• 20 February 2009
  • Posted By Patrick Disney
  • Nuclear file, Persian Gulf

Always a straight shooter (updated)

From Gary Sick, two things to note in yesterday’s IAEA report:

1. Starting at about the time of the US presidential election, Iran dramatically slowed down its installation of operating centrifuges.* This led Mohammad al-Baradei, the director of the IAEA, to comment publicly that “They haven’t really been adding centrifuges, which is a good thing.  Our assessment is that it’s a political decision.”

In other words, there was no technical obstacle preventing Iran from installing many more cascades of centrifuges, which produce enriched uranium. Instead, it appeared to be sending a positive signal to the Obama administration, possibly the precursor to a “freeze for freeze” agreement (Iran freezes its enrichment program at the current level in return for US freezing of any further punitive actions, while talks proceed), which has been proposed in some quarters.

2. The IAEA paper also reported that its inspection discovered that more uranium had been enriched than shown by Iranian estimates. It is important to note that Iran reports on the basis of ESTIMATES, while the IAEA does precise measurement once a year with precision instruments. The total production, however, is monitored regularly and is under IAEA supervision during regular (often surprise) inspections. Senior UN officials were at pains to note that the mistake was the result of an engineering miscalculation and not a deliberate attempt to mislead the IAEA.  They also noted that no LEU (low enriched uranium) was at risk of diversion, and that the discrepancy will be corrected in future reports. In their report they say clearly that “the physical inventory as declared by Iran was consistent with the results of the [inspection], within the measurement uncertainties normally associated with enrichment plants of a similar throughput.” They confirmed that the uranium output was enriched at a level of 3.49% (it must be enriched above 90% to be usable in a nuclear weapon).

Update: Please.  If you haven’t figured it out yet, you must read Jeffrey Lewis’ blog Arms Control Wonk.  You’ve just got to do it.

Posted By Patrick Disney

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Sign the Petition


7,350 signatures

Tell Google: Stop playing Persian Gulf name games!

May 14, 2012
Larry Page
Chief Executive Officer
Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, California 94043

Dear Mr. Page:

It has come to our attention that Google has begun omitting the title of the Persian Gulf from its Google Maps application. This is a disconcerting development given the undisputed historic and geographic precedent of the name Persian Gulf, and the more recent history of opening up the name to political, ethnic, and territorial disputes. However unintentionally, in adopting this practice, Google is participating in a dangerous effort to foment tensions and ethnic divisions in the Middle East by politicizing the region’s geographic nomenclature. Members of the Iranian-American community are overwhelmingly opposed to such efforts, particularly at a time when regional tensions already have been pushed to the brink and threaten to spill over into conflict. As the largest grassroots organization in the Iranian-American community, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) calls on Google to not allow its products to become propaganda tools and to immediately reinstate the historically accurate, apolitical title of “Persian Gulf” in all of its informational products, including Google Maps.

Historically, the name “Persian Gulf” is undisputed. The Greek geographer and astronomer Ptolemy referencing in his writings the “Aquarius Persico.” The Romans referred to the "Mare Persicum." The Arabs historically call the body of water, "Bahr al-Farsia." The legal precedent of this nomenclature is also indisputable, with both the United Nations and the United States Board of Geographic Names confirming the sole legitimacy of the term “Persian Gulf.” Agreement on this matter has also been codified by the signatures of all six bordering Arab countries on United Nations directives declaring this body of water to be the Persian Gulf.

But in the past century, and particularly at times of escalating tensions, there have been efforts to exploit the name of the Persian Gulf as a political tool to foment ethnic division. From colonial interests to Arab interests to Iranian interests, the opening of debate regarding the name of the Persian Gulf has been a recent phenomenon that has been exploited for political gain by all sides. Google should not enable these politicized efforts.

In the 1930s, British adviser to Bahrain Sir Charles Belgrave proposed to rename the Persian Gulf, “Arabian Gulf,” a proposal that was rejected by the British Colonial and Foreign offices. Two decades later, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company resurrected the term during its dispute with Mohammad Mossadegh, the Iranian Prime Minister whose battle with British oil interests would end in a U.S.-sponsored coup d'état that continues to haunt U.S.-Iran relations. In the 1960s, the title “Arabian Gulf” became central to propaganda efforts during the Pan-Arabism era aimed at exploiting ethnic divisions in the region to unite Arabs against non-Arabs, namely Iranians and Israelis. The term was later employed by Saddam Hussein to justify his aims at territorial expansion. Osama Bin Laden even adopted the phrase in an attempt to rally Arab populations by emphasizing ethnic rivalries in the Middle East.

We have serious concerns that Google is now playing into these efforts of geographic politicization. Unfortunately, this is not the first time Google has stirred controversy on this topic. In 2008, Google Earth began including the term “Arabian Gulf” in addition to Persian Gulf as the name for the body of water. NIAC and others called on you then to stop using this ethnically divisive propaganda term, but to no avail. Instead of following the example of organizations like the National Geographic Society, which in 2004 used term “Arabian Gulf” in its maps but recognized the error and corrected it, Google has apparently decided to allow its informational products to become politicized.

Google should rectify this situation and immediately include the proper name for the Persian Gulf in Google Maps and all of its informational products. The exclusion of the title of the Persian Gulf diminishes your applications as informational tools, and raises questions about the integrity and accuracy of information provided by Google.

We strongly urge you to stay true to Google’s mission – “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” – without distorting or politicizing that information. We look forward to an explanation from you regarding the recent removal of the Persian Gulf name from Google Maps and call on you to immediately correct this mistake.



Share this with your friends: