HomeFeaturesDailyBriefingsRapidReconSpecial ReportsAbout Us

InBrief Archives

The Non-Deadline: Redrawing Lines In The Sand

While much was made over Iran’s self-imposed August 22 deadline to respond to the nuclear incentives deal offered by the United Nations Security Council’s ‘Permanent Five’ members and Germany, the real deadline imposed by the UNSC has been today, August 31, 2006. But, as has been noted over the period since Iran’s August 22 ‘multifaceted response’, that ‘deadline’ has been steadily losing its meaning. In fact, it could be plausibly suggested that, apparently sans consequences, it is no longer even a deadline at all.

Iran’s confident defiance is clear, as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeated the adopted Iranian mantra of nuclear rights saying, “The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and the violation of its rights.” The source of Iran’s confidence is the clear lack of Western resolve that is adroitly exploited by a clever Iranian regime.

China, Russia and France are expressing reluctance to impose sanctions on Iran regardless of any deadline agreed to within the Security Council. Seemingly erasing the meaning of a deadline, China’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Wang Guangya, said yesterday of Iran’s 11th hour response offered last week, “It has some ‘positive elements’ which we must study carefully.”

Traditional Western allies outside the ‘Permanent Five’ are also displaying a withering resolve as even Italy is showing signs of floundering on the issue. Said Italy’s Foreign Minister Massimo D’Alema, “If Iran is looking to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, it is not only legitimate, but can also clear the way for cooperation.”

But the difference between a civilian nuclear program and a military nuclear program are not in design or equipment differences, but merely what the output is used for. That Iran’s military is already in firm control of the Iranian nuclear program is a clear indicator of purpose. Italy’s foreign minister and others must therefore put their trust in an Iranian regime that is the world’s premiere state sponsor of terrorism. Though rarely spoken verbatim, the current conflict with Iran revolves not around materials or technology, but in fact trust.

Iran’s exploitation of differences among a conflict averse West, including today’s conveniently timed release of a Canadian-Iranian dissident from an Iran prison, continues to serve to diminish the effective meaning of today’s ‘deadline’ set by the Security Council.

While the United States has hoped for the deadline to be just that - a deadline - it remains clear that it was never to be recognized as such by other members of the Security Council. Russia is only now (again) ‘getting ready for’ talks on Iran, with a date for such talks not even yet determined on this, Iran’s so-called ‘deadline.’ Said a Russian source, “Preparatory work for the meeting of political directors of the sextet’s foreign ministries is underway. The meeting will be held, but its time and place are yet to be specified.”

So, while some headlines today - such as that from the Asia Times which reads “Time’s up for Iran on UN’s nuclear clock” - will suggest that today is the day that the Iranian nuclear program crosses a meaningful international threshold, clearly it will not.

Simply stated, there effectively is no deadline for Iranian compliance, as each time Iran crosses the line drawn in the sand without the desired answer in hand, the West merely redraws the line farther from the present, unprepared to match the Iranian regime’s will.


The UN is a useless but expensive body that needs to be abolished. Let Iran have its bomb. Have the President go on television like Kennedy did and proclaim that any attack on Israel by any outside force will be considered an attack against the United States with a full retaliatory response. Then when the ignorant and insane extremests in Iran use the bomb against us or Israel, we can turn them into a cinder which is what their government (made up of Islamic Shiite Fundementalists) really want anyway. If the Russians or the Frogs (French) help them in anyway, we take them out too.

Why do the world media keep repeating parrot fashion about Iran using nuclear energy for "peaceful purposes".
Islam divides up the world into two regions, a land of peace - those countries that are Islamic and under Sharia law, and a land of war - that is everywhere else.

It is the duty of jihad to spread peace everywhere - by violent means if necessary.

The hojattieh sect to which the President of Iran belongs takes this even further - wishing to engineer a great catastrophe in order to bring about the return of the "12th imam" who will lead mankind to a "universal peace" under Islam, of course.

So when Iran says they want the atom for peaceful purposes, they don't mean generating electricity, they mean forcing the whole world into islam - their definition of true peace.

Iran knows the western media will misunderstand - but that doesn't make their statements "lies" - it makes them taqiyyah.

I don't think Iran wants nuke weapons. I think they are about as transparent as a piece of glass.

I don't know the solution to this "drawing lines in the sand" though. Maybe just what guarantees that would allow other nations as Israel to live in a comfort zone.

The FM spokesman for Iran, Hamid Reza Asefi, condoled the US following an air crash earlier in the week. (Comments on Irna) I don't think that's the signal of a nation with bad intent. Neither is the release of a prisoner.

Can the Un agree on anything these days. Back in the 1940's the idea of a "league of nations" to represent ALL was a fantastic idea that worked! Now it only fizzles like a cheap sparkler. A deadline is a deadline. You either abide by it or don't make a deadline in the first place. Was all this talk about a deadline to distract from other conflicts that have gone a rye- hmmm I wonder?
Are there nukes there like IRAQ? Can we trust what comes out of anybody's mouth at the UN any more? It seems that fear mongering today has become more important than the truth- whatever or how ever you interpret it as.