Iran News and Discussions

[Johann]

However,here is no doubt whatsoever that the western media,BBC and US in particular,have tried to show that Ahmedinejad rigged the polls.

This is sort of like saying there is no doubt that Western media have tried to show that Sharukh Khan is popular in India.

The story isn't what Western commentators think - it is that the Islamic Republic's own ex-President Khatami called the vote rigged, as did the two other major candidates, one an ex-prime minister, and the other a twice-over speaker of parliament, plus one of the Grand Ayatollahs of Shi'i Islam, plus any number of prominent Iranian figures, secular and religious alike.

Even Khamenei, the 'supreme leader of the revolution' have dismissed Ahmadinejad and the IRGC's claims that the Iranian political elite's objections to the elections were driven by the West or any outsiders because its too ridiculous to be taken seriously.

[Johann]

Iranian President Ahmedinejad's spiritual mentor, Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi on the religious sanctioned permissibility of raping both male and female prisoners in custody .

If this is not Israeli misinformation, then it is simply disgusting that a man of the cloth holds such views to be religiously sanctioned :

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners

I don't know if this particular fatwa is accurate, but there have been secret fatwas issued since the early 1980s by the most radical clerics to their allies in the revolutionary security forces. The most infamous were usually regarding the secret trials and mass executions of political prisoners of which there were two waves, one in 1979-81, and another in 1988.

As far as women are concerned it is Islamic customary belief that a murdered virginal Muslim woman will go straight to heaven - in order to deny enemies of the state that kind of martyr's status unmarried/virgin women prisoners were forced in to marriage with their jailors, who of course were legally allowed, and expected to consummate their 'marriages' before execution.

One of the best books on the radical mullahs approach to prisons, and particularly political/religious prisoners was written by an Iranian sociologist who fled to France, Chahla Chafiq.

Her book Le Nouvel Homme Islamiste: La Prison Politique en Iran (The New Islamist Man: The Political Prison in Iran) was published in 2002, and you can read a review, here

http://www.aljadid.net/reviews/0942tarabishi.html

It remains to be said that the fate of women in the prisons of the Iranian Islamic Revolution is worse than the fate of men. It is not necessarily because women are less resistant and less tolerant to torture, but because women are considered from the theological perspective of the Iranian regime to be an element of seduction, and their bodies a place of evil and impurity. The torture of a woman's body may take the form of rape.

...In fact, raped women were often executed. A woman's rape is frequently the last act that precedes her execution. This is explained by the rule in Iranian political prisons that the sentence of execution cannot be carried out if the woman is a virgin. Since there is a theological belief that if a woman dies a virgin she will go to heaven, the politically active virgin is forced to "marry" before her execution and thus to insure she will go to hell. She is forced to "marry" the hangman who will carry out her execution.. This marriage is conducted as a legitimate and official contract which includes, among other things, an estimated dowry. This "dowry" is subsequently paid to the family of the victim; it simultaneously becomes the equivalent of an official notification that she was executed.

See also this letter by an Iranian feminist Shadi Sadr arrested and released a few weeks ago in Iran responding to Karroubi's accusations of rape against the government. http://iranianvoicesintranslation.blogs ... ainst.html

Published reports are available about these types of torture committed against women political prisoners after the 1979 Revolution. The most systematic type of reported rape has been the rape of virgin girls who were sentenced to death by execution because of political reasons. They were raped on the night before execution. These reports have been substantiated by frequent statements from the relatives of women political prisoners. On the day after the execution, authorities returned their daughter’s dead body to them along with a sum considered to be the alimony. Reports state that in order to lose their virginity, girls were forced to enter into a temporary marriage with men who were in charge of their prison. Otherwise it was feared that the executed prisoner would go to heaven because she was a virgin!

Years later, [Reynaldo] Galindo Pohl, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights, who had been assigned to examine human rights violations in Iran, emphasized the following in his report: “Virgin women who are sentenced to death are forced to enter into a marriage with a man. They lose their virginity before execution. Concerning this matter, the special reporter for the commission on torture would like to emphasize that rape is a form of torture.”*

Nevertheless, up to now, no fatwa [edict] has been issued concerning this systematic torture, and no documentation has been offered regarding its specific cases.

So while this particular story of fatwa may be anti-mullah propaganda, there is more than enough evidence of similar long standing policies documented by Iranians.

[Ameet]

Raped and beaten for daring to question President Ahmadinejad’s election

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 829921.ece

Ardeshir — not his real name — is one of scores, perhaps hundreds, of detainees who have been raped and tortured by their jailers in the past three months in what appears to be a systematic attempt to break their will.

Every other day Basiji would choose detainees from the cell to rape. “The third time they dragged me from the cell, I momentarily escaped their grip and ran to a corner. I screamed, ‘You say you are Muslim. How can you rape and humiliate us in this way?’. They laughed and said they had religious sanction from the Leader [Ayatollah Khamenei] to do so because we had gone against his word.

[Sadler]

Iranian President Ahmedinejad's spiritual mentor, Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi on the religious sanctioned permissibility of raping both male and female prisoners in custody .

If this is not Israeli misinformation, then it is simply disgusting that a man of the cloth holds such views to be religiously sanctioned :

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners

by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz

(IsraelNN.com) A highly influential Shi'a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime. .......................

"Can an interrogator rape the prisoner in order to obtain a confession?" was the follow-up question posed to the Islamic cleric.

Mesbah-Yazdi answered: "The necessary precaution is for the interrogator to perform a ritual washing first and say prayers while raping the prisoner. If the prisoner is female, it is permissible to rape through the vagina or anus. It is better not to have a witness present. If it is a male prisoner, then it's acceptable for someone else to watch while the rape is committed."

This reply, and reports of the rape of teen male prisoners in Iranian jails, may have prompted the following question: "Is the rape of men and young boys considered sodomy?"

Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi: "No, because it is not consensual. Of course, if the prisoner is aroused and enjoys the rape, then caution must be taken not to repeat the rape."

A related issue, in the eyes of the questioners, was the rape of virgin female prisoners. In this instance, Mesbah-Yazdi went beyond the permissibility issue and described the Allah-sanctioned rewards accorded the rapist-in-the-name-of-Islam:

"If the judgment for the [female] prisoner is execution, then rape before execution brings the interrogator a spiritual reward equivalent to making the mandated Haj pilgrimage [to Mecca], but if there is no execution decreed, then the reward would be equivalent to making a pilgrimage to [the Shi'ite holy city of] Karbala." .........................

Arutz Sheva

Just out of curiosity. What made you think it was israeli misinformation? Knowing what this forum knows about islamic texts and the acts of mohammad himself, would it not be logical to first believe that it was indeed the truth before seeking an alternative explanation?

Further, after reading the ensuing posts about iranian mollah fatwas, do you now believe that your statement about the news article being israeli misinformation (or disinformation) premature?

