[A-List] No Nukes for Iran!

["Macdonald Stainsby" <mstainsby@xxxxxxxxx>]

No Nukes for Iran!

by Reza Fiyouzat / July 24th, 2007

Those in the Iranian socialist opposition arguing for a nuclear-free Iran
have either been absent from the Western left?s discourse or have been
getting the short end of the stick from some in the US left. Trapped in a
mentality as simplistic as that of George Bush?s, a good part of the US
left has been repeating a similar logic, by saying that either you go
along with the imperialists? plans and support Bush or find excuses to
support Iran?s government?s pursuit of nuclear energy.

This, in spite of the fact that the same American left-leaning activists
and writers have a strong tradition of anti-nuclear stance when it has
come to the US society. May E. P. Thompson?s soul rest in eternal peace,
but I know that his spirit must be spinning in his grave.

The point of discussion here is not nuclear weapons, but the use of
nuclear power for the peaceful purpose of producing energy.

Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a disaster to awaken some people?s
deadened auto-responses. The US left has recently been re-sensitized to
the dangers of nuclear power as a result of the recent earthquake in
Japan, which caused the shut-down of a nuclear power plant. We have
consequently seen many insightful articles questioning the wisdom of
pursuing the nuclear route for providing energy, most notably by Ralph
Nader and Harvey Wasserman, to name only two.

The disaster that gave everybody a wake-up nudge was the earthquake that
rocked the western coast of Honshu Island on July 16, causing the shut
down of Tokyo Electric Power Co.?s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power
station, in the Niigata prefecture. More earthquakes as well as several
aftershocks kept the area trembling well into the day and night. The
resultant shutdown of the power plant has attracted the critical attention
of many observers, thereby exposing many problems worrying the government
officials, energy-producing company officials, experts, pundits, and
ordinary citizens alike.

Increasing number of reports have focused on both the attempted cover-ups
by company officials (in the immediate aftermath of the quake) as well as
the understatements regarding the real and potential dangers of the
radioactive leakage into the atmosphere and the surrounding water, and the
its consequent impacts.

The fact that Japan sits atop a very active earthquake zone has meant
that, over the centuries and especially over the last century, measures
have been taken to design and implement high earthquake-proofing standards
for buildings; particularly for nuclear power plants, which provide for
some 30 percent of Japan?s energy needs.

We know that it is customary for capital to wish to save costs. Since
safety measures cost money, nuclear energy providers are likely to meet
building requirements not maximally, but only barely adequately. To make
things worse, even if and when standards are devised, enforced and
followed, earthquakes have dynamics of their own and may not necessarily
limit themselves to the scope wished for by human-made regulations. For
example, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant was built to withstand earthquakes
of up to 6.5 magnitude; unfortunately, the July 16 quake measured 6.8;
hence, the problems that arose.

This particular quake scenario, though, has not escalated to the
worst-case scenario, but it very easily could have.

The same occurrence in Iran, however, most definitely and quite easily
would have turned into a huge disaster. If an earthquake of such magnitude
had erupted in, say, the tectonically active south-southwestern coastal
plains of Iran, with the Bushehr reactor having gone live, you can bet
your house that cover-up and evasion would have been the only ?aid? sent
by the government to the people affected there; plus some troops to make
sure, much like in New Orleans, that things didn?t get too out of hand.

For one thing, how much can we really trust the seismological surveys
carried out to determine how near-or-far major fault lines are from the
Bushehr reactor? What about the safety regulations? What about the
environmental-impact studies for the best-case scenario? Has any thinking
gone into plans for a worst-case scenario? Or, are the gentlemen in Tehran
too dependent on good luck and divine protection?

And what about evacuation procedures should the worst happen? Iran?s roads
are not exactly extensive or kept in any decent order. We know from New
Orleans? experience with Hurricane Katrina that even in a country with
extensive highway systems, evacuating large populations can take very long
and therefore be very hazardous at the least, and at worst a murderous
deal, even when the effort is demonstrated to have been made. A nuclear
accident, by contrast, is capable of precipitating extremely poisonous
atmospheric and environmental conditions in less than an hour.

Iran stands atop many very active, large fault lines (see a relatively
recent seismicity map of Iran). Of the major earthquakes that do occur in
Iran, a good many are stronger than magnitude 6 on the Richter scale (from
which point on, major damages increase exponentially). Here are some facts
about recent major earthquakes since 1972:

· Dec. 26, 2003: Southeastern Iran, Bam, magnitude 6.5; 26,000 killed.
· June 22, 2002: Northwestern Iran in the Qazvin province, magnitude 6; at
least 500 killed.
· May 10, 1997: Northern Iran near Afghanistan, magnitude 7.1; 1,500 died.
· June 21, 1990: Northwest Iran around Tabas, magnitude 7.3-7.7; 50,000
killed.
· Sept. 16, 1978: Northeast Iran, magnitude 7.7; 25,000 killed.
· April 10, 1972: Southern Iran near Ghir Karzin, magnitude 7.1; 5,374
killed.

These casualty figures are very high as it is. In each case, thousands if
not tens of thousands more suffered dislocation and complete loss of
livelihood, which was never compensated for. Now, imagine the additional
casualty and displaced figures if any of these quakes had been combined
with the meltdown of a nuclear reactor!

