portion that was to be constructed in Pakistani area the survey has been completed. Pakistan is bearing losses due to energy crises and it would go ahead with different options including Iran,” The Nation quoted a Pakistani official as saying on Thursday.

The Pakistani source added Islamabad had not backed down from its trade agreement with Iran.

On December 19, high-ranking Islamabad diplomats said the administration of Barack Obama is frustrated with the “rapid progress” of Pakistan's gas project with Iran, and is exhausting all its resources to sabotage the deal.

“They (US officials) have gone to the extent of threatening [Pakistan's] President [Asif Ali] Zardari of economic sanctions if work is not stopped immediately,” the official said.

Zardari, however, reportedly dismissed the threats, bluntly asserting that the commissioning of the project is vital and inevitable for the wellbeing of Pakistan's “fast crumbling” economy.

The USD 7.6 billion gas pipeline deal, which was signed in June 2010, aims to export a daily amount of 21.5 million cubic meters (or 8.7 billion cubic meters per year) of Iranian natural gas to Pakistan.

Iran and Pakistan finalized the details of the deal during bilateral talks held in Tehran in October 2007.

In addition to exporting gas to Turkey, Armenia, and Pakistan, Iran is currently negotiating gas exports to Iraq.

Iran gives NAM data on IAEA report

Iran's envoy to the IAEA Ali-Asghar Soltanieh

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/209136.html

Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Ali-Asghar Soltanieh has offered the (Non-Aligned Movement) NAM critical information about Iran's nuclear program amid a publicity hype by the Western media over the latest IAEA report on Tehran's nuclear case.

In an extraordinary session of the NAM, held upon Iran's request on Tuesday, Ali-Asghar Soltanieh answered 20 critical questions about Tehran's nuclear program and a host of related issues.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano's latest report on Iran's nuclear activities was circulated among 35 members of the Board of Governors of the agency on Tuesday evening, almost 10 days ahead of the seasonal meeting of the board, due to take place in Vienna on November 17 and 18.

Amano has reportedly attached a 15-page annexation to his report, which focuses on the issue of Iran's alleged studies in the field of military nuclear activities.

According to some of the Western media speculations, the report makes three claims regarding Iran's nuclear activities, which purport that Tehran is pursuing a covert nuclear military program.

One of the claims has been made over satellite pictures of a steel container supposedly used for testing explosives that might be used to detonate fissile material.

The other claim revolves around Iran's hypothetical attempt to built computer models of a nuclear warhead, still another one conjectures that Tehran appears to have received foreign assistance in its experiments with nuclear material.

Soltanieh on Tuesday provided the NAM member states with detailed answers to 20 key questions about Iran's nuclear program.

Question 1: Has the IAEA detected, after 4000 days of most intensive inspection in the agency's history, even one gram of uranium being diverted for military purposes?

Response: No. Please study all of the reports by the agency's current and former director generals.

Question 2: With respect to nuclear activities and materials which are claimed to have not been declared until 2003, has the IAEA found out that they had been diverted towards military activities?

Response: No. All of these activities and materials were audited by the agency. Please study all the agency's reports to the Board of Governors between 2003 and 2004

Question 3: Was Iran ethically obliged to declare Natanz enrichment facility before 2003?

Response: No. Given that nuclear material had not been introduced into the facility until 2003, Iran was under no obligations to declare it. Particularly since Iran had not signed the Revised Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements, as well as the additional Comprehensive Safeguards (CSA) and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) agreements.

Question 4: Was Iran legally obliged to declare the heavy water research reactor in Arak (IR40) before 2003?

Response: No. Iran was not under any obligation to declare it since no nuclear material had been introduced into it until 2003, particularly since Iran had not signed the Revised Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements until 2003.

Question 5: Had Iran any obligation under the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement to report Arak's heavy water production plant to the IAEA before 2003?

Response: No, because heavy water and its products are not covered by the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. Iran started implementing the Additional Protocol in 2003.

