Title: Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear
Spartan - November 5, 2006 09:04 PM (GMT)
What have I been saying for four years? Here it is. Live with it because eventually we will die by it.
Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear
~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2436948,00.html
~~~~~~~~~~~
By Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor
Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek atom technology
THE SPECTRE of a nuclear race in the Middle East was raised yesterday when six Arab states announced that they were embarking on programmes to master atomic technology.
The move, which follows the failure by the West to curb Iran’s controversial nuclear programme, could see a rapid spread of nuclear reactors in one of the world’s most unstable regions, stretching from the Gulf to the Levant and into North Africa.
The countries involved were named by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Tunisia and the UAE have also shown interest.
All want to build civilian nuclear energy programmes, as they are permitted to under international law. But the sudden rush to nuclear power has raised suspicions that the real intention is to acquire nuclear technology which could be used for the first Arab atomic bomb.
“Some Middle East states, including Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Saudi Arabia, have shown initial interest [in using] nuclear power primarily for desalination purposes,” Tomihiro Taniguch, the deputy director-general of the IAEA, told the business weekly Middle East Economic Digest. He said that they had held preliminary discussions with the governments and that the IAEA’s technical advisory programme would be offered to them to help with studies into creating power plants.
Mark Fitzpatrick, an expert on nuclear proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said that it was clear that the sudden drive for nuclear expertise was to provide the Arabs with a “security hedge”.
“If Iran was not on the path to a nuclear weapons capability you would probably not see this sudden rush [in the Arab world],” he said.
The announcement by the six nations is a stunning reversal of policy in the Arab world, which had until recently been pressing for a nuclear free Middle East, where only Israel has nuclear weapons.
Egypt and other North African states can argue with some justification that they need cheap, safe energy for their expanding economies and growing populations at a time of high oil prices.
The case will be much harder for Saudi Arabia, which sits on the world’s largest oil reserves. Earlier this year Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Foreign Minister, told The Times that his country opposed the spread of nuclear power and weapons in the Arab world.
Since then, however, the Iranians have accelerated their nuclear power and enrichment programmes.
ALSO IN THIS SECTION
Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear
Nuclear steps put region on brink of most fearful era yet
Treaty is left in shreds by new race
Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear
~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2436948,00.html
~~~~~~~~~~~
By Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor
Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek atom technology
THE SPECTRE of a nuclear race in the Middle East was raised yesterday when six Arab states announced that they were embarking on programmes to master atomic technology.
The move, which follows the failure by the West to curb Iran’s controversial nuclear programme, could see a rapid spread of nuclear reactors in one of the world’s most unstable regions, stretching from the Gulf to the Levant and into North Africa.
The countries involved were named by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Tunisia and the UAE have also shown interest.
All want to build civilian nuclear energy programmes, as they are permitted to under international law. But the sudden rush to nuclear power has raised suspicions that the real intention is to acquire nuclear technology which could be used for the first Arab atomic bomb.
“Some Middle East states, including Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Saudi Arabia, have shown initial interest [in using] nuclear power primarily for desalination purposes,” Tomihiro Taniguch, the deputy director-general of the IAEA, told the business weekly Middle East Economic Digest. He said that they had held preliminary discussions with the governments and that the IAEA’s technical advisory programme would be offered to them to help with studies into creating power plants.
Mark Fitzpatrick, an expert on nuclear proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said that it was clear that the sudden drive for nuclear expertise was to provide the Arabs with a “security hedge”.
“If Iran was not on the path to a nuclear weapons capability you would probably not see this sudden rush [in the Arab world],” he said.
The announcement by the six nations is a stunning reversal of policy in the Arab world, which had until recently been pressing for a nuclear free Middle East, where only Israel has nuclear weapons.
Egypt and other North African states can argue with some justification that they need cheap, safe energy for their expanding economies and growing populations at a time of high oil prices.
The case will be much harder for Saudi Arabia, which sits on the world’s largest oil reserves. Earlier this year Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Foreign Minister, told The Times that his country opposed the spread of nuclear power and weapons in the Arab world.
Since then, however, the Iranians have accelerated their nuclear power and enrichment programmes.
ALSO IN THIS SECTION
Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear
Nuclear steps put region on brink of most fearful era yet
Treaty is left in shreds by new race
Spartan - November 5, 2006 09:05 PM (GMT)
Nuclear steps put region on brink of most fearful era yet
By Richard Beeston
The Middle East is poised for a headlong rush into a new age. The players, their motives and the risks are analysed by our correspondent
IT IS one of the world’s most unstable regions, where conflicts over land, ideology and religion have raged for centuries.
Yet the Middle East may now be entering the most precarious era of its history, with the sudden rush by Arabs, Iranians and Turks to master nuclear technology and one day unlock the secrets to the atomic bomb.
