Arabs Make Plans for Nuclear Power
VIENNA - As Iran races ahead with an illicit uranium enrichment effort, nearly a dozen other Middle East nations are moving forward on their own civilian nuclear programs. In the latest development, a team of eight U.N. experts on Friday ended a weeklong trip to Saudi Arabia to provide nuclear guidance to officials from six Persian Gulf countries.
Diplomats and analysts view the Saudi trip as the latest sign that Iran's suspected weapons program has helped spark a chain reaction of nuclear interest among its Arab rivals, which some fear will lead to a scramble for atomic weapons in the world's most volatile region.
The International Atomic Energy Agency sent the team of nuclear experts to Riyadh, the Saudi capital, to advise the Gulf Cooperation Council on building nuclear energy plants. Together, the council members - Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the seven sheikdoms of the United Arab Emirates - control nearly half the world's known oil reserves.
Other nations that have said they plan to construct civilian nuclear reactors or have sought technical assistance and advice from the IAEA, the Vienna-based United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, in the last year include Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Turkey and Yemen, as well as several North African nations.
None of the governments has disclosed plans to build nuclear weapons. But Iran's 18-year secret nuclear effort and its refusal to comply with current U.N. Security Council demands have raised concerns that the Arab world will decide it needs to counter a potentially nuclear-armed Iran. The same equipment can enrich uranium to fuel civilian reactors or, in time and with further enrichment, atomic bombs.
"There is no doubt that countries around the gulf are worried ... about whether Iran is seeking nuclear weapons," Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. representative to U.N. agencies in Vienna, said in an interview. "They're worried about whether it will prompt a nuclear arms race in the region, which would be to no one's benefit."
The United States has long supported the spread of peaceful nuclear energy under strict international safeguards. Schulte said Washington's diplomatic focus remained on stopping Iran before it could produce fuel for nuclear weapons, rather than on trying to restrict nations from developing nuclear power for generating electricity.
But those empowered to monitor and regulate civilian nuclear programs around the world are worried. Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the IAEA, warned Thursday that the surge of interest in sensitive nuclear technology raised the risk of weapons proliferation. Without singling out any nation, he cautioned that some governments might insist on enriching their own uranium to ensure a steady supply of reactor fuel.
"The concern is that by mastering the fuel cycle, countries move dangerously close to nuclear weapons capability," ElBaradei told a disarmament conference in Luxembourg.
Iran is the obvious case in point. Tehran this week defied another U.N. Security Council deadline by which it was to freeze its nuclear program. The IAEA reported that Iran instead was accelerating uranium enrichment without having yet built the reactors that would need the nuclear fuel. At the same time, the IAEA complained, Iran's diminishing cooperation had made it impossible to confirm Tehran's claims that the program is only for peaceful purposes.
That has unnerved Iran's neighbors as well as members of the Security Council.
"We have the right if the Iranians are going to insist on their right to develop their civilian nuclear program," said Mustafa Alani, a security expert at the Gulf Research Center, a think tank based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. "We tell the Iranians, 'We have no problem with you developing civilian nuclear energy, but if you're going to turn your nuclear program into a weapons program, we'll do the same.' "
Iran sought to rally Arab support for its nuclear program at the World Economic Forum meeting of business and political leaders this month in Jordan.
"Iran will be a partner, a brotherly partner, and will share its capabilities with the people of the region," Mohammed J.A. Larijani, a former deputy foreign minister, told reporters.
Arab officials were cool to his approach, however, and openly questioned Iran's intentions.
The IAEA team's weeklong foray to Saudi Arabia followed ElBaradei's visit to the kingdom in April. The Gulf Cooperation Council plans to present the results of its study on developing nuclear plants to the leaders of council nations in the Omani capital of Muscat in December.
"They don't say it, but everyone can see that [Iran] is at least one of the reasons behind the drive to obtaining the nuclear technology," said Salem Ahmad Sahab, a professor of political science at King Abdulaziz University in Jidda, Saudi Arabia. "If the neighbors are capable of obtaining the technology, why not them?"
Officially, leaders of the Arab gulf states say they are eager to close a technology gap with Iran, as well as with Israel, which operates two civilian reactors and is widely believed to have built at least 80 nuclear warheads since the 1960s. Israel does not acknowledge its nuclear arsenal under a policy aimed at deterring regional foes while avoiding an arms race.
Advocates argue that the gulf states need nuclear energy despite their vast oil and natural gas reserves.
The region's growing economies suffer occasional summer power outages, and the parched climate makes the nations there susceptible to water shortages, which can be offset by the energy-intensive processing of seawater.
"The promising future of nuclear energy in electricity generation and desalination can make it a source for meeting increasing needs," Abdulrahman Attiya, the Kuwaiti head of the Gulf Cooperation Council, told the group this week in Riyadh.
Attiya also cited long-term economic and environmental advantages to nuclear energy.
"A large part of Gulf Cooperation Council oil and gas products can be used for export in light of expected high prices and demand," he said. "It will also help to limit the increase in carbon dioxide emissions in the gulf region."