Question 6: Was Iran under any legal obligation until 2003 to declare uranium conversion Facilities (UCF)?

Response: No. Since no nuclear material had been introduced into the facility until 2003, Iran was not under any obligations to declare it, particularly given that Iran had not signed the Revised Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements until 2003.

Question 7: Did Iran have any legal obligation to declare uranium mines including Gachin and Saghand mines?

Response: No, because Iran had not signed and implemented the Additional Protocol until 2003.

Question 8: Has the IAEA detected any nuclear material or activity including enrichment in Parchin and Lavizan-Shian, which are claimed to have been part of a nuclear weapons program after the UN agency carried out intensive inspections, including sampling and analyzing?

Response: No. The director general's press statement about Iran on March 6, 2006 reads, “On transparency, I think I mentioned in my report access to military sites, we have been given access to a number of military sites recently, to Parchin, Lavizan, Shian, to dual use equipment, to interview people. These are beyond the Additional Protocol, but they are essential for us to reconstruct the history of the program.”

On November 15, 2004, the director general reported that the agency had been provided access to the Lavizan-Shian military site where the agency took environmental samples. Finally, paragraph 102 of the director general (GOV/2004/83) says, “The vegetation and soil samples collected from the Lavizan-Shian site have been analyzed, and reveal no evidence of nuclear material.” Further information with respect to this issue is available in November 18, 2005 (GOV/2005/87) and February 27, 2006 (GOV/2006/15) documents.

Question 9: Did the IAEA, in its agreed Action Plan (INFOSIRC/711), announce that there is no other issue in addition to what was listed in 2007?

Response: Yes. The paragraph IV of the document (INFOSIRC/711) says that these modalities cover all the remaining issues, and the agency emphasizes that there will be no issues and ambiguities regarding Iran's previous nuclear programs and activities.

Question 10: Was the IAEA bound to submit the documents related to the “Alleged Studies” to the Islamic Republic based on its Action Plan?

Response: Yes. Paragraph III says, “Although the agency will submit the documents to the Islamic Republic, considering the Green Salt Project, experiments of high explosives and carrying missiles with returning abilities, it will also keep them with itself.

Question 11: Did the IAEA fulfill its obligations regarding the submitting of the evidence pertaining to the allegations to Iran?

Response: No. Please study the report by the former director general to the UN Board of Governors, where he correctly criticizes that the certain country that has provided the agency with the evidence on the allegations has not allowed the agency to submit the documents in question to Iran.

Question 12: Has the IAEA confirmed the authenticity of the content of the “Alleged Studies”?

Response: No. Please study the report by the former director general to the UN Board of Governors, where he correctly brought up the authentic problems with the documents. The director general also clearly explained that the nuclear materials and activities in the “Alleged Studies” are not relevant.

Question 13: What was Iran's obligation toward the document INFOSIRC/ 711 regarding the “Alleged Studies”?

Response: In Paragraph III of the document, which was discussed and agreed upon by the IAEA and Iran, and was to be approved by the Board of Governors specifies, “As a sign of the resolve to cooperate with the agency, based on all the related documents received, Iran will study the document and will inform the agency of its evaluation.”

Question 14: Did Iran, under the work plan, have any obligation to hold meetings, interviews or [allow] sampling regarding the “Alleged Studies”?

Response: No. As mentioned in Response 12, Iran was only obliged to inform of its evaluation. Iran has submitted its 117-page evaluation of the past three years. But the agency has not acted on its obligation to end the Action Plan. Accreting to Paragraph IV of the Action Plan, “The agency and Iran agreed that, following the implementation of the Action Plan and the agreed modalities for the negotiation of remaining issues, the implementation of the safeguards in Iran change to continue in the normal and conventional path.”

Notice: Instead of the Action Plan's conclusion, the secretariat introduced new allegations known as “Possible Military Aspects.” But in Paragraph IV of the Work Plan it is affirmed that “no issue has remained and there not any doubts about Iran's nuclear program and previous activities.”

