The Qom Facility and International Law
Spencer Ackerman interviews some experts on the subject of whether Iran’s Qom nuclear facility could really have any non-weapons purpose and the basic consensus is that realistically it couldn’t. If the facility is of the scale that we’re being told it is, it’s too small to be something any reasonable person would want for electricity generation purposes. The trouble, as I was told yesterday by a European diplomat with experience on the legal aspects of such matters (and on the merits much more hawkish views on Iran than I have) is that these kind of appeals to common sense don’t have any clear legal force in terms of Iran’s commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
You can look at the economic logic of a civilian project and make inferences about what’s really motivating it, but that’s not what the standard is. The good news (again in legal terms) is that the UN Security Council has more-or-less carte blanche to regard situations as a threat to international peace based on their judgment, so it’s not as if legally-grounded international action is hamstrung by these considerations. But it’s a bit of a problematic situation; the fact of the matter is that the NPT gives countries a lot of latitude in terms of their nuclear activities.
31 Responses to “The Qom Facility and International Law”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 29th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Who. Fucking. Cares. If Iran wants a bomb, let them get a bomb. They’re being threatened on a regular basis by two violent, aggressive, nuclear-armed nations, one of which currently occupies two of its neighbors. They’d be crazy to not be building a bomb.
As for violations of the NPT, when India broke the treaty, we more or less agreed to subsidize their nuclear program. For that matter, the United States is not in compliance with the NPT, given that the NPT requires us to disarm.
September 29th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
This is the same crap we heard from the experts about Iraq.
So spare us Obama’s aluminum tubes OK?
Does the world want Iran to quit the NPT?
Hey then Tehran can play Israel’s game.
Instead Iran is living up to its treaty obligations to the letter.
Too bad the US doesn’t.
September 29th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
1) The USA can not allow Israel to build probably at least 100 nuclear weapons and then claim to be the world’s policeman on nuclear proliferation. Those Israeli nukes are a knife held at the throat of her neighbors –including Iran. This is what you get when corrupt politicans whore for the Israel Lobby — it greatly undermines any motivation China and Russia have to cooperate. Especially when China needs oil.
2) On the other hand, there is a SHITLOAD of information that the News media is NOT telling us — probably because they are too fucking stupid to recognize it.
3) Item 1: The facility appears to be 10 miles or so northeast of Qom. Which means that if you hit it with a nuke, you will probably contaminate one of the most holy sites in Shia Islam.
4) Item 2: Something here does not make sense. The facility is NOT buried under a mountain — the terrain there only has small hills (100 to 200 meters). Iran has MUCH better places in which to build a facility that would withstand an air attack. Although QOM is where they have much aerial defenses, military base and space launch sites.
5) However, it should also be noted that Iran could pose a nontrivial threat to the USA itself in 5 to 10 years, if given Chinese or Russian help. Iran launches to the south over the Indian Ocean. HOWEVER, satellites launched in that direction pass OVER the USA and approach from the SOUTH.
We have always expected nuclear ICBMs to come at us over the North Pole from Russia or China. Our ABM facility in Alaska is set up to intercept a Korean missile coming in from the west. I don’t know if we have much in the way of defenses (radar or ABM) to something coming in over Mexico. An Iranian satellite coming from that direction is kinda coming up our …er..backdoor.
IN February of this year, Iran launched a satellite (Omid) into orbit. It expects to refine its launcher by next year to put 330 Kg packages into orbit.
That’s roughly the weight of the 400 Kt USA W88 nuclear warhead — although Iran does not yet have fusion weapons nor does it have advanced small warheads of that small size.
September 29th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
India, Pakistan, and Israel never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, so they are incapable of violating it no matter how many nukes they have.
September 29th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
it’s too small to be something any reasonable person would want for electricity generation
I thought the basic premise of US anti-Iran warmongering was that Iran’s leaders are unreasonable people.
