|
29 July 2010 By Kourosh Ziabari
It's more than 8 years that the world's newspapers are
filled with miscellaneous news, reports and
commentaries concerning Iran's nuclear program.
Controversy over Iran's nuclear program has spanned
through two administrations in Iran: ex-President
Mohammad Khatami's government and the incumbent
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's administration. The
term "Iran nuclear program" returns more than 6
million results in Google web search. Thousands of
scholars, journalists, politicians and political
pundits have made their own statement regarding this
debatable subject.
Terminologically, Iran's nuclear program calls to mind
the words holocaust, Israel, Zionism, Axis of Evil,
George W. Bush, stretched hands and uranium
enrichment. The world is watching the uninteresting
continuation of confrontation over Iran's nuclear
program and the opportunist journalists find this
tedious charade the best subject to entertain their
readers and enrich their portfolio.
Iran says that it needs enriched uranium to meet its
energy demands and produce electricity. The United
States and its European allies claim that Iran wants
to produce nuclear weapons in order to launch a
military strike against Israel. Israel, over the past
5 years, has been incessantly threatening Iran with a
preemptive attack, warning that it would not allow
Iran to achieve nuclear technology.
The United Nations Security Council, under the
pressure of United States and its stalwart allies, has
imposed 4 rounds of backbreaking financial sanctions
against Iran to dissuade it from developing "nuclear
weapons". Iranian officials have repeatedly rejected
the claims that they're moving towards developing
nuclear weapons and called the sanctions ineffective,
valueless.
These scenarios have been taking place over the past 8
years repeatedly and there was not a single
magnanimous politician to put an end to the exhausting
war of words between Iran and the West categorically.
There are only two possibilities which can terminate
Iran's nuclear deadlock. The first solution is that
Iran has to withdraw from its nuclear accomplishments
and submit to the calls of Western politicians by
giving up its uranium enrichment program. The other
solution would be the West's abandonment of its
uncompromising stance by accepting a new nuclear power
in the Middle East.
Both of the solutions, however, seem to be impractical
and unattainable as none of the parties involved in
Iran's nuclear standoff have so far shown any sign of
flexibility and reasonability. The West staunchly
insists that Israel should remain the sole possessor
of nuclear weapons in the Middle East and the
employment of nuclear energy by the other countries,
even for peaceful purposes, violates the policy of a
Middle East with an unrivaled nuclear Israel. Iran, on
the other hand, insists that it would never accede to
halt its uranium enrichment program in lieu of
receiving a certain amount of uranium enriched by a
third country to be consequently transferred to Iran
to be used in the nuclear reactors in Bushehr and
Natanz.
Both sides of the game continue to stick to their
stubbornness and adamancy. None of them retreat from
their stances which have been indicated a number of
times that are baseless and unfounded. The game which
they've started has no winner. It's a "lose-lose"
competition. Amidst their erosive and probably
unending clashes, the Iranian people seem to be the
only loser. They're the ones who should tolerate the
intolerable consequences of financial sanctions.
They're the ones who will be deprived of the barest
rudiments of their daily life as a result of the
financial sanctions which are purportedly imposed on
the government of Iran.
The Iranian people are the only loser of power game
between Iran and the West. They're competing to
surmount each other in a nonstop match which is
designed to show the most powerful competitor.
Once the turn comes to boasting of respecting the
human rights and freedom, the Western leaders chant
that they want the well-being, liberty and safety of
the Iranian people. Once it's time to keep silent and
watch, they interfere disturbingly and affect the
political destiny of a nation. I'm referring to Iran's
June 2009 presidential elections in which the Western
politicians blatantly took the side of the reformist
candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi and made an opposition
figure out of him, laying the groundwork for his being
demonized domestically; however, once it's time for
them to take action and prevent the Iranian nation
from being affected by the grave consequences of a
meaningless power game, they vote in favor of a fourth
round of financial sanctions against Iran unilaterally
and prove that their claims are drastically futile and
unrealistic.
The only losers of this power game are the ordinary
Iranian people. There's no doubt about that. - Kourosh Ziabari is an Iranian
freelance journalist and media correspondent. He has
interviewed political commentator and linguist Noam
Chomsky, member of New Zealand parliament Keith Locke,
Australian politician Ian Cohen, member of German
Parliament Ruprecht Polenz, former Mexican President
Vicente Fox, former U.S. National Security Council
advisor Peter D. Feaver, Nobel Prize laureate in
Physics Wolfgang Ketterle, Nobel Prize laureate in
Chemistry Kurt Wüthrich, Nobel Prize laureate in
biology Robin Warren, famous German political prisoner
Ernst Zündel, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff,
American author Stephen Kinzer, syndicated journalist
Eric Margolis, former assistant of the U.S. Department
of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts,
American-Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud and the
former President of the American Motion Picture Arts
and Sciences Sid Ganis. |