�We have to date found no evidence
of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities
in Iraq.� Mohamed ElBaradei, for the United Nations International Atomic Energy
Agency IAEA, 2003.
Iraq possesses �30,000 warheads, 500 tons of chemical
weapons, 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulin toxin, 1 million
pounds of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve gas, tons of yellowcake uranium from Niger.�
from White House web page, 2002-03.
In the pre-dawn
hours of Saturday, 30 September, the US Senate approved a bill authorizing
sanctions that target foreign countries continuing (completely legal) nuclear
cooperation with Iran. The bill stipulates �not to bring into force an
agreement for cooperation with the government of any country that is assisting
the nuclear program of Iran or transferring advanced conventional weapons or
missiles.� Unmentioned in the bill, the intended targets are Russia and China. The
previous day, the bill was approved by the House of Representatives.
Together with the
suspension of �habeas corpus,� this congressional endorsement of Bush�s
preparations for war against Iran should make it perfectly clear to November
voters that the US Congress is an illiberal and warmongering institution in
partnership with the policies of the Bush White House, whether the Republicans
or the Democrats are in power.
Lawmakers did add a caveat to the bill, warning that nothing
in this bill should be �construed as authorizing the use of force against
Iran.� However, the president can ignore the caveat because he has been granted
the right to waive provisions of the bill if he finds that US �national
security� interests require it.
Furthermore, the bill comes in the midst of ongoing
diplomatic talks over Iranian uranium enrichment for civilian use between Iran
and the European Union, which the new US sanctions clearly aim at sabotaging.
Let us be clear
about one thing: there is no evidence that Iran is anywhere near enriching
uranium to weapons-grade capacity at the rate and quantity required to produce
nuclear bombs that could effectively threaten the US or any of its allies in
the area within a decade. Nor is there any evidence that Iran is capable of
manufacturing plutonium bombs on the quick. Washington is simply keen to start
yet another war for �regime change� based on lies intended to terrorize the US
public into compliance.
Nuclear reactors,
uranium enrichment, and the bomb
Enriching uranium to 3.6 percent is needed to make �pellets�
to fuel nuclear reactors that generate electricity. This level of uranium
enrichment is recognized to be for civilian use. The troubling kind of uranium
enrichment involves intensively raising the enrichment level to over 90 percent
-- or enriching Uranium-235 to weapons-grade capacity.
Pakistan is said to own up to 50 nuclear bombs. These are
devices obtained by enriching Uranium-235 by 90 percent . Pakistan is said by
scientific experts to be the only country in the world using highly enriched
uranium to produce fission bombs. They have done so as a matter of preference,
because A. Q. Khan, the "father" of the Pakistani nuclear-weapons
program, learned how to produce weapons-grade uranium while employed at URENCO,
the highly-enriched-uranium-production plant in Europe. He mastered the
technique of enriching uranium through a "cascade" of centrifuges
(explained below).
As you probably know, the aim of enrichment is to increase
the proportion of fissile Uranium-235 atoms within uranium in order to increase
uranium's energy-release potential as a result of nuclear fission -- the
process by which certain atoms of uranium are split to cause a chain reaction.
What becomes enriched uranium-235 is mined as ore, pounded and converted into
"yellow cake," prepared for enrichment by dissolving "yellow
cake" in nitric acid. Then, it is subjected to a series of chemical
processes that convert it into a gas, uranium hexafluoride. This highly
corrosive gas is then processed at conversion plants, using pipes and pumps
constructed from aluminum and nickel alloys. The gas-centrifuge method of
enriching U-235 requires that uranium hexafluoride gas be spun in a cylindrical
chamber at high speed, which causes the slightly denser U-238 to split from the
lighter U-235. Extracted from the bottom of the chamber where it gravitates,
U-238 becomes depleted uranium, a heavy, radioactive (said to be
"slightly" radioactive by the military) metal, capable of piercing
tank armor and other munitions. Clustering at the center of the chamber, U-235
is collected and fed into another centrifuge, in a process repeated many times
and known as "cascade." A U-235 atomic bomb requires 20 kilograms of
enriched uranium, and has an explosive power of 50 kilotons. As previously
mentioned, Pakistan has 50 of these in its unregulated, unsupervised nuclear
arsenal.
Pakistan�s nuclear arsenal has been accumulated in secret,
without inspections or regulations because Pakistan has not signed the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT, 1972). Iran, of course, is a signatory of the
NPT -- an international courtesy that the US is apparently eager to use against
Iran�s interests.
Now, even if we assume that Tehran is seeking to build a
uranium bomb, it would need a cascade of 1,500 to 1,800 centrifuges, processing
uranium round-the-clock to produce the 20 kilos of enriched U-235 needed to
build a primitive uranium bomb (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jul/August
issue). At its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, Iran already has an
operational cascade of 164 centrifuges and plans to build another one. However,
the latest UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report reveals that at
Natanz plans were behind schedule and a second 164-machine cascade was not up
and running in August 2006.
The nuclear reactor at Natanz, therefore, is clearly
under-equipped to produce the volume and potency of enriched uranium needed to
build even one crude nuclear bomb in the near future.
This obvious fact, however, did not stop the House Intelligence
Committee (HIC) from issuing a congressional report on 23 August 2006,
ominously entitled �Recognizing Iran as a Strategic Threat: An Intelligence
Challenge for the United States.� Seething with outrage and professional fury,
the IAEA characterized the report as "erroneous, misleading, and unsubstantiated
information."
