Reply #2: So long NPT

[Flabbergasted]

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/03/dadded02-1275-469e-8fae-b6f886015140.html

Indian Parallels (to Iran)

RFE/RL: Some people say the nuclear deal between the United States and non-NPT-member India, while NPT member Iran is going to be punished, could weaken the NPT. Do you agree?

Cirincione: Yes. The U.S. deal, brokered by President Bush and Prime Minister Singh, is a real blow to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. If this deal stands, the treaty could fall. Here's why: The president is basically violating Article 1 of the treaty. Article 1 says that no state with nuclear technology will sell that technology to another country if it assists or encourages that country's nuclear-weapons program. This sale does help India build more nuclear weapons; it does encourage India's nuclear-weapons program.

This deal is going to come back to haunt us. If we're making an exception for India, selling nuclear technology even though they're not a part of the , then why can't Russia decide that it's going to make an exception for Iran -- to sell nuclear technology to Iran even if Iran were to pull out of the treaty? Once you start playing this nuclear exceptionalism theme, once you start breaking the rules for favorite states, it becomes impossible to stop. That's why the India deal actually greatly weakens our efforts to enforce the NPT against Iran.

snip


U.S. Credibility

RFE/RL: You've said in the past that Secretary Rice has been successful in uniting the international community against Iran's stance. Now we hear statements by Vice President Cheney or others implying possible military actions against Iran. Could that harm the unity?

Cirincione: Yes. What's disturbing about the vice president's remarks is, number one, that he's getting involved in this discussion at all -- because people remember the role he played in Iraq, where he basically misled the world, misled the American people, gave a lot of false information, and was the prime architect of the war against Iraq. Number two, to have the vice president intervening at this point could lead other countries to conclude that all this talk about a peaceful settlement is not true. Countries may start to believe the U.S.'s true agenda is regime change and that they're just using this nuclear issue as a way to get it. If that becomes the widespread view, then support for the U.S. and European position will collapse.