Yesterday’s disclosure that Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and smaller states such as Tunisia and the UAE want to acquire nuclear technology was suspected for some time, but the headlong race into the atomic age came as a shock.
For months Arab leaders have been speaking out against nuclear proliferation in the region. Most wanted a nuclear-free zone to force Israel to give up its nuclear arsenal and to discourage Iran, which is pursuing a controversial atomic programme many suspect will give the regime a nuclear weapons capability.
But the calculations in the region changed dramatically this year. A far more strident Iran, under the leadership of President Ahmadinejad, defied pressure from the international community and began uranium enrichment work, which could be used to produce the fissile material needed to make an atomic weapon.
Then last month North Korea detonated a nuclear device, proving that even a country with limited resources can build an atomic weapon and use its nuclear status to blackmail the international community. In the case of North Korea the world did unite to place sanctions on the regime in Pyongyang. But so far the United Nations Security Council has failed to find a common approach on Iran, which defied a UN ultimatum more than two months ago and has yet to suffer any consequences.
Last night Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, said proposals by the European Union to impose very limited sanctions on Iran were too strong. Western diplomats fear the talks will drag on without any serious action being taken against the Iranian regime, which recently announced it had expanded its enrichment work.
The rest of the world has been watching these events with alarm, and nowhere more closely than in the Middle East. It is widely accepted that an Iran armed with nuclear weapons would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region. Tehran has most vocally spoken out against Israel and Mr Ahmadinejad once remarked that the country should be “wiped off the map”.
But even greater concern exists in Arab states. They fear the rise of Iran’s brand of Islam and the impact it is having on Shia brethren in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.
An Iran that is a member of the nuclear club would have far more clout in the region.
There is no evidence that the sudden interest by Iran’s neighbours and across the Arab world in nuclear technology is directly connected to Tehran’s own nuclear ambitions. But the coincidence is too great to ignore, particularly in a region blessed by huge oil reserves where costly nuclear energy has never been needed before.
A civilian nuclear programme would not give any of the countries automatic access to nuclear weapons but building up nuclear knowhow and training a core of nuclear physicists and technicians is a vital first step in that direction.
The first country to signal an interest in nuclear power was Turkey. In June Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister, announced the country planned to build three power stations by 2015, the first near the Black Sea coast town of Sinop by 2014.
Next came Egypt. President Mubarak told members of his ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) in late September that the time had come “for a serious debate” about a nuclear programme, which Egypt abandoned 20 years ago.
This week it became clear that the debate was over. During a visit to Moscow his Russian hosts were delighted to learn that he had decided to build up to four nuclear power stations and would consider bids from Moscow. The first Egyptian nuclear power plant is due to be completed at Dabaa by 2015.
Algeria is expected to be next in line. It already explored the possibility of nuclear power in the 1980s and is ready to pick up where it left off.
Most interest will be focused on Saudi Arabia, traditionally Iran’s main rival for control of the Gulf. The leadership has consistently cautioned about the dangers of nuclear expansion in the region. Now it has signalled that it too wants to join the club.
This year Prince Saud alFaisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, said that he was opposed to all nuclear expansion in the Middle East, be it for power stations or for weapons. Prince Saud told The Times: “We are urging Iran to accept the position that we have taken to make the Gulf, as part of the Middle East, nuclear-free and free of weapons of mass destruction. We hope they will join us in this policy and assure that no new threat or arms race happens in this region.”
Those hopes now appear doomed. In their place is the first evidence of a nuclear race beginning in the region and with it fears that the Middle East is entering the most dangerous period of its history
By Richard Beeston
The Middle East is poised for a headlong rush into a new age. The players, their motives and the risks are analysed by our correspondent
IT IS one of the world’s most unstable regions, where conflicts over land, ideology and religion have raged for centuries.
Yet the Middle East may now be entering the most precarious era of its history, with the sudden rush by Arabs, Iranians and Turks to master nuclear technology and one day unlock the secrets to the atomic bomb.
Yesterday’s disclosure that Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and smaller states such as Tunisia and the UAE want to acquire nuclear technology was suspected for some time, but the headlong race into the atomic age came as a shock.
For months Arab leaders have been speaking out against nuclear proliferation in the region. Most wanted a nuclear-free zone to force Israel to give up its nuclear arsenal and to discourage Iran, which is pursuing a controversial atomic programme many suspect will give the regime a nuclear weapons capability.
But the calculations in the region changed dramatically this year. A far more strident Iran, under the leadership of President Ahmadinejad, defied pressure from the international community and began uranium enrichment work, which could be used to produce the fissile material needed to make an atomic weapon.
Then last month North Korea detonated a nuclear device, proving that even a country with limited resources can build an atomic weapon and use its nuclear status to blackmail the international community. In the case of North Korea the world did unite to place sanctions on the regime in Pyongyang. But so far the United Nations Security Council has failed to find a common approach on Iran, which defied a UN ultimatum more than two months ago and has yet to suffer any consequences.
