Iran's nuclear program is supported by the international community

As I mentioned before, some articles "go missing" on the internet:

Iran finds allies against UN atomic plan-diplomats

By Louis Charbonneau,

Reuters Feb 22 2005

VIENNA - A plan by the U.N.'s atomic watchdog aimed partly at helping to persuade Iran to forsake its nuclear ambitions is opposed not only by Tehran but a group of countries including Japan and Brazil, diplomats said.

Even the United States, which accuses Iran of trying to make an atomic bomb under the guise of a civilian nuclear programme, has reservations about the proposed five-year moratorium on new nuclear production facilities, they added. Major uranium suppliers Canada and Australia also have objections.

Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), proposed the plan last year, hoping a global moratorium would give the world time to patch up loopholes in the nuclear non-proliferation regime.

The scheme also offered Iran a way of saving face while acceding to a European Union demand that it scrap its uranium enrichment programme, the U.N. diplomats said.

"The idea is that it would be easier for Iran to give up enrichment as part of an international movement," a diplomat involved in EU discussions with Iran on its atomic fuel programme told Reuters on condition of anonymity.

Iran, which denies seeking to make an atomic bomb and says its programme is peaceful to generate electricity, has rejected both the EU demand and the moratorium.

ElBaradei will not have an easy time selling his plan for a moratorium on the creation of new uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing facilities ahead of a nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference in May.

EXCESS OF ENRICHMENT CAPACITY

Tariq Rauf, head of the IAEA's Verification and Security Policy Office, told a news conference on the future of nuclear fuel supply that there was currently a global excess of enrichment capacity and new multinational alternatives to national enrichment programmes were needed to reduce proliferation risks.

"Clearly it's not in the interest of the world to have 30 or 40 countries, each having a national plutonium reprocessing or uranium enrichment capability, because this does lead for the potential for going to the next step -- making nuclear weapons."

The moratorium has only partial support from Washington, which nevertheless sees such a plan as a way of isolating and increasing pressure on Iran to give up its enriched-uranium fuel projects, the diplomats said.

Iran and other states which would be affected by the moratorium strongly oppose it, fearing it will become permanent.

Tehran also rejects the idea of such a moratorium as tantamount to granting a virtual monopoly to European, Russian and other existing producers of enriched-uranium nuclear fuel.

Enrichment is a process of purifying uranium for use as fuel in nuclear power plants or, when very highly enriched, in bombs.

While the EU supports the moratorium, Iran has some powerful allies against it -- including Japan, Argentina, Brazil and Pakistan, diplomats from several IAEA member countries said.

"Some countries are worried that the moratorium would eventually become compulsory, especially countries that would be affected by it," a diplomat close to the IAEA said. "They don't want to limit their options for the future."

Despite this opposition, the diplomat said ElBaradei's moratorium proposal was "still on the table" and would be a major topic of discussion at the NPT review conference in May.

Countries like Canada and Australia -- which have ample uranium but do not enrich it -- have reservations about closing doors on their own future nuclear fuel options, diplomats said.

Japan, they said, opposes the moratorium because it fears its own plutonium-based atomic activities might be curtailed.

The United States only supports the idea of a moratorium for countries which lack an atomic fuel production capacity. In this case, U.S. plans for new enrichment facilities would be exempt from the moratorium while Iranian facilities would be covered.

Diplomats close to the IAEA say this would be unfair.

"It wouldn't be worth it unless all the 'have' countries, not just the 'have nots', also agree to a moratorium on new enrichment and reprocessing facilities," a Western diplomat close to the IAEA said. "This is where it gets tricky."