Question 15: Has the Islamic Republic implemented the Additional Protocol?

Response: Yes. Please study the report by the former director general before 2006.

Question 16: Has Iran implemented the Modified Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangement of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement?

Response: Yes. Please study the report by the former director general before 2006.

Question 17: Since when Iran has halted its voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol and the Modified Code 3.1? Why?

Response: Iran's Majlis (parliament) voted to stop the voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol and the Modified Code 3.1 (after two years and half) regarding the unfair reference of Iran's technical nuclear case to the United Nations Security Council in 2006. The important point is that the Additional Protocol is not a binding legal tool and the Modified Code 3.1 was merely a suggestion by the Board of Governors and is not part of the legal provisions of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA).

Question 18: Have all Iran's nuclear materials been measured, and are under the complete supervision of the safeguards and remained peaceful?

Response: Yes. Please study the annual Safeguards Implementation Report (SIR).

Question 19: Did Iran itself provide the possibility of unannounced inspections?

Response: Yes. The agency conducted more than 100 unannounced inspections in Iran. The advance-notice for some of them were issued only two hours before the inspection.

Question 20: Why does Iran deem the resolutions by the Board of Governors and the UN Security Council as illegal?

Response: A. In accordance with Article 12 C under the IAEA statute, if the inspectors notice any “non-compliance,” they should report the same to the director general and the later should report to the Board of Governors thereafter. Followingly, the Board will notify the report to the United Nations. None of these procedures have been applied with regard to Iran.

After three years elapsed since 2003, when the issue was raised at the Board of Governors, some members of the Board claimed that there had been “non-compliance” prior to 2003. Nonetheless, the director general did not use the legal term “non-compliance” and instead used the word “failure,” which has also been used with regard to the other countries, which implement the CSA. Based on this agreement, the issue will be considered as concluded after corrective measures are adopted. The former director general clearly confirmed in his report that Iran took all the corrective measures.

B. Article 12 C mentioned in the Board's resolutions speak of “recipient member states,” which have misused the nuclear materials delivered from the Agency. Iran has never received the nuclear materials mentioned in the relevant provisions under the Statute.

C. According to the Statute and the CSA, if the Agency discovers that the nuclear materials have been diverted to military purposes, it will notify the UN Security Council of the same. All the reports submitted by the incumbent and former dire generals so far contain no evidence of nuclear diversion.

D. Based on the CSA, if a member state does not allow the inspectors to enter the country and as a result the IAEA cannot conduct its verification activities, the Agency will notify the UN Security Council of the issue. All the reports by the director general since 2003 have explicitly announced that the Agency is able to continue its verification activities in Iran.

E. The resolutions by three EU member states against Iran from 2003 to 2006 have recognized Iran's move to suspend its uranium enrichment activities as a non-binding, voluntary and trust-building measure. Therefore, the Board of Governors 's resolutions which referred Iran's nuclear issue to the UN Security Council, after Iran decided to suspend its UCF activities voluntarily, are totally in contradiction with the Board's previous resolutions.

It should be mentioned that when the three EU member states proposed the anti-Iran resolutions at the Board of Governors in 2006 with political motives and in an attempt to involve the UN Security Council in an IAEA-related technical issue, enrichment activities in Natanz were still suspended voluntarily.

The last question from peace-seeking nations:

Based on the abovementioned facts, should we allow the IAEA, as the only international body tasked with promotion of peaceful use of nuclear energy for the achievement of peace and prosperity, to be manipulated as a tool by a number of countries which seek to turn the Agency into a watchdog utterly malleable into the hands of the UN Security Council and deprive the developing countries of their “absolute right” to use peaceful nuclear energy as stipulated in the IAEA Statute?

Russia blasts new IAEA report on Iran

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/209132.html

Russia has strongly criticized the release of the latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran, describing it as a "source of a new increase in tension" over Tehran's nuclear program.

Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Tuesday the release of information from the IAEA report was driven by "destructive logic" aimed at the "intentional demolition of the political-diplomatic process."

"Russia is gravely disappointed and bewildered that the report is being turned into a source adding to the tensions over the problems connected to the Iranian nuclear program," reads the statement, Reuters reported.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano's latest report on Iran's nuclear activities was distributed to the 35 members of the Board of Governors of the agency on Tuesday evening, ahead of the seasonal meeting of the board, which is scheduled to be held in Vienna from November 17 to 18.

Iran dismissed the report as "unbalanced, unprofessional and prepared with political motivation and under political pressure by mostly the United States."

Russia also said that the agency's move would damage the chance of a renewal of talks between Tehran and the P5+1 group -- Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States, and Germany -- to solve the crisis over Iran's nuclear program through diplomatic channels.

"We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the 'sextet' (P5+1) of international mediators and Tehran have begun to appear," the ministry said.

Russia also said that it needs time to study the detailed of the anti-Iran report.

"The analysis must take place in a calm atmosphere, since it is important to determine whether some new, reliable evidence strengthening suspicions of a military element in Iran's nuclear program has really appeared, or whether we are talking about an intentional -- and counterproductive -- whipping up of emotions," the ministry said.

Moscow also called on international community to "keep public steps in line with the interests of progress toward a political and diplomatic resolution."

The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Tehran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program.

Yet, as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the IAEA, Iran has every right to develop and acquire nuclear technology meant for peaceful purposes.

In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence indicating that Iran's civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.

Vicious triangle forming against Iran

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/208576.html

In recent days, there has been a vociferous interest in Israel, the US and the UK in fanning the flames of Iranophobia in what observers see as a political red herring to engage in a catastrophic war in the Middle East.

The trio, which constitute a vicious triangle in their roguishly Iranophobic endeavors, have manifestly held secret meetings among the top security officials and formed a united front against Iran.

A recent report by The Guardian has revealed that British Chief of Defense Staff Gen. David Richards visited Tel Aviv secretly during the week, held a number of meetings with top Israeli military and intelligence officials and reassured them of Britain's unwavering support in case of an attack on Iran's nuclear sites. Further to that, the British officials revealed that the US government was mulling accelerating plans for targeted attacks on the country's nuclear sites and that Britain was prepared to be part of the plan for a possible attack.

Interestingly enough, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrived in London on Wednesday to hold talks with his British counterpart, with Iran of course to top the agenda. The importance of these meetings is that Britain's senior military official had not visited Israel for a decade. So, the recent meetings indicate the cementing security and military ties between the two countries.

Only recently, a senior US military official addressing a forum in Washington said that Iran had become the biggest threat to the United States. “The biggest threat to the United States and to our interests and to our friends … has come into focus and it's Iran.”

Coincidentally (how so?), on the same day (Friday), Israel's president Shimon Peres also stated something virtually to the same effect, saying that the military option to stop Iran from obtaining "nuclear weapons" was nearer.

When asked by Channel Two News if events were moving toward a military option rather than a diplomatic one, Peres replied, “I believe so, I estimate that intelligence services of all these countries are looking at the ticking clock, warning leaders that there is not much time left.”

In this regard, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, a pea in the pod, graced a G-20 summit of world leaders in France with his pithy words, “Iran's behavior and this obsessional desire to acquire nuclear military (capability) is in violation of all international rules. … If Israel's existence were threatened, France would not stand idly by.”

The trio (excluding France) have stepped up their rhetoric against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Threat is not a new word to Iran and the country is prepared for the worst and as Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi has said on the sidelines of a news conference in the Libyan city of Benghazi, “The US has unfortunately lost wisdom and prudence in dealing with international issues. It depends only on power. They have lost rationality; we are prepared for the worst but we hope they will think twice before they put themselves on a collision course with Iran.”