It remains unclear how many countries will carry through on ambitious and enormously expensive nuclear projects. In some cases, analysts say, the nuclear announcements may be intended for domestic prestige, and as a signal to Iran that others intend to check its emergence as a regional power. As a result, some analysts say fears of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East are overblown.
"Those who caricature what's going on as Sunni concern about a Shiite bomb are really oversimplifying the case," said Martin Malin, a nuclear expert at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, referring to Sunni Muslim-led Arab countries and Shiite Muslim-led Iran.
Aggressive international monitoring, he contended, could ensure that nuclear energy programs don't secretly morph into weapons capabilities.
"If what Jordan is really concerned about is energy, and the U.S. is concerned about weapons, all kinds of oversight can be provided," Malin said.
A Russian diplomat here similarly cautioned that Iran's influence on other nations' nuclear plans might be overstated. "I should be very cautious about any connection between these two things," he said. "We don't deny that even Iran has the right to peaceful nuclear activities."
Although enthusiasm for prospective nuclear programs appears strongest in the Middle East, governments elsewhere have displayed interest in atomic power after years of decline in the industry that followed the 1979 reactor accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and the far worse 1986 radiation leak at Chernobyl in Ukraine. About 30 countries operate nuclear reactors for energy, and that number seems certain to grow.
"There's certainly a renaissance of interest," said an IAEA official who works on the issue. "And there's likely to be a renaissance in construction over the next few decades."
IAEA officials say the largest growth in nuclear power is likely to occur in China, India, Russia, the United States and South Africa, with Argentina, Finland and France following close behind. The United States has 103 operating plants, more than any other country, and as many as 31 additional plants are under consideration or have begun the regulatory process.
And there are other nations in line. Oil-rich Nigeria and Indonesia are preparing to build nuclear plants. Belarus and Vietnam have approached the IAEA for advice. Algeria signed a deal with Russia in January on possible nuclear cooperation. Morocco and Poland are said to be considering nuclear power. Myanmar disclosed plans to purchase a Russian research reactor.
Even Sudan, one of the world's poorest countries, has expressed interest.
"When Sudan shows up, we say, 'You're in a real early stage and here's what you need. A law. Get people trained. Build roads. And so on,' " the IAEA official said.
So far, the nuclear programs around Iran are in the early planning stages. Alani, the security expert in Dubai, said most of the nations in the region were scoping out the possibilities but had made no final decisions or begun constructing facilities.
"They feel it's a right and significant move at least to put [their] foot in the door of civilian nuclear energy," he said. "It's not a race, not yet."
bob.drogin@latimes.com
daragahi@latimes.com
Drogin reported from Vienna and Daragahi from Dubai.
Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
17 Comments so far
Show AllThis is a comment to the dear writer who doubts the existance of other Jews in middle east other than the land of Israel or Palestine:
The Jewish Community in Iran is one of the oldest in the the Diaspora, dating back to the destruction of the First Temple at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. It has now been the witness of unique and unprecedented celebrations, of fourfold significance to Iranian Jews.
First of all, Iran is their home and they have shared its joys and sorrows. It is the resting place of their ancestors, and their holy shrines such as tomb of Daniel, Esther and Ezra are located here. Aside from that, parts of the Old Testament have either been written in this land or relate to it.
Secondly, the Iranian jews honour a Persian king who occupies the highest spiritual position in the religious literature of the Jews.
Cyrus the Great, as it is written in Ezra, c. I and Isaiah, c. 44-45, as well as in the last Chapter of Kings, has been given the titles of Shibban and Messiah by God, which even the prophets do not have.
I pray for peace and the day when all countries have done away with their weapons - ESPECIALLY THE NUCLEAR ONES.
dcbeltway: Funny that the first map on the list provided by you is actually a map of the 12 tribes of Israel.
Now seriously:
Palestine (from Latin: Palaestina; Hebrew: ×¤×œ×©×ª×™× ×” Palestina; Arabic: Ùلسطين Filasá¹Ä«n, Falasá¹Ä«n) is one of several names for the geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River and various adjoining lands. Different definitions for the region have been used over the past three millennia.
Other English names for this region include: Canaan, Land of Israel, Holy Land and Cisjordan
All I said is that in the last 2700 years there was no independent country by that name.
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&tab=wi&hl=en&q=antique+palestine+maps
Old maps of Palestine
dcbeltway:
"The only country that has been wiped off the map in the Middle East is Palestine. Check your atlases."
I checked all the historical atlases I could find. The only reference to an independent Palestinian state / country I found was during Biblical times. There was a Palestinian state in south west Israel (The aria of todays Gaza strip and its soundings). That nation was annihilated by the Assyrians in the late 7th century B.C.E. It's people, which were related to Greeks, are gone. The Biblical Palestinians had nothing to do with todays Palestinians who are Arabs that never had an independent state.
Judea itself was renamed Palestine my the Roman Emperor Adrian, who expelled the Jews from the country and tried to erase any trace of its indigenous people in 135AD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine.
Unlike your statement - many other ME nations and countries were erased from the map. Judea, Assyria, Babylon to name a few.
