We Want a Nuclear-Free Middle East

Tehran seems to be waiting for new offers from West. But Western powers are standing firm on the October 2009 proposal. Aren’t the chances of an agreement minimized?
There is no vague point about the nuclear fuel Tehran’s research reactor needs. The facility was constructed by Americans before the revolution and US itself supplied its fuel. We bought the material once after the revolution from Argentina. The reactor is used for humanitarian medical purposes. Eight-hundred fifty-thousand patients need the products of this reactor. Everything that revolves around this reactor is peaceful.
As an IAEA member, Iran has certain rights. One of them is that its peaceful nuclear demands should be met. So the IAEA has to supply the nuclear fuel for Tehran’s reactor. This is our right. Countries which do not possess the nuclear fuel cycle know-how should expect IAEA’s help. The agency should have paved the way for our access to the fuel, but with the unreasonable concerns of some powerful countries about our peaceful nuclear program, which is political driven of course, it turned into a nuclear swap deal.
Iran has basically accepted the exchange offer to create a better situation for interaction. But our country has its own terms and conditions since it doesn’t fully trust the other side. We had three ways to supply the fuel we need: to purchase it, to receive it in exchange of our low-enriched uranium or produce it inside.
Tehran’s nuclear fuel will be consumed within a year, so we are facing time limits. We spent several months on negotiations over the fuel and we didn’t gain any results. If we want to spend another several months with no achievements, how could we be accountable to those people? Unfortunately, Iran’s humanitarian and medical demands have become pawn to politics. So we have come to the decision that we should start 20 percent uranium enrichment inside so as not to lose more time. At this point, we are receiving different proposals from various countries. We will examine them all and if they serve our demands, they will definitely be welcome. Otherwise, we continue 20 percent uranium production.
Moreover, it is not only the Tehran reactor that needs fuel. In our development programs, we are going to construct nuclear facilities to meet our agricultural, medical and energy needs. These are all peaceful purposes and we will achieve them through cooperation with IAEA. These power plants naturally need fuel and we should plan for that. The more produced inside the better it is for us in terms of costs. The remaining should be purchased from other countries. We are ready for purchase and exchange.
Were there any new points in the proposal sent by the United States, Russia and France to the International Atomic Energy Organization?
That would not be clear until our experts have studied the proposal. We should examine the letter and become sure that there are no ambiguities. It is not the right time to say if there are any new points. I can just say that Iran welcomes interaction, is ready to swap for nuclear fuel and is open to different proposals as long as they meet our demands.
So Iran is now going to take a look at different offers and nuclear fuel production will continue inside. As you said we lost some time trying to seal a deal on nuclear fuel. Aren’t we now losing time for reaching an agreement with West and avoiding further pressures?
We don’t welcome further resolutions or sanctions. But you can’t deprive a country with diplomatic pressure from its inalienable rights IAEA has granted for running the nuclear fuel cycle. The possibility of sanction and imposition of a non-legal, unreasonable pressure will not stop us from pursuing our rights. Iran believes that politics and propaganda are behind such pressures to force Iran withdraw from its independent path. Nuclear activities are just a pretext for West to impose sanctions. We faced such limitations even when our nuclear activities were not an issue.
Meanwhile, a limited number of countries who are running this anti-Iran campaign are trying to represent themselves as the voice of the international community. Neither Iranians, nor other nations of the region and the world view them so. International community is 118 members of the Non-Aligned Movement who have defended Iran’s right to peaceful use of nuclear activities. International community is the 57 members of Islamic Conference Organization; it is all those African, Latin American and other countries who have defended our right.
Why are a few countries that ironically are the sole possessors of nuclear weapons and have used them threat another country? Regardless of Article 6 of the NPT, they have not only pursued nuclear disarmament but are planning to increase the number of their nuclear weapons. These forces, those which are driving the world towards nuclearization, are the self-assumed representatives of the international community. They are just a number of unappeasable countries that know in a few decades, fossil fuels will be all used up and nuclear fuel will be the key replacement. They are trying to tighten their grip on this monopoly and keep the other countries dependent.
We see countries which have defended Iran’s nuclear rights, but have voted in favor of the resolutions. Can we tie our hope to such countries?
Zionists are running an Iranophobia campaign and are ready to pay a high price for that. Their media are trying to divert the world’s attention from Israel’s nuclear threat by fueling this anti-Iran frenzy. Europeans are also aiding them. But Iranians and Middle East nations know this is just a show. I admit that some countries defend our rights while voting against us, but that is because of all the pressures they face. There is a certain level of resistance that if passed they have to succumb to Western powers despite their own desire. But sanctions and threats are not effective anymore. They cannot discourage Iran from the path it is has chosen. It just motivates our young scientists to master the latest technology.
Arab states of the region are also expressing worries over Iran’s nuclear activities. What should we tell them?
This is our advice: do not fall victim to the stratagems of a few countries. Move towards regional convergence and collaboration to build a stable, developed Middle East. Arab leaders’ comments are also poorly reflected in the media. What Iran has understood so far from their remarks is that regional states want a nuclear-free Middle East. This is exactly what Iran has always defended. That’s why we are going to hold a disarmament conference in Tehran in 16th and 17th of April in Tehran.

Glasgow gears up for 2010 International Festival of Visual Art

The entire city of Glasgow is preparing for the 2010 International Festival of Visual Art with not only museums and art galleries, but streets, bridges and even the River Clyde providing locations for this year’s ambitious celebration of the arts.

Building on the huge success of 2008, an impressive and diverse list of 50 artist has been announced. They range from Glasgow based sculptor, David Shrigley and Susan Philipsz whose first outdoor sound work will premier on the banks of the Clyde to the Croatian David Maljkovic, one of the most exciting artists to emerge from Europe in recent years.

As well as sculpture, drawings, film, video, sound works, performance and music the festival will include a re-enactment of a 1960’s eco-action by releasing 50 white bicycles on the streets of the city.

Under the artistic direction of Katrina Brow, this year’s inspiration is the relationship between past, present and future. It's a theme that will be tackled by a range of participating galleries including Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, The Hunterian Art Gallery, The Gallery of Modern Art, Glasgow Centre for Contemporary Arts (CCA), and Tramway.

For more information on the 2010 International Festival of Visual Art taking place between April 16 and May 3 go to the website www.glasgowinternational.org.

Art gallery hosts underground sex club

VIENNA (Reuters Life!) - A Vienna art gallery has opened a nightly swingers club as part of a two-month project aimed at provoking debate about scandal in art.

The club, housed in the cellar of The Secession art gallery in central Vienna, offers visitors the chance to act out their sexual fantasies in leather and latex and includes a dance floor, body painting and an S&M chamber.
The club opens only after the main exhibits have shut but curious visitors over 18 years of age can walk through the empty, scarlet rooms with black sofas during the day.
Vienna Mayor Michael Haeupl said he did not approve of the club, but noted that outraged politicians and newspapers were playing into the artist's hands.
"An artist's goal is to provoke, and you are all playing along with it," he told a news conference.
The project is the work of Swiss artist Christoph Buechel, who wanted to draw a parallel with the controversy over Gustav Klimt's "Beethoven Frieze" painting, a spokeswoman for the gallery told the Austria Press Agency.
The Klimt painting, which hangs next to the swingers exhibit, provoked uproar at the turn of the last century for the way it depicted nude women. It cannot be viewed when the swingers' club is open.