Time and again, the USA has renewed its hollow rhetoric against the Islamic Republic of Iran, repeating the same allegations again and again and again: that Iran is pursuing a clandestine nuclear weapons program; that Iran is supporting terrorism in the region; that Iran is violating human rights; that if Iran acquires the technology to produce nuclear weapons, it will create World War III.

The recent allegation leveled against the Islamic republic ahead of the next week's report by the UN atomic watchdog is that Iran has “built a large steel container for carrying out tests with high explosives that could be used in nuclear weapons,” and that Iran has made computer models of a nuclear warhead and other previously undisclosed details on alleged secret work by Tehran on nuclear arms.” Allegation comes after allegation against the Islamic Republic and the vicious triangle is forming to set a stage for an all-out attack against the country with the intended purpose of plundering its natural resources.

However, Iran will not sit quietly and leave the invaders in peace.

In August 2011, a top IRGC commander Brigadier General Ali Shadmani envisaged three effective measures to counter any potential act of aggression.

1. As Israel is the USA's backyard, Iran will disturb peace there. (The absence of peace in Israel will certainly deny repose to the USA as well.)

2. It would take full control of the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway where over 40 percent of all traded oil passes (thereby spiraling up the oil prices to a confounding level and dealing a heavy blow to the already deteriorating global economy.)

3. It would keep a close watch on all American military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. In case of an attack, Iran will cripple the troops stationed in those bases and incapacitate them of any possible move.

In the final analysis, the US hidden agenda in creating Iranophobia is to raise a specter of a nuclear apocalypse in the world, invade the country in alliance with Israel and the UK and other nefarious powers and eventually get their hands on Iran's myriad resources which they have coveted for so long.

In the unholy Israel-US-UK alliance, one cannot say with surety who is the most responsible party for these anti-Iran provocative acts but it seems that the Israeli tail is wagging the US-UK dog.

~~ Ismail Salami is an Iranian author and political analyst. A prolific writer, he has written numerous books and articles on the Middle East. His articles have been translated into a number of languages.

US nukes threaten international peace

Iran's Permanent Representative to the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Kazem Gharibabadi

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/197564.html

An Iranian official says the deployment of US nuclear weapons in Europe threatens the security and safety of host countries and endangers international peace.

The deployment of US nuclear weapons in the territory of some European countries violates the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), Iran's Permanent Representative to the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Kazem Gharibabadi said.

He made the remarks at the “4th Annual International Conference Nuclear Dilemmas: Present and Future” at The Hague.

Gharibabadi advised the Western countries to focus on real threats that endanger international peace and security, such as Israel's nuclear weapons, instead of creating false ones.

“It is surprising that in the sensitive region of Middle East, while Israel is not a party to any international disarmament or arms control treaties and has an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction including nuclear ones, it is immune to any criticism,” the Iranian official said.

Israel, widely believed to be the sole possessor of a nuclear arsenal in the Middle East with over 200 undeclared nuclear warheads, pursues the policy of "deliberate ambiguity" on its nuclear program.

Tel Aviv has rejected global demands to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and does not allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to observe its controversial nuclear program.

“How can the countries that advocate disarmament and the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons close their eyes to this obvious threat?” Gharibabadi pointed out.

He stressed the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities and said, “No evidence of the existence of a program to build nuclear weapons has been found in Iran.”

The US and its allies accuse Iran of developing a military nuclear program. In June 2009, the UN Security Council imposed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran's financial and military sectors under Western pressure.

Iranian officials have repeatedly refuted the allegations, arguing that as a signatory to the NPT and a member of the IAEA, Tehran has the right to use peaceful nuclear technology.

Iran to launch Bushehr plant in Nov-Dec

Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/194325.html

Iran's top nuclear official has announced a plan for the official inauguration of Bushehr's nuclear power plant in southern Iran in mid-November or in December.