"..........then it is simply disgusting that a man of the cloth holds such views to be religiously sanctioned :"

Further, why is the man of the cloth disgusting, if his fatwas are based on his own correct interpretion of his religious texts and the acts of mohammad.

[csharma]

Even more shocking.

'I wed Iranian girls before execution'

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? ... 2FShowFull

In the Islamic Republic it is illegal to execute a young woman, regardless of her crime, if she is a virgin, he explained. Therefore a "wedding" ceremony is conducted the night before the execution: The young girl is forced to have sexual intercourse with a prison guard - essentially raped by her "husband."

"I regret that, even though the marriages were legal," he said.

Why the regret, if the marriages were "legal?"

"Because," he went on, "I could tell that the girls were more afraid of their 'wedding' night than of the execution that awaited them in the morning. And they would always fight back, so we would have to put sleeping pills in their food. By morning the girls would have an empty expression; it seemed like they were ready or wanted to die.

"I remember hearing them cry and scream after [the rape] was over," he said. "I will never forget how this one girl clawed at her own face and neck with her finger nails afterwards. She had deep scratches all over her."

[sanjaykumar]

Ain't the human race wonderful?.

[Rony]

Iran blackmailing India ?


Peace pipeline not waiting for India

Iran's ambassador to India says an offer for New Delhi to rejoin a multi-billion dollar gas pipeline deal will not stay on the table for an 'unlimited period'.

Iran's top diplomat in the South Asian country confirmed that China was interested in the Peace Pipeline project.

"Yes it is true [that China has shown interest in the deal]. We hope that this tripartite agreement is settled soon so that we do not have to talk with anyone else," he said.

[Sanjay M]

Iran Warns India Pipeline Could Go to China

We could just as easily warn them that the safety of any pipeline running through disputed territory belonging to India may not be guaranteed.

I'd love to see what the Iranians would do if we started shelling any pipeline running through POK. I don't see any other route that the Iranians could use to get to China.

[Satya_anveshi]

IMO, Obama is craving for irani blood just as Bush craved for iraqi blood. Most of us have been wondering anyway..when will Obama will adorn his favorite hat, drumming up the passions of his janta, as that is the sole skill he has and he will not miss using it.

Guest Post: The Next Crisis Nobody Is Talking About

[Sanjay M]

Here it is - the war you've all been waiting for:




I think we need to discuss the implications of such a conflict, and its repercussions for the region and beyond.

What would the repercussions of this war be for India?

(Alright, we know there'll be higher oil prices, with Unmanlymohan Singh bleating helpessly about the plight of the Common Man. But what else?)

I'm thinking that if the Iranian tiger is wounded (we know it won't be killed), then it will turn into a deadly man-eater.

Iran's wrath would make the US presence in Afghanistan and Iraq untenable.
Saudi participation in Israel's military action will mean that it too will not escape unscathed.

Ironically, Ahmedinejad will relish the upswell of national outrage that he can then surf while waving an angry fist at the West. I think he's already planning for it.

[A_Gupta]

FYI, there is a August 2005 fatwa from Ayatollah Khamenei that the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons is against Islam.

I haven't seen any discussion of the full import of that fatwa, the reasoning on which it is based, its reception among the other Ayatollahs, etc., but was hoping that someone somewhere has that information.

[CRamS]

Sanjay M:

I am trying to understand this Iran thingy. Couple of indisputable facts, whether or not US govt mouthpiece media mention them or not:

1) Iran is NOT a threat to USA, it is the pro-Israel lobby in US that is driving this Iran paranoia.
2) My sampling is significant to the extent that I have noticed Iranains are the TFTA variety, and will easily Gubo just like the Paki TFTA if only US showers them a modicum of respect. But as I said above, the Israel factor complicates US policy.
3) This clown Ahmadinejad could very well be Saddam Hussein redux, i.e., lots of tough talk like "mother of all battles" and then abject surrender once attacked.

But that said, some uncertanties in my mind:

1) Why haven't US/Israel, and their little western puppy dogs: France/UK etc, taken out Iranian nuke sites if any? Surely, its not because of fear of Iranian retaliation?
2) Could it be as I mentioned above that US is waiting for the Iranian TFTA threshold to tip the scales against the more hardline Isalmists like Ahmadinejad in which case Iran falls into USA's hip pocket?

Bottom line: I am not sure there will be any melodrama besides tough talk. Iran will be castrated and will cave in. They are up against a determined Israel, and by default US.

[Sanjay M]

The fatwa is academic. What matters is how the geopolitical landscape will change, after Israel and/or the US bomb Iran.

What will happen to the US/NATO mission in Afghanistan?
I expect that the Europeans will loudly criticize the military strike on Iran, and will hasten their pullout from Afghanistan when the Iranian retaliation there provides additional excuse.

In the face of international backlash against it due to the attack on Iran, the US will quickly rush to put pressure on Israel over the Palestinian dispute.

AlQaeda, while having no great love for Iran, will nevertheless be galvanized by the bombing of Iran to renew jihad against the American infidel. Remember that it was the first Gulf War that triggered AlQaeda's jihad against the USA.

AlQaeda would definitely ride the worldwide backlash against the bombing of Iran to further its recruitment and its operations against the US.
While the new Whitehouse tries to differentiate Taliban from AlQaeda, it seems that the Taliban would also echo the call for worldwide jihad against the American infidel. US attempts at rapprochement would crumble and be spurned by an uncompromising Taliban drive for complete victory.

Pakistan would obviously feel deep repercussions too, as popular outrage against an attack on yet another Islamic country puts an embattled Zardari on the ropes. Zardari would similarly go the way of Musharraf, faciliating the return to power of the less cooperative Nawaz Sharif. The less "sekoolar" Nawaz will be more interested in showing the US the door.

I'd further expect another big fallout to be in Turkey, which has a budding Islamist political dispensation in power. They would also capitalize on the upswell of popular outrage to gain leverage against their "sekoolar" opponents in the military.

With a collection of not-so-friendly govts around the world, it's difficult to see how Obama's teflon would stay untarnished, especially given the scope of his policy ambitions.

Iran has the potential to make Obama a one-term president, as it did for his predecessor Jimmy Carter.

[Sanjay M]

Sanjay M:

I am trying to understand this Iran thingy. Couple of indisputable facts, whether or not US govt mouthpiece media mention them or not:

1) Iran is NOT a threat to USA, it is the pro-Israel lobby in US that is driving this Iran paranoia.
2) My sampling is significant to the extent that I have noticed Iranains are the TFTA variety, and will easily Gubo just like the Paki TFTA if only US showers them a modicum of respect. But as I said above, the Israel factor complicates US policy.
3) This clown Ahmadinejad could very well be Saddam Hussein redux, i.e., lots of tough talk like "mother of all battles" and then abject surrender once attacked.