Last night Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, said proposals by the European Union to impose very limited sanctions on Iran were too strong. Western diplomats fear the talks will drag on without any serious action being taken against the Iranian regime, which recently announced it had expanded its enrichment work.
The rest of the world has been watching these events with alarm, and nowhere more closely than in the Middle East. It is widely accepted that an Iran armed with nuclear weapons would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region. Tehran has most vocally spoken out against Israel and Mr Ahmadinejad once remarked that the country should be “wiped off the map”.
But even greater concern exists in Arab states. They fear the rise of Iran’s brand of Islam and the impact it is having on Shia brethren in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.
An Iran that is a member of the nuclear club would have far more clout in the region.
There is no evidence that the sudden interest by Iran’s neighbours and across the Arab world in nuclear technology is directly connected to Tehran’s own nuclear ambitions. But the coincidence is too great to ignore, particularly in a region blessed by huge oil reserves where costly nuclear energy has never been needed before.
A civilian nuclear programme would not give any of the countries automatic access to nuclear weapons but building up nuclear knowhow and training a core of nuclear physicists and technicians is a vital first step in that direction.
The first country to signal an interest in nuclear power was Turkey. In June Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister, announced the country planned to build three power stations by 2015, the first near the Black Sea coast town of Sinop by 2014.
Next came Egypt. President Mubarak told members of his ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) in late September that the time had come “for a serious debate” about a nuclear programme, which Egypt abandoned 20 years ago.
This week it became clear that the debate was over. During a visit to Moscow his Russian hosts were delighted to learn that he had decided to build up to four nuclear power stations and would consider bids from Moscow. The first Egyptian nuclear power plant is due to be completed at Dabaa by 2015.
Algeria is expected to be next in line. It already explored the possibility of nuclear power in the 1980s and is ready to pick up where it left off.
Most interest will be focused on Saudi Arabia, traditionally Iran’s main rival for control of the Gulf. The leadership has consistently cautioned about the dangers of nuclear expansion in the region. Now it has signalled that it too wants to join the club.
This year Prince Saud alFaisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, said that he was opposed to all nuclear expansion in the Middle East, be it for power stations or for weapons. Prince Saud told The Times: “We are urging Iran to accept the position that we have taken to make the Gulf, as part of the Middle East, nuclear-free and free of weapons of mass destruction. We hope they will join us in this policy and assure that no new threat or arms race happens in this region.”
Those hopes now appear doomed. In their place is the first evidence of a nuclear race beginning in the region and with it fears that the Middle East is entering the most dangerous period of its history
KOKORO - November 7, 2006 01:10 PM (GMT)
yes very dangerous.
period.
eery body has problems with each other and most of these countries dont have democracy. mostly monarchy . And monarchy is kind of a dictatorship .
and having a weapon like that would cause very big problems.
<_< democratic countries would have problems but at the end they solve it.
but religiously managed or family managed countires would clash or start a war. if they have small arms thats ok but if they have biological or atomic power. this would efect every body in the world.....
as i know we dont have any planet to move???
Kaan.
period.
eery body has problems with each other and most of these countries dont have democracy. mostly monarchy . And monarchy is kind of a dictatorship .
and having a weapon like that would cause very big problems.
<_< democratic countries would have problems but at the end they solve it.
but religiously managed or family managed countires would clash or start a war. if they have small arms thats ok but if they have biological or atomic power. this would efect every body in the world.....
as i know we dont have any planet to move???
Kaan.
Nikephoros - November 7, 2006 05:17 PM (GMT)
You can see in the thread I scanned in the history section:
Dar-Al-Harb, Dar-Al-Islam a little about the muslim concepts of war. Unlike Western nations which are from a just war tradition, where wars need to be justified, even if the justification is lame; muslim nations have the concept of permament war inherited to them.
Obviously, it is not in my interest for any muslim nation to have nukes because they are alot more likely to get in the situation to use them.
Dar-Al-Harb, Dar-Al-Islam a little about the muslim concepts of war. Unlike Western nations which are from a just war tradition, where wars need to be justified, even if the justification is lame; muslim nations have the concept of permament war inherited to them.
Obviously, it is not in my interest for any muslim nation to have nukes because they are alot more likely to get in the situation to use them.
KOKORO - November 7, 2006 06:38 PM (GMT)
darp ül harp,
if u ask this word to people in turkey 70 000 000 people 69 990 000 would nt understand it. :doubt:
and darp ül islam is a idea to colect all islamic people to gether under one flag. but
there was a problem
nations !! turk is very difrent than a persian ( iran guys ) or a iraqi( arap).
or a lebanesse very difrent that egyption. so it didnt work. because in the first world war our muslim friends killed 700 000 turkish soldiers in arap deserts with english.
but people gater under one flag may times. mostly for gold . like crusiders.
even they atack constantianapolis. ! they look road is very far to jerusalem so lets atack the richcity.