Bushehr nuclear power plant is currently nearing its pre-operation phase which means that initial tests for its reactor and turbine are in the final stages, Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Fereydoun Abbasi told reporters on Wednesday.

The Iranian vice president added that the plant is getting closer to its 40 percent capacity, IRNA reported.

He stated that the steam which had already been produced in the plant was not transferred to the turbine to generate electricity and noted that the produced steam is currently injected to the turbine and electricity is generated.

The AEOI head explained that in a time-limited experimental phase, the produced electricity will join the grid but it will be then cut off to make necessary revisions.

On Sunday, Abbasi said that the first phase of the Bushehr plant has been scheduled to go on stream by the end of the holy month of Ramadan (early September) with a 40 percent capacity.

He noted that a pre-launch phase of the plant was due to be implemented by September and “if things proceed according to plans ... the [Bushehr] power plant will join the national grid with a 40 percent capacity.”

Iran signed a deal with Russia in 1995, under which the plant was originally scheduled to be completed in 1999, but the completion of the project was repeatedly delayed. The nuclear power plant was finally finished with the help of Russia following a three-decade delay.

In October 2010, Iran started injecting fuel into the core of the reactor at Bushehr nuclear power plant in the initial phase of its launch. However, engineers began removing the fuel rods in late February for safety reasons.

The unloading of the fuel delayed the plant's connection to the national grid, initially scheduled for the beginning of 2011.

Iran president urges end to dollar supremacy

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) meets with Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev (L) in the Iranian capital Tehran on August 16.

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/194266.html

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for an end to the dollar dominance, as the US economic crisis would lead to further devaluation of the currency.

Ahmadinejad made the remarks in a meeting with Russian Security Council secretary, Nikolai Patrushev, in the Iranian capital Tehran on Tuesday, IRNA reported.

“Considering that the US Treasury prints dollar and this is how the US budget deficit is reduced by using resources in countries like Iran and Russia, Tehran and Moscow could have useful cooperation to end reliance on dollar,” the Iranian president said.

Patrushev, for his part, hailed the suggestion by the Iranian president, stating that there is a huge capacity to increase the level of cooperation between the two countries, using their local currencies.

Ahmadinejad also welcomed Russia's proposal to solve the dispute over Iran's nuclear energy program based on a staged approach.

On July 13, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov proposed a new "step-by-step" approach toward Iran's nuclear program that would enable the Islamic Republic to take steps to address questions raised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Under the proposed plan, Iran would revive negotiations to alleviate individual concerns of the IAEA about its nuclear activities and be rewarded along the way by the partial removal of sanctions.

Ahmadinejad also said that practical measures, including the launching of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, could be a “positive step” toward deepening relations.

Patrushev arrived in Tehran on Monday for a two-day visit upon an invitation from Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili.

'Bushehr Nuclear Plant to join grid by Sept.'

Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani (file photo)

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/193973.html

The first phase of Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant has been scheduled to be launched by the end of the holy month of Ramadan (early September) with a 40 percent capacity.

Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Fereydoun Abbasi Davani announced that a pre-launch phase of the plant was due to be implemented by September and “If things proceed according to plans ...the [Bushehr] power plant will join the national grid with a 40 percent capacity,” IRNA reported.

He stated that should certain technical tests be successfully executed, then the power plant will link up to the national power grid.

He further alluded to the safety standards of the power plant and emphasized, “We will observe the safety of the plant at the highest level, especially following the impact of what happened at the Fukushima nuclear power station on the world public opinion.”

Abbasi anticipated that the power plant would be officially launched in its entirety by next December.

The construction of Bushehr power plant started in 1975 when Germany signed a contract with Iran. Germany, however, pulled out of the project following the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iran then signed a deal with Russia in 1995, under which the plant was originally scheduled to be completed in 1999, but the completion of the project was repeatedly delayed. The nuclear power plant was finally finished with the help of Russia following a three-decade delay.