But that said, some uncertanties in my mind:

1) Why haven't US/Israel, and their little western puppy dogs: France/UK etc, taken out Iranian nuke sites if any? Surely, its not because of fear of Iranian retaliation?
2) Could it be as I mentioned above that US is waiting for the Iranian TFTA threshold to tip the scales against the more hardline Isalmists like Ahmadinejad in which case Iran falls into USA's hip pocket?

Bottom line: I am not sure there will be any melodrama besides tough talk. Iran will be castrated and will cave in. They are up against a determined Israel, and by default US.

You must be dreaming. Your comments advertise your ignorance.

The US does not have the spare military power to bring to bear for regime-change in Iran.
The most they can do is pull off a bombing attack that wounds and inflames the Iranians.
Even if Israel goes it alone in bombing Iran, the US will bear the brunt of the fallout, given its role as Israel's patron state.

In my opinion, the Obama administration will feel so stung by the international backlash following the bombing of Iran, that their internal political solidarity will crumble.
The Atlanticist coterie will rush to appease the backlash by quickly demanding strong pressure against Israel.
The Jewish lobby will immediately balk and bolt from the camp, coalescing around Hillary and backing her as a rival pole against Obama. A schism will emerge within the administration that will severely weaken it.
I'm sure that Hillary wouldn't mind running against a beleaguered Obama in 2012, since the Republican candidates will all be 2nd-raters anyway.

[CRamS]

You must be dreaming. Your comments advertise your ignorance.

Dreaming of some imaginary "Atlanticist" conspiracy has delted your grey cells; I look at facts on the ground, and the only immutable facet in US outlook: "econommic/political interests of itself and those of its western lackeys (call it western triablism or white brotherhood if you want)", to come to conclusions.

The US does not have the spare military power to bring to bear for regime-change in Iran.
The most they can do is pull off a bombing attack that wounds and inflames the Iranians.
Even if Israel goes it alone in bombing Iran, the US will bear the brunt of the fallout, given its role as Israel's patron state.

Rubbish. The only constraint US faces is how to keep any damage, I mean in political terms to an absolute minimum. Militarily, US can bomb the living s@it out of Iran to smithreens. And like Muammar Quaddafi & Saddam Hussein before him, Ahmadinejaad will go down huffing and puffing or surrender. Although I must admit, he does exhibit much more honesty and self respect and genuine self confidence than other tin pots.

In my opinion, the Obama administration will feel so stung by the international backlash following the bombing of Iran, that their internal political solidarity will crumble.

Oh yeah, US gives a rat's behind for the "international community"? Since when? And please, who exactly constitute this "international community"? Sarkozy and Brown were competing with each other recently in Pittsburgh on who can impress their bigh brother USA more with their Iran bashing. Thus, as in all international affairs that have to do with non-whites, all the white boys will gang up. And what can the non-whites do? As I said either scream "mother of all battles", and then line up for visas in droves to beg to be let in Washington, London, and Paris.

The Atlanticist coterie will rush to appease the backlash by quickly demanding strong pressure against Israel.

Oh, please this Atlancist farting agaisn, and cut this "Oh my, poor Israel" balderdash; they are sitting pretty and dictating terms, thank you very much.

[Rudradev]

This is how I'd like to see the Iran scenario play out (though with the current bunch of weevils at the Indian PMO, it's all but impossible that such a thing will materialize). Anyway...

March 2010: The American economy has been steadily tanking for nearly two years, health insurance reform is at a gridlock, and despite Obama's floweriest pronouncements, joblessness has hit bottom and stayed there. Rahm Emmanuel, David Axelrod and their Gestapo of thuggish character-assassins are seriously panicked, with the Congressional mid-term elections just a few months away. No convenient Republicans to blame things on now!

The conservatives are still shrilly hyping the issue of Iran's nuclear program... but any moment now they might decide to focus on the real issues instead, the ones that could lead to a sound thrashing of the Democrats in November. Clawing desperately for a distraction, the President gives the Israelis a long-awaited all clear to take out Iran's nuclear facilities.

March 6, 2010: Israeli F-16s take the familiar route over the Saudi desert, then transit the friendly airspace of US-occupied Iraq. They flatten the much-photographed facility at Natanz. Absent an Iranian S-300 system, they return to base with no casualties.

Less noticeably, but equally destructively, USN-launched SLCMs converge on a suspected underground site near Kushk-e-Bahram, some 50 km north of Qom, where the CIA has determined with 399.99% probability that another, parallel enrichment facility is supplying fissile material to the Iranian bomb program. Military-enthusiast websites are agog with debates on whether the SLCMs came from a US sub or an Israeli one, and many photoshopped pictures are attempted to be passed off as the real thing. But nobody knows for sure what happened there.

The nose-cam footage and satellite pictures of the Natanz strike dominate the 24-hour cable news shows for an entire week, intercut with shots of huge crowds of enraged Iranians protesting in public.

March-April 2010: Despite much frenzied rhetoric at the UN by Iranian and Syrian diplomats, and much shifty-eyed hedging by Saudis and Egyptians, there are no significant repercussions to the Israeli action. Gaza heats up and quickly cools down after a visit by Merkavas. European greens protest outside the US and Israeli embassies of their nations, enacting their politically correct Rites of Spring. By late April, the news has become old, even though pro-Democrat anchorpersons like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann continue to trumpet the President's "decisive action" and "strategic foresight" in crippling Iran's nuclear ambitions forever.

May 11 2010: At 9:45 GMT, startled seismographs in the trans-Caspian, Persian Gulf and Caucasian regions record a pattern of disturbances and aftershocks that could only have come from an underground nuclear explosion. A really, really large nuclear explosion, somewhere in the rocky desert south of Semnan in Northern Iran.

As telephones ring in Western capitals and bleary-eyed functionaries stumble to their stations at the CIA, Pentagon and State Department, it becomes some poor soul's job to wake the President with the bad news.

The conclusion is inescapable. The Iranians have just tested a 500 kT thermonuclear device near Semnan.

Satellites detect that sure enough, an underground nuclear test has been carried out at the site. Obama's foreign policy and non-proliferation crew are frantically teleconferencing with London, Tel Aviv and Riyadh. A fusion device! Where could the Iranians have got such technological capacity from??

The Russians of course, says Zbignew Brzezinski. Some bright junior staffer mentions the name "Beijing", but Brzezinski, Hilary Clinton and Ellen Tauscher stare him down with stern vehemence.

Yet, even Clinton and Brzezinski are waiting tensely for their back-channels in the Hu government... the ones who provided 400% guarantees that Chinese weapons would not go beyond the Pakistan-North Korea axis under any circumstances... to report in.

Damage control proceeds way into the night. Who should be blamed? The "A.Q. Khan network"? Photochor has been locked up at Chaklala airbase and under the dire threats of the State Department, a C-130 is being fuelled up to fly him to a CIA "water-park" in Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, Zardari, Gilani and Kiyani sound as if they are close to tears as they breathlessly deny any Pakistani involvement in, or knowledge of the Iranian test.