Look at our war at istanbul. 1453. our Army was found of 20 000 regular soldiers. 30 000 iregulars from all around anatolia and arabic countries for gold ( 1/3 soldiers, 1/3 goverments,1/3 emperors) and 50 000 soldiers from balkans . greek clans bulgarians hungarian soldiers. all was under the flag of
ottoman for gold.
so biggest umbrella is gold and money . not harp not islam not chrinistianty.
gold is a good motivator.
nukes will be very big problem in the hands of arabs!!!
Kaan
if u ask this word to people in turkey 70 000 000 people 69 990 000 would nt understand it. :doubt:
and darp ül islam is a idea to colect all islamic people to gether under one flag. but
there was a problem
nations !! turk is very difrent than a persian ( iran guys ) or a iraqi( arap).
or a lebanesse very difrent that egyption. so it didnt work. because in the first world war our muslim friends killed 700 000 turkish soldiers in arap deserts with english.
but people gater under one flag may times. mostly for gold . like crusiders.
even they atack constantianapolis. ! they look road is very far to jerusalem so lets atack the richcity.
Look at our war at istanbul. 1453. our Army was found of 20 000 regular soldiers. 30 000 iregulars from all around anatolia and arabic countries for gold ( 1/3 soldiers, 1/3 goverments,1/3 emperors) and 50 000 soldiers from balkans . greek clans bulgarians hungarian soldiers. all was under the flag of
ottoman for gold.
so biggest umbrella is gold and money . not harp not islam not chrinistianty.
gold is a good motivator.
nukes will be very big problem in the hands of arabs!!!
Kaan
Socrates - February 2, 2007 02:55 AM (GMT)
Personally,I wish nuclear weapons didn"t exist.
But since they do,if only a few powers have them they can brow beat everyone into submission.We can"t have that either.
The Arabs deserve some security.Everyone around them has weapons (US,Israel,Pakistan,Russia).I actually feel that if they possed weapons they would instantly become more moderate since then they would gain prestige.
Nothing like a little self esteem to ease tensions. ;)
But since they do,if only a few powers have them they can brow beat everyone into submission.We can"t have that either.
The Arabs deserve some security.Everyone around them has weapons (US,Israel,Pakistan,Russia).I actually feel that if they possed weapons they would instantly become more moderate since then they would gain prestige.
Nothing like a little self esteem to ease tensions. ;)
KOKORO - February 2, 2007 07:32 AM (GMT)
monkeys must play with bananas not nukes.
arabs having nukes would be extremly dangerous.
arabs having nukes would be extremly dangerous.
D.E.A - February 3, 2007 03:18 AM (GMT)
Did you hear about the nuclear plans of.....Albania...Fyrom.....Bulgaria..... and finally Turkey...From what i know turkey plans building a nuclear power plant directly over the anatolian rift... I think that jimmys panousis(greek singer)was very right with one of his songs.... Gamate giati xanomaste(f*** now that we can)!! :roflmao: :roflmao:
As you see in case of emergency i have my "jet" ready... :P :vader:
As you see in case of emergency i have my "jet" ready... :P :vader:
Thermopyles - February 4, 2007 06:43 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| monkeys must play with bananas not nukes. arabs having nukes would be extremly dangerous |
:hahaha: :roflmao: Well I must say, nukes in the hands of ANYONE is extremely dangerous and unacceptable. But as long as only 1 country (especialy one already big and powerfull) has them, all bets are off. any nation can/should have them. Thats just reality... Wars since WWII have proven that if your the smaller guy, you better have an equalizer. No better equalizer than nukes (and ASAT cap imo).
So to expect a world with no nukes, as long as the biggest and most powerful have them is silly at best. :attention:
Thermopyles - February 4, 2007 06:45 PM (GMT)
DEA can you re-size you image down a bit please? Its making the page huge...
KOKORO - February 5, 2007 10:32 AM (GMT)
wauwww
it is a good jet but we Turkey have our F 4s still hahaha
long lasting newer ending modernized ones . by Ýsrael . we plan to fly them till year 2450.
and they become a multirole air to air atack capacity also air to ground air to sea and air to under sea capacity . ;)
it is a good jet but we Turkey have our F 4s still hahaha
long lasting newer ending modernized ones . by Ýsrael . we plan to fly them till year 2450.
and they become a multirole air to air atack capacity also air to ground air to sea and air to under sea capacity . ;)
D.E.A - February 5, 2007 10:59 PM (GMT)
well kokoro you know the jet i presented you is the phantom mk 64547465747868475657845687.64564546 version...HaH! GOTCHA!