Mehdi Hasan

Mehdi Hasan’s polemical take on politics, economics and foreign affairs

Syndicate contentRSS

Iran and lazy journalism

Muddled Metro gets it wrong on nukes

By Mehdi Hasan Published 25 September 2009 12:00

Aidan Radnedge's cover story in Metro this morning is an abysmal piece of journalism -- if, indeed, it can be called journalism.

Headlined "We will rid world of nuclear arms" (sorry, there doesn't seem to be a link available for the piece on the Metro website) and focusing on the UN's "landmark pledge" to abolish nukes, his bizarre piece claims in its opening paragraph that the pledge was made "despite defiance from Iran and North Korea".

Really? Iran? Defiant on nuclear weapons? The Iranian regime is proudly, publicly and defiantly committed only to nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons. You could argue -- without a shred of evidence -- that the Iranians are secretly building a nuclear bomb, and should not therefore be trusted with a uranium enrichment programme, but you can't then pretend that they would be bragging about it at the United Nations. The reality is that as long ago as 2003 the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, proclaimed in a fatwa that "the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam" and that "the Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons".

In the penultimate paragraph of the article, Radnedge chooses flatly to contradict his own inflammatory claim from the opening paragraph by actually quoting from the official Iranian statement at the UN yesterday: "Our commitment to non-proliferation remains intact."

Which is it, Aidan? Is (non-nuclear) Iran committed to "non-proliferation", or is it in "defiance"?

Tags: Iran

 
 

22 comments

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:44 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:45 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:46 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:47 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:48 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

Just Observer's picture

Mon, 2009-09-28 16:49 — Just Observer

I cant believe this is turning into a repeat of what happened in Iraq and the world is again accepting it blindly. Why?

explodingbadger1's picture

Tue, 2009-09-29 06:12 — explodingbadger1

Most news coverage of Iran is quite bizarre... always failing to mention Israel nukes and the fact the Israel is not a signatory of the non proliferation treaty unlike Iran.
It also fails to mention Israels refusal to back a non nuclear middle east.

Angela1's picture

Fri, 2009-10-09 09:09 — Angela1

I don't understand: how many countries did Iran invade since its inception? None. How many did the US invade, influence, ruined, how many dictatorships did they back? Countless, all over the world. Why should we trust more the US than Iran?

Why should I sleep tight if I know that Israel has nuclear weapons but not Iran? Iranian regime has no intention to invade other countries, on what base should we doubt it? Western governments are currently united to conquer, divide and sell Iraq and Afghanistan, what do we need to understand that, being Iran rich in oil and just between Iraq and Afghanistan, it's very likely the next prey of our banks' and corporations' greed?

hasan6's picture

Wed, 2009-10-14 05:38 — hasan6

Time and again the Iranian Government has invited the UN Weapons inspectors to visit their nuclear stations. Yet the US and other western countries stubbornly insist that Iran is stockpiling nuclear weapons. How ignorant and hostile can papers like the Metro get apart from the Anglo American alliance?

BABUR_72's picture

Sun, 2009-10-25 03:12 — BABUR_72

A few facts perhaps we should be mindfull of before assuming the worst of the Iranian's intentions.
The IAEA have repeatedly stated they have 'no credible evidence' that the Iranian government have breached the NPT by diverting any nuclear fissile material from their declared power generation programme,towards a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
According to NPT rules,signatories must inform the IAEA 180 days in advance of the transportation of nuclear fissile material to the designated site.
The building of the new nuclear facility,near Qom,began only recently & was disclosed to the IAEA a full 18 months before it was due to become an active nuclear site.
Despite their compliance with the NPT & the transparency with which they've dealt with the IAEA inspectors(in contrast to many NPT signatories),they're still threatened with more punitive sanctions,or even military action.
In the history of the IAEA no nation has undergone more official IAEA inspections,nor been subjected to such rigorous scrutiny as Iran's nuclear power generation programme has.
With increasingly bellicose statements eminating from Washinton,Europe & resounding in the mainstream media,if i were in a position to advise them(which i'm not) i'd tell them to get a few nukes...And be pretty damned quick about it!
After all.Weren't we in the West 'protected' during the Cold war by the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction?

Hans-Heinrich's picture

Sat, 2009-10-03 03:59 — Hans-Heinrich (not verified)

Let's face it:: The US is told what to do by Tel Aviv. Ever since the UN allowed Israel to come into existence in 1948 it's been clear that Zionism would turn the world into one big chaotic mess. All our "troubles" have their origin in Israel's drive for conquest of Palestine and beyond. It's time the world woke up to them and told the Israelis where to go.

Greg1's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 12:46 — Greg1

"The Iranian regime is proudly, publicly and defiantly committed only to nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons."

Regardless of what the Iranian regime says, how do you know this is actually true?

In the Guardian today Iran has admitted to a secret uranium enrichment plant. Did you know about this? If you didn't you can't possibly claim to know what the Iranian regime thinks as you aren't party to all the information about their nuclear plans.