May 12, 2010: 11 AM Teheran time. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad climbs the podium at Imam Khomeini Square in front of a crowd of over 300,000 Iranians roaring with adulation. They are charged up and full of patriotism as at no time since the founding of the Republic.

Ahmedinejad is beaming with barely-contained joy ... as well he might. The Israelis and Saudis must be soiling their pants still. The Americans and Europeans will treat him differently now, if history is any indication. So what if he doesn't actually have any more bombs? He certainly has a deterrent!

Not to mention, American stooges like Mousavi have been dried up and blown away into complete irrelevance by the fire that burned at Semnan yesterday. The revolution blazes brighter in the hearts of the people than at any time since the liberation of Khorramshahr!

His speech can hardly be heard, except in dribs and drabs, over the jet-plane exultation of the crowd.

"In the name of Allah the most magnificent, the most merciful...

...Iran has now the indigenous capacity to build thermonuclear bombs, and level the cities of those who threaten her...

...thank our brothers in Islam, the Republic of Pakistan, for their valuable assistance in our nuclear program!..."

Asif Ali Zardari, watching on TV, faints.


May 13, 2010: Indian Consulate, Mazar-e-Sharief.

The two tired-looking SDREs arrived last night in a four-wheel-drive Toyota vehicle, straight up the Zaranj-Delaram highway. They've had the opportunity to rest, shower, and shave off the ample beards they had grown to "blend in" over the previous week. Over a breakfast of hot parathas, paneer bhurji and masala tea, they are quietly congratulated by the charge d'affaires.

In their luggage are various storage devices containing reams and reams of data... the sort of readings that only someone with the opportunity to directly observe a thermonuclear test could have collected. If they knew exactly what to look for.

This evening a chartered aircraft will fly them to Delhi to meet with the rest of their colleagues... Kakodkar Sahab cannot wait to speak to the only two Indians who have witnessed, in person, the fruition of more than a decade's back-breaking work since the partial disappointment of Shakti 2. They will then be felicitated, personally, by the PM, the National Security Adviser and the Service Chiefs. They will get to say the words finally, unequivocally... no more "possibility", no more "potential capacity", but a guarantee of full thermonuclear capability.

At long last, the skepticism of Western scientists and non-proliferation "experts" need never be dignified with the slightest consideration again. At long last, the country can rest assured.

The Pakis and Chinese, it seems, are no longer the only powers on earth who can test with impunity...or by proxy.

[A_Gupta]

1. A spike in oil prices will put the US back into deep recession. Such a spike can be expected if the US or Israel starts a war with Iran. Democrats will lose heavily in the 2010 elections.

2. If the US or Israel attacks, a key problem will be Iraq. If the Iraq govt. turns hostile to the 100+K US troops stationed there, life can become very interesting for the US. It is a matter of being able to supply those troops.

[Prem]

Gupta ji, Saudi alone have spare capacity of 5 million Barrels a day and Iranian export is not even half of this capacity.

[Sanjay M]

Rudradev, very nice Tom Clancy-ish post.

But I don't think GOI would dare bring the wrath of the world down on themselves by nuclearizing Iran. Kaangress needs to get re-elected, you know. And giving them thermonuclear capability, for heaven's sakes! Then we might be in danger of suffering a strike on our facilities. There might also be a repeat strike against Iran, with our Indian embassy "accidentally" being targeted, as occurred with the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
US forces would be paying a visit to our consulate in Mazar-e-Sharif too, if something like this happened.

If the Iranians conducted a thermonuclear test on the first try, then it would obviously raise alarms around the world - everyone everywhere would be asking who could have assisted them in achieving such a test.

Prem, good call on the Saudi reserve capacity.
They would certainly reap big profits by selling during a spike period, too.
But I'm thinking that the Straits of Hormuz would become untraversible to Saudi oil-tankers in the immediate aftermath of a strike.

I'm also thinking that Iran would have ample opportunity to take revenge on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. The IEDs would be reverberating non-stop across the region.


I'm wondering though - would any military logistics supply agreement between US and India be used to indirectly involve us in the strike, or even in any further military action in its aftermath?
What would we do in those circumstances?

[A_Gupta]

The Saudi government is the one who warned that of a large rise in oil prices in case of a war with Iran.

a. Iran just has to fire some missiles at Saudi facilities, and
b. make things a little more dicey in the Straits of Hormuz.

[Sanjay M]

predictions that the US can't strike Iran while it is still mired in Iraq and Afghanistan:



Meanwhile, a damning UN report on Iran has been "leaked" - note the Atlanticist NYT's claim that "rogue Pakistani" AQ Khan's assistance to Iran was supplemented by visits from Russian nuclear scientists:

It said nothing specific about the “external sources,” but many intelligence agencies assume that Iran obtained a bomb design from A. Q. Khan, the rogue Pakistani black marketer who sold it machines to enrich uranium. That information may have been supplemented by a Russian nuclear weapons scientist who visited Iran often, investigators say.

[Prem]

If Iranian shites attack Saudi, it will be Sunni Shia war. Iranian do have some leverage in the Gulf but US wont be able to do much because of US Navy. It will be a quick war meant to destroy infrastructure of Iran and if Persian insist upon stoping Oil shipment in the Strait etc they will earn the ire of many countries thus loosing any support they might get. Saudi will be on board if and when war start: they are going out of way to have supposed reconcliation with Iran but we all know what such brotherly overtues mean in Middle Eastern culture.... nada like Egypt, Jordan and Syria co-ordinating attack on Israel. Then war is another way to stimulate economy and get out Recession and let loose pent up nationalistic emotions.

[Sanjay M]

No, Egypt's govt would never attack Israel - that's a guarantee. The billions in US aid each year ensure that. Like the Kaangress, they love their privileges and perks too much to rock that boat excessively. I've really been starting to feel that our own Kaangress is headed down the road to become like Hosni's.

It's not clear to me how strongly an attack against Shiite Iran would resonate in the Sunni world.
After all, the Arabs never protested too loudly when Reagan had various military clashes with Iran. They never cared about the USS Vincennes downing of the Iranian airliner. They never cared how many Shiites Saddam slaughtered.

But I think that firebrands like AlQaeda and Taliban would certainly try to make use of any attack against Iran to motivate their own calls for jihad. Likewise, Iran could choose to join forces with Taliban/AlQaeda, to jointly oust the Americans and inflict an humiliating defeat upon them.

It seems to me that Obama's teflon image will be significantly tarnished by the time any conflict with Iran draws down. I'm thinking that the Democrat schism between Obama and Hillary would re-open again, due to the pressures resulting from competing interest groups jockeying against one another (ie. Israel lobby vs Atlanticists).

[Sanjay M]

Ahmedinejad's Family Has Jewish Roots

A photograph of the Iranian president holding up his identity card during elections in March 2008 clearly shows his family has Jewish roots.