The IAEA letter singled out the HIC�s characterization of
the enrichment facility at Natanz, which is subject to IAEA inspections,
including camera monitoring, as particularly mendacious. The IAEA letter
pointed to a sub-section in the HIC report, entitled �Evidence for an Iranian
Nuclear Weapons Program.� A photograph of Iran�s enrichment facility at Natanz
was captioned, �Iran is currently enriching to weapons grade using a 164-machine
centrifuge cascade.� The IAEA pointed out that the claim was false. The small
cascade at the Natanz enrichment plant had been enriching uranium to the level
of 3.6 percent as required by Iran�s stated goal for producing nuclear fuel. As
the IAEA caustically remarked, this hardly qualifies as �weapons grade.�
Heavy-water reactors
and the plutonium bomb
Israel secretly obtained its nuclear arsenal via a different
route from the one mapped out by uranium enrichment. It has gone the
heavy-water-reactor route and thus has taken the plutonium option. (Like
Pakistan, Israel is not subject to inspections or regulations, not being a
signatory of the NPT.)
A small amount of plutonium (about 1 percent) can be
obtained via the U-235 enrichment process that produces fuel
"pellets" (enriched to 3.6 percent ) for nuclear-energy reactors.
Called "reprocessing," this routine involves stripping away the
metallic outer casings of used fuel rods in nuclear reactors before dissolving
them in hot nitric acid. What one gets from this reprocessing of nuclear waste
is some more, if highly radioactive, waste (about 3 percent ), uranium (96
percent ), and plutonium (1 percent ). This amount of plutonium obtained from a
reactor's nuclear waste, however, is a negligible and legitimate by-product,
which poses no weaponizing threat according to the scientific community and the
IAEA.
To make plutonium bombs, there is a more productive route:
the heavy-water-reactor route. Heavy-water reactors derive their name from the
use of so-called "heavy water," which contains deuterium. Heavy water
is a modified form of hydrogen with more neutrons in its nucleus, which makes
it not only literally "heavier" but also potentially more energetic
or explosively "fissile." Heavy-water reactors offer the advantage that
they can use unrefined natural uranium as fuel (and Iran has that uranium to
mine). In addition, a plutonium nuclear weapon is smaller in size and weight
than its uranium equivalent. The amount of plutonium required to make a nuclear
weapon is only 3.5 to 4 kilograms. Its explosive capacity is 20 kilotons.
Iran�s planned heavy-water reactor at Arak is a small
reactor, designed to replace another, outdated reactor, on its last leg. The
Iranians say that the Arak reactor is used to produce radioisotopes for
medicine and industry, which may be accurate. But even if they were lying about
its civilian use, the heavy-water reactor, if used to produce plutonium for
weapons, could produce at most enough for a couple of weapons per year, under
the best conditions -- and that might be sometime after 2009, the year the
plant becomes operational.
Nuclear double
standards
Now contrast the alarmist hysteria over Iran�s modest,
underdeveloped, fully regulated and legal nuclear program -- a decade away from
any production of very crude nuclear weapons -- to the nonchalance with which
Washington greets the frenetic nuclear activities in Pakistan. No pre-dawn vote
in Congress to threaten with sanctions anyone at all! Well, to be perfectly
honest, the US congress feigned to be �shocked� when White House spokesman,
Tony, Snow, said the Bush administration had known all along that Pakistan had
plans to build a large, plutonium-production plant at Khushab�s nuclear site in
the Punjab.
Under construction since 2000 and possibly several years
from completion, the heavy-water reactor at Khushab will be capable of
producing approximately 200 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium each year -- or
enough for 50 bombs per year. Spotted by independent analysts in
commercial-satellite photos, Pakistan�s heavy-water reactor caused not a ripple
of concern to the White House. �We discourage military use of the facility,�
Snow unconvincingly declared. �Discourage�? We�re talking about over 200
kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium in addition to the 10 kilograms (or two
bombs per year) of plutonium per year the small reactor at Khushab already
produces!
And the Bush gang targets Iran? Which has no heavy-water
reactor and won�t until at least 2009? Whose uranium enrichment has been
operated by small cascade-machines to perfectly legal levels? Whose Busher�s
reactor is a light-water reactor capable of yielding only negligible amounts of
plutonium? Whom the IAEA monitors and supervises with scrupulous zeal?
Clearly, Washington hasn�t the least concern about the
proliferation of nuclear weapons. Indeed, any country in the oil-rich region or
its environs that is not seeking to develop nuclear weapons is living in a
fool�s paradise. Washington will crush militant nationalism whatever its nature
and wherever it raises its independent head, calling it �terrorist� -- unless
it is armed with nuclear weapons. Call it the �blowback� correlative of Bush�s
�nuclear posture review,� or the law of inevitable nuclear proliferation,
seeking to insure mutual assured destruction -- MAD -- but on a multi-polar
global level.
But even in the MADness of infinite confrontation, you would
expect the US Congress to question the motives of the White House in pressing
for sanctions legislation against Iran for its modest nuclear program while
Pakistan, unsupervised and unregulated, goes berserk with an aggressive program
that plans to add 50 plutonium bombs per year to the 50 uranium bombs it
already has! But that would be the congress of a functioning democracy which
this farcical nation no longer has -- and hardly has had in matters of foreign
policy since the advent of Truman�s National Security State at the outset of
that other bogus war, the cold one.
This country -- its executive, legislative, and judicial
bodies -- is so steeped in bloody lies and malign hypocrisy that it hardly
turns a hair at the prospect of attacking yet another nation, whose people may
justifiably and historically resent the US but whose only wish is to keep its
wolfishness out of their national doors and be left in peace to solve their own
problems and manage their resources as they best see fit.
Luciana
Bohne teaches film and literature at Edinboro University of Pennsylvania. She
can be reached at lbohne@edinboro.edu.