The first thought that springs to my mind regarding the tamasha created by the Super Power America and the European Union, over the enrichment of Iranium, er, Uranium undertaken by Iran for military purposes is that the international community sets great store by India'sopinion and vote on the subject of Iran'sreferral to the UN Security Council. The Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (USA), Mr. Nicholas Burns has gone on record as saying: ?I think the record is clear that the United States considers India to be a great country and great countries make their own decisions based on their interests. The United States has the highest respect for the sovereignty of India. We know that India like all other countries makes decisions based on its own national interests. And we expect nothing less on this issue of Iran?. Burns also went on to say on the verge of the visit of the President George Bush to India: ?The fact that the two countries are becoming strategic partners is a very consequential development in international politics.? He further said: ?The two governments have worked very hard to put in place the foundation stone of a partnership that is going to change the face of international politics.? What a far cry and climb-down from the domineering, dominating and imperious sheen that America had acquired over all these years!
Coming back to the tamasha as I have earlier stated, it may not be as much of a tamasha as the word implies, considering the somewhat tepid and lukewarm attitude, adopted by the USA in its dealings with Iran, which is in stark contrast to the way he behaved with Iraq, a case of once bitten twice shy perhaps! After the Iraq episode one would have expected George Bush to retaliate and launch an all-out offensive and devastate Iran, but now he appears enfeebled, and is only resorting to referring the whole matter diplomatically and democratically to the United Nations Security Council, that too when he has concrete evidence that Iran has started its uranium enrichment programme whereas in Iraq he had to contend with only ambiguous reports of Saddam'spurported possession of weapons of mass destructions to justify his invasion, which were negated later on. Bush had flouted all norms when it invaded Iraq. It did so despite admonitions from the UN. However in the case of Iran'sambitious nuclear programme there is only a whimper of protest. Also Iran is a different kettle of fish altogether. It is the world'sfourth largest producer of oil in the world, has a population of 60 million, its city of Teheran can compete with the best in the world, having an ancient culture and a stable political environment. Further who has the moral authority to adjudge as to which country can produce nuclear weapons and which country should be debarred from doing so? For that matter most of the countries that have produced nuclear arms have violated the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty years ago. Do these countries presume that it is their sole bailiwick of going nuclear ?
It is also interesting to note that the United States of America cocks up its ears at the very mention of the word nuclear enrichment and it has cocked a snook at Iran for its possession of nuclear technology, whereas it is impervious to the enrichment of terrorism that is going on so brazenly and unabatedly in Pakistan. The US Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency George Schulte has said that Iran is innately evil (an adjective that is debatable) and simply will not be able to resist handing over the technology as well as a few bombs to Al Qaeda. This is a mere speculation. However, even if Iran does not supply its ammunition to the terrorists we cannot discount the possibility of some other country doing so. You cannot also discount the possibility of nuclear bombs falling into the laps of the terrorists through some other means. So where does America stand now? There is every distinct possibility of even the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qader Khan conniving with Al Qaeda and heaven forbid such an eventuality. So instead of displaying petulance at Iran, North Korea etc for their misdemeanour it is all the more imperative that America with all the paraphernalia of power that it has got at its command tries to decimate the root cause of their malady that is terrorism and trains its guns on Pakistan that is providing all the succor to the Al Qaeda and other terrorist organisations. If America and other European nations do not heed to this and take drastic steps to curb and totally eradicate terrorism, it will have to contend with disastrous consequences, that of nuclear terrorism, a case more serious and daunting than the prospect of a nuclear Iran. America is also to blame for this eventuality of Iran going nuclear because if America had not allowed Pakistan to go nuclear, Iran also would have had some difficulty in having the wherewithal of nuclear capability.
The Free Press Journal has this to say on the question of Iran'sattempt at going nuclear. Another element in the worsening West Asia scenario which is bound to cause alarm is the big win of the terrorist outfit Hamas in Palestinian elections. Both Hamas and the Iranian Prime Minister Ahmedinejad have often made publicly their resolve to wipe Israel off the map of the world. If Iran were to get its hand on a nuclear device, which seems most likely if the UN fails to do something to prevent it, only the Indian Left would rule out a very real threat of it becoming a huge menace to the world peace. Iran could well use the nuclear threat to settle the long simmering Israel-Palestine discord because according to an opinion poll released recently, nearly three quarters of Palestinians want the newly elected Hamas movement to drop its call for the destruction of Israel. The survey also found that 84 per cent of those surveyed in the West Bank and Gaza Strip want a peace agreement with Israel. Also 73 per cent of respondents believe that Hamas should change its position on the elimination of the state of Israel. After all, Israel has already evacuated from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and is this not what the Palestinians wanted?