A close-up of the document reveals he was previously known as Sabourjian – a Jewish name meaning cloth weaver.

The short note scrawled on the card suggests his family changed its name to Ahmadinejad when they converted to embrace Islam after his birth.

Haha - so the convert is a self-hater.

Experts last night suggested Mr Ahmadinejad's track record for hate-filled attacks on Jews could be an overcompensation to hide his past.

Ali Nourizadeh, of the Centre for Arab and Iranian Studies, said: "This aspect of Mr Ahmadinejad's background explains a lot about him.

"Every family that converts into a different religion takes a new identity by condemning their old faith.

"By making anti-Israeli statements he is trying to shed any suspicions about his Jewish connections. He feels vulnerable in a radical Shia society."

A London-based expert on Iranian Jewry said that "jian" ending to the name specifically showed the family had been practising Jews.

"He has changed his name for religious reasons, or at least his parents had," said the Iranian-born Jew living in London. "Sabourjian is well known Jewish name in Iran."

This is like the Pakistani mentality.

[CRamS]

Sanjay M:

I don't know about his Jewish roots, but he does raise a legitimate issue, namely, that the creation of the state of Israel dominated by persecuted European Jews by Europeans themselves, and USA's slavish support to this Jewish state; reeks more of colonialism than anything else. Ahmadinejaad asks the profiund question: The holocaust aginst Jews happend in Europe, perpetrated by Germans (Europeans). Yet, Palestinians have paid for this colossal crime, while Germans are sitting pretty. Why, Ahmadijejaad asks, if the US loves Jews so much, a part of California not chopped up and offered to the persecuted Jews as their state, why not a part of Germany, the beautiful Bavarian region for example (man, the very thought of sipping crispy, delicious Heferwiezen beer at a beer Garden in Munich which I did often, is breathtaking ) not confiscated as reparations for German crimes, and offered to the Jews? Why did Palestinains have to pay this humongous price and their essential humaness stolen from them in broad daylight, and then pompously demonzing them for demanding their legitimate rights? Isn't this barbaric if not covered up through glib propaganda? No American elite can ever dare to give a convicning answers to these profound querstions. They know in their hearts of hearts that Palestinains were wronged, and irreversibly so.

Of course, real-politick demands that Indian govt in deference to its national interests, however much private citizens might sympathize with Palestinians, must set aside all this colonial mumbo jumbo and side with Israel .

[RayC]

Why, Ahmadijejaad asks, if the US loves Jews so much, a part of California not chopped up and offered to the persecuted Jews as their state,

Could be done.

However, it is not the 'Promised Land'.

I presume it is as emotive an issue as Mecca to the Moslems, Jerusalem to the Christians or Ramjanmabhoomi to the Hindus.

Religion has a weird ways to icon-ise issues that have no practical spinoffs but immense spiritual salve!

[A_Gupta]

The return of Jews to Palestine is a precondition for the end of days, second coming, etc. I.e., it is a necessary part of a particular Christian eschatology that has been in vogue for approx. a century and a half.

[brihaspati]

CRamS wrote
Ahmadinejaad asks the profiund question: The holocaust aginst Jews happend in Europe, perpetrated by Germans (Europeans). Yet, Palestinians have paid for this colossal crime, while Germans are sitting pretty. Why, Ahmadijejaad asks, if the US loves Jews so much, a part of California not chopped up and offered to the persecuted Jews as their state, why not a part of Germany, the beautiful Bavarian region for example (man, the very thought of sipping crispy, delicious Heferwiezen beer at a beer Garden in Munich which I did often, is breathtaking ) not confiscated as reparations for German crimes, and offered to the Jews?

This is a logic seen often applied against Israel and the Jews. Pakistanis claim that the British deprived the Muslim from lording it over Hindus and the subcontinent. Technically, it was the British who deposed the last Mughal emperor, and dissolved the Mughal empire, and executed the direct successors. So why should Hindus of India bear the obscenity of a Pakistan on their soil? If the British love the Pakistanis so much, why not create a homeland for them in one of their dominions?

It is not just real-politic of small advantages and political sparring why India should side up with Israel. It is against a common enemy and threat to existence. Palestinian cause is not just Palestinian cause - it is the cause of Islam trying to use them for consolidating their hold on Eastern Mediterranean. Removal of Israel from the scene frees up the Islamic hordes egged on by resources and ideological pep-talk from the Saudi based Wahabis and their competitor Shia mobilizers based from Iran - now all engaged in erasing Israel. Just think of what happened to the Jihadis out of work after the Soviets withdrew from AFG - they moved on to J&K. Some returned to BD and have been using the porous border to carry out attacks both in BD as well as in India.

Iran is very much part of OIC and its role on J&K has remained ambiguous. What will make us understand the real nature of Islamic theologians wherever and whenever they are in power - another Partition riot or the promised Ghazwa-e-Hind?

[Sanjay M]

Sanjay M:

I don't know about his Jewish roots, but he does raise a legitimate issue, namely, that the creation of the state of Israel dominated by persecuted European Jews by Europeans themselves, and USA's slavish support to this Jewish state; reeks more of colonialism than anything else. Ahmadinejaad asks the profiund question: The holocaust aginst Jews happend in Europe, perpetrated by Germans (Europeans). Yet, Palestinians have paid for this colossal crime, while Germans are sitting pretty. Why, Ahmadijejaad asks, if the US loves Jews so much, a part of California not chopped up and offered to the persecuted Jews as their state, why not a part of Germany, the beautiful Bavarian region for example (man, the very thought of sipping crispy, delicious Heferwiezen beer at a beer Garden in Munich which I did often, is breathtaking ) not confiscated as reparations for German crimes, and offered to the Jews? Why did Palestinains have to pay this humongous price and their essential humaness stolen from them in broad daylight, and then pompously demonzing them for demanding their legitimate rights? Isn't this barbaric if not covered up through glib propaganda? No American elite can ever dare to give a convicning answers to these profound querstions. They know in their hearts of hearts that Palestinains were wronged, and irreversibly so.

Of course, real-politick demands that Indian govt in deference to its national interests, however much private citizens might sympathize with Palestinians, must set aside all this colonial mumbo jumbo and side with Israel .

The answer is obvious - it's because being European means never having to say you're sorry.

The Europeans destroyed their continent by waging massive wars, and the US paid the bill to rehabilitate them with the Marshall Plan.
The Europeans ravaged whole other continents and nations through colonialism, and never had to pay anyone a cent, as they just picked up and left.

The Europeans("Romans") came down and destroyed the original kingdom of Israel, scattering the Jews far and wide. Then later on in the 20th century, they massacred the Jews living among them, sending them running back to the Middle East as a haven.

Yes, it is the Europeans who should be held accountable for what was done to the Jews -- not just the Germans alone, but the other Great European powers who helped to bring about WW2.

But the thing is that the Europeans are never held accountable for anything they do.
They have a very old and well-embedded Atlanticist lobby in the United States, which helps them to evade the consequences of their acts.
Hence the fundamental importance of the Atlanticists in influencing Western policy trajectory.

Anyway, it's an irony that Ahmedinejad the jew-hater and holocaust-denier is himself of Jewish extraction.
Even Hitler apparently loathed the fact that he had some Jewish blood within him, from his maternal side.
Maybe somebody needs to ask Ahmedinejad how he feels about his Jewish heritage.
To me, his mentality is like the Pakistani mentality - they hate us because we're this ugly, inferior past they're trying to bury. That's why they wish our entire culture would disappear.

[Sanjay M]

Why, Ahmadijejaad asks, if the US loves Jews so much, a part of California not chopped up and offered to the persecuted Jews as their state,

Could be done.

However, it is not the 'Promised Land'.

I presume it is as emotive an issue as Mecca to the Moslems, Jerusalem to the Christians or Ramjanmabhoomi to the Hindus.

Religion has a weird ways to icon-ise issues that have no practical spinoffs but immense spiritual salve!

From what I've read, some of the Zionist intellectuals had considered the possibility of creating a Jewish homeland on the Baja peninsula just below the US state of California. Others had considered Madagascar as a possibility. Others had even considered locations in Siberia. None of these places have anything to do with Jewish history, but possibly might have been easier to settle than the highly-contested Palestine, which sits at the crossroads of multiple religions.

Anyway, the die was cast in favour of Israel, and you can see the big problem which has resulted. They've committed themselves to this path, and have no other place to go now.

However, the storm forces are gathering, due to Iran and even Turkey.
Iran will be the hammer, and Turkey will end up being the anvil. Israel has staked a big part of its strategic future on alliance with Turkey, but the rise of the pro-Islamic parties there mean that in the future Turkey will leave them in the lurch. Ataturkist 'sekoolarism' will fail, and Turkey will return to its natural Islamic roots, which will mean a seismic shift in the regional power balance. If the Israelis see this coming, they sure aren't talking about it.

[Rudradev]

But I don't think GOI would dare bring the wrath of the world down on themselves by nuclearizing Iran. Kaangress needs to get re-elected, you know. And giving them thermonuclear capability, for heaven's sakes! Then we might be in danger of suffering a strike on our facilities. There might also be a repeat strike against Iran, with our Indian embassy "accidentally" being targeted, as occurred with the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
US forces would be paying a visit to our consulate in Mazar-e-Sharif too, if something like this happened.

Nowhere in my post do I suggest that GOI "nuclearize" Iran.... or "give them" thermonuclear capability.

The quid-pro-quo would be that we would test our H-bomb on the Iranians' soil, finally achieving a proven thermonuclear capacity without breaking our unilateral moratorium on further testing.

(This, in case you missed the reference, is exactly what the Chinese and Pakis did with the "North Korean" nuclear test earlier this year. It was a Chinese device built especially for Pakistan... 45-60 kT boosted fission to match our S1 from 1998. Pakistan for obvious reasons couldn't have got away with testing it on their own soil (goodbye Kerry Lugar, etc.) so they arranged with the Chinese to test it in NoKo instead. That's why the West has been very quiet in the aftermath... has even one new economic sanction been applied to North Korea?)

Meanwhile the Iranians make the most of the appearance of having developed their own H-bomb. Externally this would serve as a deterrent for the Iranians against the Israelis, the West and (most importantly from our point of view) the Saudi-Pakistani Sunni axis which serves as the West's proxy. Economically, Iran would have ascended to that grey-area-nuclear-club outside the P5, which as history shows, comes with a whole new standard of treatment which tends to be far more respectful of the member's status.

Internally too, Iran's Abadgaran regime would blow away opposition and consolidate its popular support in an upsurge of nationalist sentiment, something that the Americans were seeking to undermine with their allegations of electoral fraud and support of Moussavi.

For all these advantages the Iranians may well be willing to allow us to test on their soil, even though we wouldn't be giving them any actual weapons, fuel, designs or technology in the process. The Iranians would get to make observations and readings, collect data and derive whatever inferences they can about the design (a lot of good that would do them, if the Israelis and Americans actually knocked out all their reprocessing facilities). So there is no question of "nuclearizing" Iran.

As for "repercussions" which we might face... we will face repercussions no matter what we do in order to establish a proven thermonuclear capability (I'm sure you agree that we absolutely need to do that, given what has been coming to light about the 1998 tests). So far, other nations have got away with testing by proxy... even Pakistan, via China conducting the test of their 200kT boosted-fission device in North Korea this year.

We're always in danger of pressure tactics like the bombing of our embassies, facing a strike on our nuclear facilities (exactly what Madeleine Albright was proposing in 1998) and so on. If we're going to shy away from consolidating our deterrence because we're afraid of repercussions, we don't deserve to play in the strategic-weapons league at all... might as well sign all the alphabet soup treaties, become an "economic power" and depend on Unkil to save us from the Chinese.

If the Iranians conducted a thermonuclear test on the first try, then it would obviously raise alarms around the world - everyone everywhere would be asking who could have assisted them in achieving such a test.

Let them ask, and wonder! The existence of many, many suspects... thanks to the Paki and Chini shenanigans of two decades' standing... becomes a huge advantage for us here. Not to mention the lengths to which several Washington players have gone to cover up Chinese proliferation! It gives us more leeway to get away with a proxy test in Iran than we would otherwise have had. People will be terrified of opening any closet door for the skeletons that may fall out.

[sanjaykumar]

None of these places have anything to do with Jewish history, but possibly might have been easier to settle than the highly-contested Palestine, which sits at the crossroads of multiple religions.

The Rhine valley would have been perfect-the Ashkenazim could continue to think of themselves European, but Europe would never countenance a Jewish state in Europe.


It is a good thing Europeans have access to nuclear weapons technology or they would still be braining each other with iron weapons.

[Sanjay M]

Rudradev, if you bring an H-bomb onto Iranian soil, they're going to take possession of it - no matter what previous assurances they gave you. The relationship between India and Iran is not like the master-servant relationship between China and Pak. They have no dependency on us, and therefore nothing to prevent them from railroading us. I could picture your scenario going awry in all sorts of ways.

And why would Iran want to falsely advertise nuclear teeth without actually having any?
That would open them up to US/Israeli attack without actual cause. We might benefit from the test, but how would Iran?

But I agree that we shouldn't be giving the big powers a free ride on the NPT that they refuse to admit us to. After all - no taxation without representation, no obligation without representation. We shouldn't feel obliged to show restraint on proliferation, when we're not included in the treaty.

It is our lack of such restraint which would pressure the big powers to then accommodate us. Why should they get our restraint for free?

[Johann]

Iran will never test, or pretend to test anything they cant build from scratch on their own, and in numbers.