If they’re so unreasonable, as we’ve been repeatedly told by the warmongers they are, who’s to say on what scale they might choose to build a nuclear power-generating facility?
September 29th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
The second paragraph of the Wikipedia entry on the NPT shows the gaping hole in it:
Only four recognized sovereign states are not parties to the treaty: India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea. India, Pakistan and North Korea have openly tested and declared that they possess nuclear weapons. Israel has had a policy of opacity regarding its own nuclear weapons program. North Korea acceded to the treaty, violated it, and withdrew from it in 2003.
We would be in a much better, and far more moral, position viz-a-viz sanctioning Iran if we had first of all sanctioned ALL those nations who didn’t sign on to the NPT treaty in the first place. That is a far greater sin than signing on and then violating its terms. (Although the US, under Bush at least, made violating terms of any treaty almost a national obligation.)
September 29th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
A site called Ogle Earth has large images of the new Iran facility and a discussion of people analyzing it. I tried to give a link but CAP’s filters block it. Google should be able to give it to you.
You can also look at earlier imagery of it on Google’s map —
it is the two white buildings about 4 miles north-northwest of Khederabad (road formation looks like a tuning fork). Khaderabad is itself about 10 miles north east of Qum.
Of course, we all give $Billions to support the National Reconnaissance Office every year and if we asked THEM for any info, they would tell us it was “highly classified” and to bugger off.
September 29th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
If you zoom in on the new Iran site with Google’s map using the Satellite feature and then click on Google’s “Terrain feature” ,
you will see that facility is NOT “in a mountain” .
Those are fucking small hillocks about 40 meters high. That is NOT the terrain you chose if you’re trying to bury something deep — you look for something like those places in the Alps where the Swiss tunnel INTO a granite mountain near its base in order to get under 1000 feet of granites after they have tunneled 2000 feet or so in.
The US News Media is lying to us again. I wonder why.
September 29th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Hmmm. Maybe that can be my column for the WashPost’s Pundit Search. “How the Washington Post Lies to You”
September 29th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Iran is surrounded by Nuclear powers. India, Pakistan, Russia, Israel and the US all have nukes. Israel threatens to nuke Iran on a regular basis for attempting to acquire nuclear weapons, apparently oblivious to the immorality and irony. As others above stated, India and Pakistan ignored the NNPT and Israel doesn’t even admit what everyone knows, that it has a stockpile of a hundred or more nukes.
Still, Iran’s regime is a collection of nuts propped up by a gang of rapists. I’m totally opposed to war with Iran (or air-strikes or commando raids or whatever) but any pressure, sanctions or insults directed at that corrupt, phony regime is totally warranted.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Matt said: “The good news (again in legal terms) is that the UN Security Council has more-or-less carte blanche to regard situations as a threat to international peace based on their judgment,”
Yep, that is very good news for Iran, because Russia and China are not going to help remove an obstacle to American military dominance in the Middle East.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
It is truly amazing that the USA, France and the UK are willing to engage in blatent lies regarding Iran. The western democracies are failing.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
This Nonprofilartion threaty is a very unfair peace of paper, because it hardly demanded anything notable from the five threaty singing Nuclear powers. Still, if the Iran wants to get ouf this, without getting out of the threaty officially they can still argue with some merit that the five threaty singing Nuclear powers did not fulfill their part of the bargain to start lowering their nuclear arsenal with the ultimate goal to abolish Nuclear weapons.
In the way that the UN is not a court but a formalication of the international military power asymetries 60 years ago, which are still halfway in line with todays structures, the Un security council can if they want weasel arround anything. Since the five permanent members have to some extend a shared interest to stay the only five international accepted nuclear powers and also the only ones with a clearly world destroying second strike capacity ( most likely a couple of nukes are enough to start a nuclear winter anyway so that advantage is not that impressive) that might look appealing to some. But that would be a mistake. Countries accept the UNO as a compromise, more often than not with a very low level of normative commitment. Wont stay that way if the security council members abuse their position in the UNO on such an important matter in that way.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
N:
Still, Iran’s regime is a collection of nuts propped up by a gang of rapists. I’m totally opposed to war with Iran (or air-strikes or commando raids or whatever) but any pressure, sanctions or insults directed at that corrupt, phony regime is totally warranted.