If you did know, then you too are party to withholding information from the IAEA and your honesty has to be questioned.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/25/iran-admits-uranium-plant

bariloche's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 13:03 — bariloche

What do you expect from a rubbish newspaper like the Metro? I skimmed London lite the other day and most of the news articles were written by just two journalists. Hopefully they are all recycled properly after being read each morning...

Delves's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 13:42 — Delves

I'm afraid anything that the Iranian government says is not to be believed.

Buddy's picture

Mon, 2009-10-05 16:06 — Buddy (not verified)

It is obvious that there are too many sociopaths in positions of political power.

vanrisszcu's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 13:50 — vanrisszcu

"Delves" - you may be right, and that anything the Iranian government says "is not to be believed" but, in the wake of the Iraq lies about Saddam's WMDs, do you uncritically accept everything our own government and America's now says about Iran? Ironically, America's own intelligence agencies have concluded that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons programme. So you don't just have to take Iran's word for it.

"Greg" - why does my "honesty" have to be questioned? What are you smoking? The fact that Iran have concealed a secret uranium enrichment plant shows that they are keeping their nuclear programme a secret and that is, I accept, a bad thing. But it is not evidence of nuclear weapons - I repeat, there is no hard or credible evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons programme. Do you have any Greg? Do you even understand the difference between nuclear power - which Iran admits to wanting - and nuclear weapons - which Iran says it doesn't want and which there is no evidence for?

Greg1's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 14:42 — Greg1

Mehdi,

I do accept that I created a false dichotomy and that your honesty should not actually be questioned.

SuperStudent's picture

Fri, 2009-09-25 20:14 — SuperStudent (not verified)

Mehdi, you are a hero.

Daniele1's picture

Sun, 2009-09-27 01:31 — Daniele1

What I would like to know is how countries like America, France and Britain who still have enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world several times have the audacity to tell others that they have no right to have them?

Also when Pakistan, India and Israel acquired nuclear weapons, I do not recall any protest whatsoever, not even a timid "excuse us but.." from any of those superpowers.

Could it be that these guys are our friends and Iran is not? What does it look like from the point of view of Arab and other Muslim countries? Surely the position of the West can only provoke more defiance and anger in those countries. Why should we be surprised?

the pair's picture

Sun, 2009-09-27 07:02 — the pair (not verified)

Why don't the Iranians just follow Israel's example by withdrawing from the NPT, keeping the number and location of their nukes secret and buying material from the French? I'm sure they would then enjoy the same friendly relations that open, honest people like Avigdor and Bibi have with Obama, Brown and Sarkozy. We might even send them a few billion in aid every year!

Sorry for the sarcasm, but the hypocrisy of this whole affair is repugnant and, other than a few ACTUAL journalists like yourself and Greenwald, it's been 2003 all over again in the media (here in the States, anyway.)

Keep up the good work.

mrblobby's picture

Sun, 2009-09-27 14:25 — mrblobby

Worse perhaps is the hypocrisy and double-standards that seems to particularly surround the nuclear issue. The heightened rhetoric concerning Iran has much to do with the high profile visit of Netanyahu to Washington his subsequent circuit of Europe and his altogether more clandestine visit to Moscow. What is wobbling our politicians more than anything else is the threat of Israeli military action should the UNSC not deliver on the sanctions front. The Israelis have shown historically that they have scant regard for international law and will take the law into their hands if deemed appropriate. The likely consequences of this action could be catastrophic for the region and for world peace in general - so perforce we succumb to Israeli blackmail and not I suspect for the first time.

Clearly for the US administration in particular the issue of concern is not nuclear proliferation but regime change. Are we really going to be blinded once again into thinking that Iran's nuclear ambitions are, like Saddam's WMD, the real issue for the aggressive sanctioning of a country? If the US and the UK were truly committed to nuclear non-proliferation they wouldn't be spending billions upgrading their nuclear capacity, or expanding their own civil nuclear programs, or expanding their nuclear fuel reprocessing operations, or doing cosy technology sharing deals with countries that are not even signatories to the NPT. The US and the UK were founding signatories of the NPT but since then have done far more than any other country to effectively shred the NPT at a time when the NPT desperately needs revamping, rewriting, restrengthening, in order to survive the new priorities of the 21st century.

What makes the US-Indian nuclear sharing deal - it it doesn't violate the legalities of the NPT sure it makes a mockery of the spirit of the NPT - a real hoot is it is aimed at garnering Indian support at the Governing Board of the IAEA on voting against Iran's breach of the 'modified fine print' of its specially tailored NPT agreement. These are the extra special rules drafted for Iran which, as with Iraq, get ever harder to comply with until..

How but in a looking-glass world does a major proliferator of nuclear weapons who refuses to sign up to the Non-proliferation treaty [India] get to vote on whether a signatory of the treaty is in breach of the coda regarding their development of a civil nuclear program?

sean's picture

Sun, 2009-09-27 18:32 — sean (not verified)

The credulity with which ,what I can only call the "so called left" treats none western fascists such as the Iranian regime becomes more of a farce daily.The BNP say they are not racist,do you believe a word they say ?

Latest tweets