In October 2010, Iran started injecting fuel into the core of the reactor at Bushehr nuclear power plant in the initial phase of its launch. However, engineers began removing the fuel rods in late February for safety reasons.

The unloading of the fuel delayed the plant's connection to the national grid, initially scheduled for the beginning of 2011.

Iran vows 'regrettable' reply to Israel

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks during an interview with Russia Today on August 12, 2011.

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/193841.html

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned Israel and the US against launching a war on Iran, saying the Islamic Republic will give a regrettable response to any strike.

“They wish to do it, they want to do it, but they know about our power. They know that we are going to give them a decisive response,” said President Ahmadinejad in an interview with Russia Today news network on Saturday.

“We have a saying in our language: If someone throws a smaller stone (at you), you should respond with a bigger stone. We will defend ourselves within our capabilities,” he added.

However, the Iranian chief executive expressed hope that such a day will never come as there is no reason for any strike against Iran.

President Ahmadinejad emphasized that Israel has been founded for the purpose of making threats and aggression and securing the interests of the West.

He also reiterated that the entity of the Israeli regime depends on terror, occupation and aggression.

In the past 60 years, Israel has done the same thing, but finally it will look at the world map and will find out about our historical might, Ahmadinejad concluded.

Amid a standoff over Iran's nuclear program, both Tel Aviv and Washington have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, based on the allegation that Iran's nuclear work may consist of a covert military agenda.

Iran says its nuclear program is completely peaceful and within the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which it is a signatory.

Iranian officials have warned that any act of aggression by the US and Israel against Iran would be firmly responded to and could result in a war that would spread beyond the Middle East.

In June, former head of Israel's Mossad spy agency Meir Dagan warned that any attack on Tehran by Tel Aviv would result in a “regional war.”

"It is important to know what the outcome of an attack on Iran would be, what would happen on the day after and what situation Israel would find itself in on the international stage," he said.

"An attack on Iran would mean regional war,” stressed Dagan, urging Israeli officials to “consider all options and not to run straight for the war option.”

'Iran to build more nuclear plants'

A general view of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/193051.html

A senior Iranian lawmaker says the Islamic Republic plans to build more nuclear power plants in upcoming years as the country moves forward with its nuclear program.

Hossein Amiri Khamkani, a member of a special parliamentary committee set up to examine the status of the Bushehr plant, made the remark in an interview with Majlis news agency (ICANA) on Monday.

He said that the construction costs of a nuclear plant are by far more than fossil ones in the beginning but nuclear plants offer long-term benefits, which make them more economical than fossil ones.

He also noted that the Islamic Republic plans to build more nuclear plants in line with its national interests.

Khamkani, however, said that Russia may not be Iran's partner in future plant projects since Moscow had reneged on its promises to complete and launch Iran's first nuclear power plant on several occasions.

He blamed Russia for the delay in launching the Bushehr plant and said the plant was supposed to go on stream in January according to the latest agreement between Iran and Russia.

He pointed out that the committee has sent its final report on the status of the Bushehr plant to the Majlis (parliament) Presiding Board.

In the report, no exact date for the final launch of the plant was given but the report mentions that the Bushehr plant will not go on stream as planned for the end of August, he further explained.

Majlis has passed plans for setting up 20 more nuclear plants and the Iranian government is bound to build them.

The construction of Bushehr power plant started in 1975 when Germany signed a contract with Iran. Germany, however, pulled out of the project following the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iran then signed a deal with Russia in 1995, under which the plant was originally scheduled to be completed in 1999, but the completion of the project was repeatedly delayed. The nuclear power plant was finally finished with the help of Russia following a three-decade delay.

In October 2010, Iran started injecting fuel into the core of the reactor at Bushehr nuclear power plant in the initial phase of its launch. However, engineers began removing the fuel rods in late February for safety reasons.

The unloading of the fuel delayed the plant's joining the national grid, initially scheduled for the beginning of 2011.