I hope that in the near future, a new peaceful Palestinian state will be created and thrive along side Israel.
The only country that has been wiped off the map in the Middle East is Palestine. Check your atlases.
pax4all - Agreed. A nuclear free world.
Though ideally I would keep a few nukes for planetary defense against asteroids, maybe in UN hands.
To my mind, it seems sensible to blame the bulk of the problem of the arms race on the insanely greedy & violent world bully, the USA (and it's anti-peace, anti-justice, anti-truth, stance; or in biblical terms: Goliath).
No country wants to be defenseless, with such a bunch of barbarians as we've got in charge of our pentagon and white house.
vets:
Actually, everything I said was true. Torture is against US law and there were Blacks in the US congress under a regime of extreme racism. So the US never tortures and American Blacks never suffered from sanctioned discrimination. Israel is worse on both counts. Israeli soldiers and prison guards torture habitually without fear of prosecution, and there are actual statutory advantages for Israeli Jews vs. non-Jews.
Let's end on a point of agreement: the best scenario is a nuclear free Middle East and, for that matter, a nuclear free world.
Pax4all : There are a few minor in inaccuracies in your comment.
Twenty some percent of Israeli citizens are Palestinians. They enjoy the same rights and freedoms of what you call "The rolling Jewish class", including the right to vote and be elected to the Knesset (The Israeli parliaments) and take part in the government. In fact, the only legal difference is that they are not forced into army service, but I hardly call that discrimination or primitive or compare it to other ME such as Iran's theocracy.,or to how other ME countries treat their Jews (If any are left at all)
As for torture - in September 6th 1999, the Israeli supreme court has ruled out any form of torture. Including type of torture used by the USA such as sleep deprivation , loud music, shaking etc. If you have any hard evidence of any torture given by any member of the Israeli security forces, after September 1999, I would recommend that you file a complain to the Israeli police with the details. (It can be done on-line)
You say: Let ME have Nuclear balance of powers, something similar to the MUD (Mutual Assurance Destruction) principle.
Even if some of the participants who have access to Nukes are what you describe as "Ahmadinejad is a nut"
I say - Let the ME be Nuclear free zone. (Israel should disarm, and all the rest prevented)
"vets", and any other gullible tools of US propaganda:
Ahmadinejad is a nut, but he never threatened to "erase Israel of [sic] the map". Get the original speech and give it to an objective Farsi translator.
To answer your question, a balance of nuclear power in the Middle East is preferable to the current situation in which a primitive, violent Middle Eastern regime uses its status as a top-five nuclear power to continue oppression and belligerence. Israel has a free press and a democratic form of government for the Jewish ruling class, but aside from that, they're a pretty typical Middle Eastern country. (torture, extra-judicial killing, arrest without charges, lack of due process, etc.)
It seems extremely hypocritical to tell Israel, India and Pakistan they can have nuclear weapons. But, in the same breath to tell Iran and North Korea they can't. It seems like the same old double standard we have always had. We threaten their future (with invasion) then penalize them for trying to defend themselves by developing the weapons to defend themselves. We are doing what amounts to the same thing with North Korea. It has to be one of the most ignorant foreign policies to come out of Washington! I personally am terrified at the thoughts of a unstable man like George W Bush having his finger on the nuclear weapons button. The man is a mental case.
Excellent point, iolellity. To look beyond oil as an energy source and come upon nuclear energy as a solution simply doesn't make sense: anyone with more than two neurons firing can see this is a sideways step into nuclear weapons. The NPT is a joke and the IAEA are a bunch of stooges talking out of their asses. If it weren't for Israel (and by proxy the U.S.), I doubt Iran or SA or UAE would be pursuing this folly. The issue of whether solar power would be a better choice is obvious, but--sadly--moot.
moonraven, Saila & iolellity
Your biased anti- Israeli opinion is crystal clear. Unlike the president of Iran who threatened to erase Israel of the map (I wonder how, if not by Nukes) - Israel never had a similar ambition to annihilate Iran (or any other country)
But forget for a second about your irrational hatred- do tell us, are you in favor of a nuclear Iran?
Are you in favor of a new nuclear arms race in the middle east?
I think we should focus our energy to convince Israel to dispose its nuclear arsenal. Instead of supporting Iran to acquire one, and by thus trigger a new nuclear arms race, which will involve also Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Nukes are evil. Don't support it.
The LA Times is intensely pro-Israel.
What a one-sided, fear mongering article. It must have been written by Israeli press or the American Enterprise Institute, aka, the Likud Center for Middle East War.
Exactly; the nuclear weapons of isreal and the united states (not to mention pakistan and india) are the reason why iran would legitimately want to protect itself. This article has a ridiculous bias, and also stupidly assumes that nuclear power is a good or practical choice in the first place. The climate of the middle east is really quite prime for solar energy...
What about Israel's nuclear weapons?
Considering that the government of Israel has threatened to use them against Iran--as has the US government--it seems much more likely that Gulf countries are concerned about nuclear fallout from the direction of Israel.
Jordan has been suffering the cancer outbreak caused by radiation from the Israeli nuclear power plant on the other side of the river for years.