Nuclear Lies, Deceptions and Hypocrisies

By Mehdi Sarram

For the first time in decades, this timely book attempts to document the lies, deceptions and hypocrisies in seven countries, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, India and the US. Certainly, not all these seven countries have lied and deceived to the same extent. It will be shown that the lies and deceptions have changed the world we live in today. The unacceptable consequences of some of these lies and deceptions have resulted in a more unsafe world. There is plenty of public information on nuclear issues in these countries except Israel where the nuclear program has been kept secret from the beginning.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BookBaby
• Release date: Jul 10, 2015
• ISBN: 9781882383252

Book preview

work.

Preface

Many books have been written on the subject of nuclear energy since Bertrand Goldschmidt published his book in 1982 on The Atomic Complex, a worldwide political history of nuclear energy. Bertrand Goldschmidt’s highly informative book covered nonproliferation issues, alliances, the nuclear fuel cycle and thenuclear debate of the 70s—however it reasonable to state that the nuclear world has changed considerably since the 80s along with the politics of nuclear proliferation.

Over the last 47 years I have worked for the government of Iran, the IAEA and the US nuclear industry and have traveled to 38 countries most of them with nuclear programs. I noticed one common denominator in the countries I visited or in which I worked. The governments, in general, lie, deceive, cheat and demonstrate hypocritical behavior. My observations are limited to nuclear technology—in particular the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

About three years ago, I finally made a decision to write this book. Since I could not cover every country with a nuclear program, I selected seven countries that I thought ranked high when it comes to nuclear lies, deceptions and hypocrisies. The countries I chose are Iraq, Syria, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, India and the US. Each chapter highlights the major lies, deceptions and hypocrisies of a country over the past 60 years. It is certain that, not all these seven countries have lied and deceived to the same extent.

Countries such as North Korea, South Africa, China, Russia, France and the UK were not selected. These countries have their own share of lies and deceptions but including them would have become a massive task.

For the first time in past decades, this book attempts to document the lies, deceptions and hypocrisies in the aforementioned countries. It will be shown that the lies and deceptions perpetrated by these countries have changed the world we live in today. The unacceptable consequences of some of these lies and deceptions have resulted in a more unsafe world in 2015. There is plenty of public information on nuclear issues in these countries except for Israel, where the nuclear program has been kept secret from the beginning in the 1950s. The collaboration of South Africa and Israel is discussed in Chapter 3.

The information provided in this book is based on many credible books, documents and some declassified National Security Archive reports. Also, at times, I have expressed my own views on the lies and deceptions of these seven countries related to their nuclear programs and their consequences.

A brief summary of the chapters covered in this book is as follows:

1. Iraq

The Israeli air force attacked Iraq’s nuclear facility on June 7, 1981. This nuclear facility did not have any nuclear fuel. Iraq had signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and was under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. This preemptive attack, on a nuclear facility with no nuclear fuel, was in violation of all international norms and is considered illegal and immoral. Many countries condemned this attack. The IAEA Director General reported this attack to the IAEA Board and the UN Security Council. Details of these important discussions are provided in Chapter 1. This Israeli attack in 1981 was the first act of aggression by a State against another State’s nuclear facility.

It will be demonstrated that indeed, Iraq was a victim of nuclear conspiracy. The Iraqi nuclear reactor was purchased from France and it was declared to the IAEA and was subject to the IAEA safeguards and inspections under the NPT. It is the government of Israel which committed an illegal act. The Doctrine of Preemptive Strike, known as the Begin Doctrine will be analyzed. A brief history of the nuclear program in Iraq is provided as well as a description of its major nuclear facilities. It is believed that that the US administration of Ronald Regan was aware of this attack. The author was in Vienna working for the IAEA Department of Safeguards at the time of the Israeli attack on June 7, 1981 and I was privy to the facts and assessments of this shocking event.

Iraq’s violations and rights under the NPT will be discussed.

2. Syria

It took nearly 26 years for Israel to attack another sovereign nation. It was on September 6, 2007 when the attack on the Syrian nuclear facility occurred. This was during the George W. Bush administration. Syria, like Iraq had signed the NPT and was under IAEA inspections.

Again, it is believed that the US government was aware of this attack and did not formally announce it to the world until months later.The Syrian Al-Kibar facility had not received any nuclear fuel and was not operational. The connection with North Korea is discussed as well as the similarity of the Syrian nuclear reactor to the North Korea’s reactor in Yongbyon.

This Israeli attack was illegal and immoral. Syria, like Iraq, is a victim of Israeli hypocrisy, conspiracy, lies and deception. One has to blame the world politicians for not voicing their opinions strongly enough in 1981 after the Israeli attack on Iraq for not cancelling Israels membership in the IAEA. Israel, based on the Begin Doctrine, feels they can attack any country with a nuclear program if they feel threatened.

A comparison between the 1981 attack on Iraq and the 2007 attack on Syria will be provided as well as the ramifications of these attacks and the impact on the NPT. This chapter also discusses the world reaction to these illegal attacks.

Chapters 1 and 2 are treated as one country; Israel took the law into its own hands and attacked two countries within 26 years. The goal is to remind people of the illegal actions of Israel and how it violated all international norms and laws.