Sanctions plus Saddam destroyed Iraq (not the “war on Iraq” as Peaceniks would have it) so I don’t know if sanctions are worth it, especially considering Iran has a sizable ongoing peaceful – so far – rebellion. I think it’s good we’re rethinking sanctions on Burma.
Still Israel will probably attack Iran which will be a disaster. And after Iran gets nukes, Egypt and the Saudis will too and everyone will have nukes.
The blithely indifferent refuse to acknoweldge Iran was/is killing American soldiers in Iraq and uses proxies Hamas and Hezbollah and ally-in-pariahship Syria to stir up trouble with the neighbors. It takes two to tango so if the Middle East blows up I’ll blame Israel and Iran.
Still they’re not stupidly suicidal as Saddam was. And they never invaded and annexed a member of the UN as Saddam did.
Also, we backed India b/c their arch-enemy Pakistan’s ISI gave us Osama. Seems logical.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Japan has the curious combination of a civilian full scale nuclear program and a civil aero space program that just happens to alow Japan too outbuild anyone expect the big 5 nuclear powers within 6 month. That is in no way substancially different from waht the Iran is doing. And still, i could never condem Japan for what they are doing. On the contrary, they deserve praise. Most other countries in their situation would have just built an outrigth nuclear aresanel, most likely arround the second biggest in the world.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
I can see three rational reasons why this might not be a weapons facility. First, if you wanted to test some new centrifuge technologies, you’d do it on a small scale. So it could be a research facility. Second, they may very well intend to expand it, and this is just the first stage of the project. Third, they may want to give themselves some capacity that’s more immune from bombing. They receive threats to bomb the Natanz facility on a weekly basis. Perhaps they just want a facility that can produce and stockpile fuel rods in case Natanz is destroyed. It would not have to be full scale because most of the fuel at Natanz would still be recoverable. It only has to make up the difference. And since the new facility is excess, all of the production could go into stockpiling.
Sure, it doesn’t make sense economically right now. But those economic calculations aren’t taking into account the risk that their primary facility is vulnerable to attack. Iran certainly needs to explain the reason for the new facility. And they need to allow it to be inspected regularly. But we shouldn’t automatically assume it’s for weapons production. There’s not much reason to worry yet. As long as there is adequate monitoring before the centrifuges start spinning, they won’t be able to divert the enriched uranium. And if it’s not enriched to weapons grade, it can’t be weaponized anyway.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
And still, i could never condem Japan for what they are doing. On the contrary, they deserve praise. Most other countries in their situation would have just built an outrigth nuclear aresanel, most likely arround the second biggest in the world.
After overthrowing apartheid, South Africa gave up nukes. And you have the miserable fucks in the comment section complaining that Iran is being bullyed. Iran, who just had a military coup, who bait loco Israel on a daily basis over the existence of the Holocaust and the legitimacy of Isarel as a country.
The Iranian regime will deserve everything it has coming to it. The Iranian people, however, who are fans of America will just turn against us over sanctions.
September 29th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Iran could not invade the USA if it wanted to, not even in a few years, but the US and Israel are threat to Iran. What could they possibly expect to gain starting a fight with the US anyway? Why should they not want nuclear weapons? To have them is pretty useless too but it would gain them prestige to be a nuclear power. MAD is still relevant I think.
September 29th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Re Poptarts at 17: “Iran, who just had a military coup”
————
Was that the military coup orchestrated by the CIA which overthrew the lawfully elected government of Iran and installed a puppet dictator on the Peacock Throne for several decades — so that US Oil Companies could steal the oil wealth of Iran while SAVAK tortured any Iranians who complained?
