Iran’s nuclear stance and U.S., U.N. options

Re “Iran’s threat, Bush’s dilemma,” Opinion, Jan. 25

The war in Iraq has led to many repercussions for the United States. Max Boot points out another issue, one that was initially an intangible, which he calls “Bush’s dilemma.” Because of the consequences over Iraq, we find ourselves fettered to a post in the face of real danger -- a nuclear-armed Iran. We cannot expect Israel to save us from an Iranian threat because the Islamic world knows that the U.S. is the big brother standing a short distance away. This action would be seen as further proof that we are in the process of another crusade against Muslims.

Boot explains that “President Bush must face a hard choice” in dealing with Iran. History is beginning to show that the self-proclaimed “war president” already made one, and that decision was ill-fated. Will one bad choice beget another? And what repercussions would our nation face? Although many measure the Iraq war in dollars or lives, it is the intangibles that make it more costly, and we will be paying for it long after the architects have passed on.

ERIC F. BURGESS

Rosemead

*

I’d like to ask those who believe that Iran is entitled to nuclear weapons if they believe in gun control for individuals. If so, why shouldn’t the same idea apply to countries?

DIANE M. ANDERSON

Lincolnwood, Ill.

*

Re “Iran’s Nuclear Stance Poses Quandary for U.N.,” Jan. 22

This article misses an important point: The legal foundation for any action against Iran is absent, in light of Iran’s extensive cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, resulting in more than 1,400 days of inspection of civilian and military sites, and the resolution of the outstanding issues, including the foreign sources of contamination. The various reports by the agency since November 2003 repeatedly state that “to date, there is no evidence that the previously undeclared nuclear material and activities referred to ... were related to a nuclear weapons program.” Iran’s resumption of nuclear research after two years of voluntary suspension is in accordance with Article III of the IAEA Statute and Article IV of the Nonproliferation Treaty and is being carried out under the full supervision of the IAEA.

Iran has not violated its international obligations, nor threatened aggression against any other state that would call for U.N. action. Those counseling U.N. sanctions or similar measures against Iran have themselves stockpiled nuclear arms, and some even openly contemplate the use of nuclear weapons against conventional threats.

MANSOUR SADEGHI

Counselor

Permanent Mission of Iran

to the United Nations, New York