It should be pointed out that the deaths occurring as a result of these
quakes are far larger than they should have been, mostly because of lax
building codes in Iran. Compared to some of the world?s highest standards
for earthquake proofing available in Japan, we can easily state that no
such standards exist at all in Iran. Additionally, the building codes that
do exist are regularly ignored and violated by unscrupulous contractors,
developers and even individual home-builders more inclined to bribe an
official than bear the larger costs of building safely.

We would therefore be right to wonder aloud about the building codes
implemented in the construction of Bushehr?s nuclear power plant.
Likewise, we should be worried about the maximum quake strengths the plant
is supposed to be able to withstand, and even more worried about safety
and rescue procedures foreseen for a worst-case scenario.

Forget IAEA inspections! In Iran what we really need is a guaranteed right
of citizens? groups consisting of independent scientists, activists, and
citizens? direct representatives, to carry out inspections of nuclear
facilities on demand. Transparency and open accountability is the most
legitimate demand of any citizenry as regards governmental activities;
when it comes to meddling with nuclear power, transparency in
accountability becomes absolutely essential.

In Iran, however, there is no accountability for anything the government
does. For example, and directly related to this topic, there is no
accountability for the fact that in an oil-rich country, refined oil (for
the everyday consumption of the people) is mostly imported! Refining oil
is not exactly nuclear science (no puns intended, but take as many as you
like). This is a century-old technology. Why is it that the Iranian
government is not investing some of its vast sums of petro euros and
dollars on improving the oil-refining capabilities of the nation, thus
reducing the need for importing (much more expensive) refined oil
products? Would this not be safer, more logical, more efficient, and a
more economically viable short-to-mid-term investment of the national
resources?

In Iran, it would be impossible to even bring to justice any government
official who plays with peoples? lives and livelihoods on a daily basis,
and yet there are thousands of them who should be sued in a really
existing legal system. Alas, there?s the rub! We do not have the most
rudimentary legal structures in place guaranteeing the citizens? right of
oversight over anything the governmental does.

As any Iranian could tell you, there is only one branch of government in
Iran, the Executive branch; the other two stems (sic; the legislature and
the judiciary) merely decorate that one branch so it doesn?t look too
bare. As enshrined into a theocratic constitution, the legislature, if it
is anything but a rubber stamp, can easily be overturned by the Supreme
Leader, as it has been repeatedly. The same goes for the judiciary, which
has historically been a mere enforcer of the Executive?s will rather than
an adjudicator of the laws of the land.

This situation clearly does not allow for a realistic system for citizens
to keep a vigilant eye on the government?s handling of nuclear-powered
energy production. Further, should any disasters occur (which is to say,
when a disaster does occur), the government is guaranteed to act in the
least responsive manner possible and to shirk as much responsibility as
needed, leaving the citizens to bear the costs of a nuclear disaster on
their own.

It is therefore the duty of any democratically inclined person, and more
so the duty of leftists, environmentalists and anti-nuclear activists in
the west, especially in the US left, to stand on the side of the well
being of the Iranian people and unambiguously oppose any nuclear energy
development in Iran carried out by an unaccountable government.

No doubt some ?leftists? will argue that demands for a halt to all nuclear
activities in Iran amount to aiding and abetting the imperialists,
especially at this historical juncture. But, to me, such logic smells too
much like what the Zionists retort back, in knee-jerk fashion, to anybody
daring to criticize anything Israeli. In the end, all fanatics argue in
the same way: you are either with me, or against me!

What those so-called leftists do not understand, or willfully ignore, is
that imperialism feeds on oppressed, un-represented people. To the extent
that the Iranian regime stifles ?its own people? and their potentials by
increasingly exposing them to larger harms, without providing any
opportunities for their flourishing and development, to the extent that
Iranian people are undermined by their government, they as a whole are
more likely to be swallowed up by the plans and designs of the
imperialists. Empowered people are the best defense against imperialist
aggression.

Those who, like the Islamic regime in Iran, insist that pursuing nuclear
power is an automatic right, must also be prepared to bear the
responsibility to fully account and be accountable for any and all
activities relating to the handling of nuclear materials, especially if
nuclear facilities are built near dense population areas, and most
definitely if those reactors are located on active tectonic plates, as is
the case with the Bushehr reactor.

Lacking transparent accountability for the preparations that have occurred
so far, as well as for the future full operations of Bushehr?s nuclear
power plant, people have a legitimate right to demand a halt to all
activities that could easily lead to the enormous health threats of
radioactive poisoning potentially lasting hundreds of years, causing
mutations and deformations in the gene pools of all living organisms in
the area for far longer, and destroying the livelihoods of hundreds of
thousands of people.

Nobody has an automatic right to take people down this kind of road!
Definitely, not a government that refuses to be accountable to any on this
earth, least of all to an absolute majority of ?its own? citizenry.

--
Macdonald Stainsby
Co-ordinator,
http://oilsandstruth.org
--
moderated radical discussion list:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
--
In the contradiction lies the hope.
-Bertholt Brecht.