September 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
ISIS pics overlaid with google here
Interesting speculation on what the big pile of dirt means for speculation purposes.
September 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Re Poptarts at 14: “Still they’re not stupidly suicidal as Saddam was. And they never invaded and annexed a member of the UN as Saddam did.”
————-
Er.. Saddam invaded Kuwait at the open invitation of George H Bush’s Ambassador, April Gilespie.
And I don’t remember Ronnie Reagan being all that upset when Saddam invaded Iran and started gassing the Iranians after the Iranians kicked our puppet Shah (and our Oil Companies) out of Iran:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg
September 29th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Yeah, I’m half asleep, oops.
September 29th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Er.. Saddam invaded Kuwait at the open invitation of George H Bush’s Ambassador, April Gilespie.
Not according to Wikipedia. According to Gilespie, “Saddam was stupid.” Yep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Glaspie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg
Were you aware that during WWII the US was allied with Uncle Joe Stalin and the Soviet Union? Hypocrisy!
September 29th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Your point about the way the UN charter and the security council is being abused cuts both ways. By doing so the UN is undermined and then what is the point if it comes to be seen as illegitimate.
This is all quite reminiscent of 2002 with all the insinuations and the demands that Iran prove a negative. We are back to relying on the usual suspects as everyone starts to lose their heads.
Check out Scott Ritter’s careful analysis in the Guardian.
September 29th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
The treaty does not require us to disarm. It requires that we engage in good faith negotiations toward achieving a nuclear free world. For most of the period between ratification and the present, that has been the case SALT, SALT II, START and the post cold war disarmament agreements have reduced the US nuclear arsenal by around 90%.
September 29th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
The 5 nuclear powers were the principle vendors of nuclear power technology. The alternative was going to be the NPT or no assistance to the rest of the world in nuclear power development.
September 29th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Juan Cole suggests that the Iranian threat is overstated here.
Glenn Greenwald suggests that the Iranian threat is overstated here.
Ron Paul suggests that the Iranian threat is overstated here.
Scott Ritter suggests that the Iranian threat is overstated here.
September 29th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Re Njorl at 25: “For most of the period between ratification and the present, that has been the case SALT, SALT II, START and the post cold war disarmament agreements have reduced the US nuclear arsenal by around 90%.”
—————–
That is the story but it is kinda bullshit when you look at strategic arms — including those stored in the bunkers at Pantex.
See the chart at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States#Current_status
That link also notes that Bush’s acts to maintain a large US nuclear inventory into the distant future — the intent of his Reliable Replacement Warhead program — is a violation of the NPT by the US government.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
The NPT is not binding for the same reason international law of any kind is a joke. The strong do what they will and the weak can go suck an egg. That’s life.
Nuclear weapons kept the peace in the aftermath of WWII. Between 1914 and 1945, the world was in a constant state of chaos with various powers jockeying for regional and global supremacy. Nuclear weapons helped eliminate the desire to make empires by making plainly obvious the natural conclusion to total war. It’s silly to pine for a world without nuclear weapons now that the cat’s out of the bag. You might as well hope for a world without death.
That said, Iran is a corrupt, wicked regime that tortures and rapes its own citizens to cower them into submission. Talk of reconciliation with this regime is every bit as naive and idiotic as talk of bombing Iran. All anyone can do is wait for Iran to change it’s government. Until then, sanctions (as tough as China and Russia will allow) tough rhetoric and calls for Iran to stop being assholes are all anyone can do.
September 30th, 2009 at 12:22 am
yeah, I guess it’s pretty silly the way I pine for a world without the threat of global annihilation.
October 2nd, 2009 at 8:04 pm
[...] from “The Qom Facility and International Law“, Matthew Yglesias, Think Progress, 29 September 2009 — As usual with Yglesias website, [...]