The Islamic Republic trusts absolutely no one - it was born isolated and nearly strangled at birth by internal and external enemies.

That is why it has taken so much longer to nuclearise than Pakistan despite a great deal more money and despite many opportunities. That's why it took longer for them to get their North Korean imported ballistic missiles longer to operationalise than Pakistan.

In the meanwhile the regime would rather rely on their ability to wreck the world economy by spiking oil prices to record highs, and their ability to use terrorism and separatism (especially in Iraq and the Gulf Sheikhdoms) - they are quite convinced they succeeded in deterring the most hawkish American administration in a century with those weapons.

Even beyond that, much of the Iranian regime thinks an opaque, recessed deterrence is the best option given the political realities of the Mid East - like Israel. That will require a high degree of confidence in the weapon - its more likely that Iran would collaborate with a test in an openly nuclear state like North Korea. Until the 1998 massacre of Iranian officers in Afghanistan, Iran hoped such collaboration with Pakistan would be possible - it was one of the few states that publicly congratulated Pakistan on its test.

[Sanjay M]

Rather than rely upon the Iranians to test for us, I'd rather go to the North Koreans and have them test for us instead. After all, the main people who'd be upset over that would be the Japanese, and their clout is on the ebb these days. Anyway, their left-leaning DPJ wouldn't really be as inclined to make a stink on a national security issue the way a rightist party would.

Besides, the North Koreans are a pretty tightly-run hermit state, and it's hard for the outside world to get good info out of North Korea. It's much less leakier than Iran, for example.

The North Koreans are also much more desperate than the Iranians, and thus would be more likely to fall in with us. They do have tensions with the Chinese too, in some areas. They are much more willing to play the nuclear blackmail game, and the US has little chance of being able to militarily escalate against them when Seoul is in bombardment range.

It would be much harder to prove anything against us if the North Koreans tested, since it's the Chinese who are the main culprits in N.Korean nuclearization. Then let the Japanese howl in pain, as they wouldn't be able to do anything much about it.

Hell, Japan's WW2 predations are what created the whole ChiCom menace that's come to burden our security, while they've lived under the luxury of the US umbrella. A little payback from us would be comeuppance for them.

Just send the device over by submarine - that's the safest way to transport it and prevent any interdiction.

[Rudradev]

Rudradev, if you bring an H-bomb onto Iranian soil, they're going to take possession of it - no matter what previous assurances they gave you. The relationship between India and Iran is not like the master-servant relationship between China and Pak. They have no dependency on us, and therefore nothing to prevent them from railroading us. I could picture your scenario going awry in all sorts of ways.

I don't think that's necessarily true at all. Any endeavour has its risks... even the Chinese risk their nuclear gifts to Pakistan ending up in the hands of Uighur jihadis... but we have many ways to minimize them.

Just for instance, why would Iran need to know the precise extent to which we intended to carry forward our strategic weapons "collaboration" with them? If they believed that collaboration with us was their best chance of achieving a real nuclear arsenal, I doubt very much they'd want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Pak is by no means a client state exclusive to the Chinese... Unkil has pretty well put paid to China's Gwadar ambitions, after all. So it's not as if they have a "master-servant" relationship in any but the most simplistic sense.

For their part the Iranians, constantly hemmed in by increasingly severe Western sanctions that seek to make them an international pariah, would not be quick to alienate the friends they do have. Certainly not an energy marketplace of the size of India. There is, in fact, a great deal to discourage them from double-crossing us for the sake of one prototype thermonuclear device (which they're not even sure will work, until the test is actually carried out).

And why would Iran want to falsely advertise nuclear teeth without actually having any?
That would open them up to US/Israeli attack without actual cause. We might benefit from the test, but how would Iran?

Oh, I don't think it would open them up to anything like that. Quite the contrary.

For all the drivel that habitually issues from the TSPA's orifices... one thing they have been absolutely correct about, is that the appearance of their having a nuclear deterrent has curbed India's military options with respect to Pakistan. It's been much the same with North Korea; since they held their test, the "six-nation-contact-group" that made such brave pronouncements throughout the past decade has fallen silent as the grave.

Note that North Korea, or even Pakistan, may not be in control of the nuclear arsenal they appeared to announce by virtue of their tests. Yet the deterrence value is unmistakable.

A US/Israeli attack may take place against Iran at any time. In such a situation the Iranians can only be less likely to face an attack if it appears that they may already have the means to retaliate with nuclear weapons. And if in fact Iran's Bushehr and Natanz facilities were attacked by the US and Israel... then the Iranians would have nothing to lose by putting up the appearance of having already acquired nuclear weapons.

In addition to this, the surge of nationalist fervour that would follow a nuclear test in Iran would greatly benefit the sitting government, as well as the grand council itself, by relieving any internal political pressure they may have been feeling.

But I agree that we shouldn't be giving the big powers a free ride on the NPT that they refuse to admit us to. After all - no taxation without representation, no obligation without representation. We shouldn't feel obliged to show restraint on proliferation, when we're not included in the treaty.

It is our lack of such restraint which would pressure the big powers to then accommodate us. Why should they get our restraint for free?

Indeed, and this is exactly why we should abandon our restraint. Especially because it is in our crucial national interest to test a thermonuclear weapon if we want our adversaries to take our deterrent seriously.

I'm not sure if testing in NoKo by proxy is the answer though, for much the same reasoning you have advanced in the case of Iran. We have no leverage with NoKo whatever (whereas we collaborate with Iran in Afghanistan, share common interests in curbing the rise of a TSP/Saudi Sunni axis, and are a significant trading partner especially in terms of consuming their energy).

Also, NoKo is essentially a Shiv Sena to the PRC's BJP! If we test there half the guys at the site will be PLA, and the next thing you know, both the countries we are most interested in deterring will have full access to our test data.

[Sanjay M]

Pak gave Iran its warhead design, along with the P-1 centrifuge designs. We can't trust the Iranians not to share test data with Pak.

The North Koreans do have differences with the Chinese on various issues, and I'm sure that the NoKos would also like to get a little more leverage towards Beijing, rather than be totally hostage to them.
The NoKos would gain nothing from handing all their cards to Beijing, whereas drawing an extra card from us would be a masterstroke for them.

A North Korean test would mainly just tick off the Japanese, and their international clout is on the wane anyway.
Such a test is not likely to trigger international military action against Pyongyang. By contrast, a nuclear test by Iran is much more likely to trigger international military action. It would be a much bigger deal, and the international chain reaction could be less containable and much more dangerous for us.

China gains no advantage from having our test data.
Hell, they probably already have seismic sensors on their side of the border to monitor against any NoKo tests.

As a matter of fact, it would be we who gain the advantage from them having our test data. All we seek is to know if our device works or not. If the Chinese measure the fact that our device works, then all the better for our deterrence, as there'll be no ambiguity in their minds. Nuclear ambiguity is the most dangerous thing, because the enemy could miscalculate that we don't really have an effective arsenal at all to fight them off with.
If we test right under their noses, so that the results are plain enough for them to see, then they'll be deterred. They'll get the message in the strongest way possible.

[Rudradev]

Pak, under the aegis of Mirza Aslam Beg, gave the Iranians centrifuge designs that turned out to be useless junk. That was as much as Beg could manage to provide them, because the majority stakeholders in Pak's Islamic bomb project-- the Saudis-- would not have tolerated the proliferation to Iran of anything actually valuable in building a strategic arsenal.

Whatever meaningful collaboration existed between Iran and the Pakistanis on a nuclear weapons program, ended with the ouster of the Shah. There is hence no reason to believe that the Iranians are likely to share anything with the Pakis.

The North Koreans cannot afford to alienate Beijing despite however many points of dispute they may have with the Chinese. Beijing is the lifeline to what passes for a North Korean economy, which depends on Chinese economic largesse to a far greater extent than on any other country. Even Pakistan has the US, KSA and Japan as alternate sources of funds. Seoul's sunshine money can dry up at any time, and after that, Pyongyang remains solvent entirely at Beijing's pleasure. I cannot imagine them taking so drastic a step to alienate China as to collaborate with an enemy of China in developing strategic weapons. Kim's regime would fall the next day.

Besides, a North Korean test would not merely tick off the Japanese. It would also tick off the South Koreans... a significant trading partner of, and source of investment in India. All told, even if no punitive economic measures were applied against India in the aftermath of a proxy test we carried out in North Korea... evading punitive measures is after all, the whole point of a proxy test... the economic fallout of the episode would create serious problems for India.

The Chinese-Paki proxy test in North Korea was privately vouched for by Beijing. All parties understood it was a controlled action with China's blessing, occurring within China's suzerain sphere of influence... so there was no panic among the economic powers of the Asia Pacific region. If some mysterious non-Chinese actor actually managed to test in North Korea, however, East Asian economic stability would be gravely threatened in the aftermath. There is no way India would escape the consequences of that, even the inadvertent ones.

By contrast, the danger of military repercussions resulting against India if we carried out a proxy test in Iran, is insignificant. A thermonuclear test in Iran, to all appearances carried out by Iran, actually decreases the likelihood of military action against Iran itself... something which is virtually imminent in the current climate.

On the other hand, the two nations most likely to use nuclear weapons against India have been acting more aggressively toward India than ever as revelations about our lack of thermonuclear capability emerge. Pakistan will soon resume engaging in terrorism against India from under a nuclear umbrella, and China seems more likely than ever in the past three decades to make a grab for territory. Neither of these threats would be aggravated in any way if we carried out a proxy test in Iran. On the contrary, both of our adversaries would have to re-evaluate out capacity for retaliation.

All in all, it seems to me that conducting a proxy test in Iran only attenuates the existing military threat which India already faces, rather than putting us at risk of any additional threat.

Lastly: Beijing would most definitely gain advantages from having direct access to our test data.

The Chinese are very capable of figuring out the general yield of a device from seismic readings. Our testing would leave them in no doubt as to what our thermonuclear device could inflict on their cities. On the other hand, the kind of data they'd be able to gather by actually making observations at a test site... such as the degree of fusion burn achieved, radiochemical and geological readings... would give them qualitative clues as to our technological approach to strategic weapons design.

It would help them determine what sort of bombs we had, and infer how many (by comparing the designs with the size our fissile material stockpile) and even project what we'd be capable of making how far in future.

Surely they don't need to possess that kind of information, in order to be deterred. Yet they would certainly have access to it if we tested in North Korea.

[Sanjay M]

The fact is that any nuclear test in any location can be measured by seismic monitors around the world, and its yield deduced to reasonably accurate approximation. If you really want to be secretive, have the NoKoreans make it an undersea test. That'll limit the data the ChiComs can get out of it.

It doesn't matter if the South Koreans and Japanese were ticked off - their international clout is a drop in the bucket, compared to those who'd be upset over an Iranian nuclear test.
Plus the economies of SKorea and Japan are export-dependent, and they simply can't afford to cut themselves off from our market. They're all hoping to sell their small cars here.
KSA has more economic power projection against us than SKorea does.

The NKoreans are in a much more precarious position, and wouldn't be as likely to muck around with us, when they need a liferope.
China can't make Kim's regime fall - whether in a day or a month - not when the issue of succession is very thorny and sensitive. The last thing China would want is to see its NKorean buffer state collapse prematurely before its time, thus potentially bringing US troops upto the Chinese border.

Sorry, but everything there is kept in very tight balance, which can't just be thrown away on a moment's notice, because of the heavy investment in keeping that balance.

The US has more options against Iran than against NKorea. There are more international backers for military action against Iran than against North Korea.
The US could pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a pinch, to free up the possibility of military strikes on Iran. But the US can't pull out of Japan and SKorea. That's a non-starter. The Americans there are like Atlas holding up the sky - if somebody tickles their arm-pits, they don't have a free hand to throw a punch back.

Besides, the Iranians sit astride the oil jugular, and if any problems grow in their region, we'll only feel the fallout at the gas pump. The same can't be said of North Asia.

How come we can't at least test neutron weapons? They're not seismic.

[Philip]

Iran's steady naval sub development.

Iran to build medium-size submarines

TEHRAN (FNA) - A senior commander of the Iranian Army's Navy announced on Saturday that the navy will launch medium-size submarines in the next two years.

""God willing, we will launch a medium-size class, 500-ton submarine in the next two years and we will reach self-sufficiency in this field (in building this class of submarines),"" Navy's Lieutenant Commander for Self-Sufficiency Admiral Farhad Amiri told FNA.

He underlined that Iran's defense industries are currently mass producing different classes of submarines and that the vessels have boosted the country's sub-surface capability.

""We can claim that all the needs of the (naval) force are supplied from inside the country, thanks to the efforts made by local experts,"" the commander reiterated.

Elsewhere, Amiri pointed to a newly launched missile-launching frigate in the jetty of Iran's fourth naval zone in Iran's northern province of Mazandaran, and added, ""The frigate is among the Navy's missile launching frigates used in southern waters (in the Persian Gulf).""

Iran has been pushing an arms development program in recent years in a bid to reach self-sufficiency. It has produced its own jet fighters and armored vehicles as well as radar-avoiding missiles and other high-tech weapons.

Iran announced in June that a home-made submarine, named Ghadir 948, had joined the naval brigade of the first naval zone.

In November, Iran announced that its first domestically built Ghadir class submarine launched operation.

The Iranian military said that the submarine can easily evade detection as it is equipped with sonar-evading technology and can fire missiles and torpedoes simultaneously.

Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Sayyari said in November that Ghadir-class submarines are the second Iranian-built underwater craft outfitted with ""state-of-the-art electronic equipment."" He said it took 10 years to build the submarine.