A brief history of the Syrian nuclear program, a description of its nuclear facilities and Syria’s violations and rights under the NPT will be discussed.

3. Israel

Chapter 3 will discuss why Israel ranks very high for nuclear hypocrisy, lies and deception. Israel has attacked two sovereign nations in 26 years and destroyed their nuclear facilities. Israel has not signed the NPT and does not intend to do so and has informed the IAEA to this effect. The number of nuclear weapons in Israel has been kept secret but various organizations report that Israel has between 80 and 100 nuclear weapons.

This chapter will show the Israeli government lied to the Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson administrations about the purpose of the Dimona nuclear reactor, its sole purpose was to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. Israeli officials told the US Presidents in many meetings that the Dimona reactor is used for peaceful research and textile. It is a fact that Israel simply has lied to the world about its nuclear weapon program since the 50s. Israel has been on the record in the past decade for possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Israel has maintained a policy of opacity regarding its nuclear program, which started with the assistance from France in the late 1950s. The Israeli government neither confirms nor denies having nuclear weapons. No concrete evidence on nuclear testing is available.

A brief description of the Israeli nuclear program as well as its nuclear facilities will be provided, noting that much of the information has been kept secret from the beginning. Many consider Israel the 51st State of the US and many believe that the US-Middle East policies are essentially formulated in Tel Aviv.

The role Israel played in trying to block the Iran and P5+1 negotiation since November 2013 will be discussed.

4. Iran

Iran signed the NPT in 1968 and ratified the Treaty in 1970. Iran had no issues with the West or the IAEA until the regime change in 1979. In the 60s, the US government had supplied Iran with a 5 MW research reactor. The regime of the Shah had an ambitious nuclear program to introduce about 23,000 MWe nuclear capacity. The details of this program will be discussed as to why Iran decided to purchase two large size nuclear plants, 1200 MWe each from West Germany as well as a supply of nuclear fuel for ten years. Iran had no intention to build nuclear weapons, as the Shah believed in a nuclear free Middle East.

The author has extensive knowledge of Iran’s nuclear program. When it comes to Iran’s nuclear program, I was there. I was the supervisor of the 5 MW research reactor at Tehran University’s Nuclear Center starting in April 1967. In 1974, I was appointed as one of the eight directors of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. As such, the information provided in Chapter 4 on Iran is mostly based on my direct involvement with the nuclear program in Iran until 1981 when I left to work for the IAEA in Vienna.

This Chapter provides detailed information on Iran’s nuclear program from the beginning in 1955 with the US Atom for Peace Program to the present time. This includes the program under the Shah and under the current regime since 1979. The details of Iran’s enrichment program and allegations of plans to build nuclear weapons are discussed.

Iran’s violations and its legal rights to enrich uranium to 20 % under the NPT are discussed. There is a huge conspiracy against Iran, with Israel and the US being the leaders. The West has created a major misinformation campaign about Iran’s enrichment program. A major disagreement between Iran and the West/IAEA has been on the interpretation of the IAEA Additional Protocol/Code 3.1. This important issue is discussed and opposing views will be presented. The validity of the six UNSC sanctions on Iran starting in 2006 and the role of the US will also be discussed.

In fairness, there is a big difference between the aggressive Bush 43 administration and the current Obama administration. Obama has made it clear to Israel that he is pursuing the line of diplomacy with Iran and not war. Any attack by Israel or the US on Iran’s nuclear facilities will have unacceptable and devastating consequences leading the instability in the world.

The recent negotiations between Iran and P5+1 starting in November 2013 will be discussed. This chapter is updated as of April 15, 2015 with the latest developments between Iran and P5+1. The details of the framework agreement signed by all parties on April 2, 2015 are also discussed. The next deadline for Iran and P5+1 to sign the final framework agreement is June 30, 2015. Despite all the misinformation by the US and Israel, Iran does not have a single nuclear weapon in 2015.

The role of the IAEA under Dr. Amano, the Director General since 2009 and his lack of impartiality is discussed.

5. Pakistan

The Pakistani nuclear program started with installation of a 5 MW research reactor supplied by a US company, American Machine and Foundry. The reactor began operation in 1963 and is located at the Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH) in Rawalpindi.

Later in 1964, Pakistan’s Executive Committee of the National Economic Council approved a project to build a 137 MWe nuclear power plant (heavy water type) at Karachi with Canadian assistance and became operational in 1972. The author has familiarity with Pakistan’s nuclear program and has traveled there and visited both the research reactor as well as the power reactor, KANUPP.

This chapter will discuss Pakistan’s weapon program and its competition with India’s nuclear weapon development. Despite the US pressure on Pakistan not to develop nuclear weapons, Dr. Muni Ahmad Khan, the former Chairman of Atomic Energy Commission told me personally in Vienna in 1981 that they are determined to develop the first Islamic Bomb. On May 28, 1998, Pakistan announced that it had conducted five (simultaneous) nuclear weapons tests.

Pakistan has not signed the NPT. They showed that by consistently ignoring the West (mostly the US) and despite having received billions of dollars from the US, they could indeed join the Nuclear Club. Pakistan’s hypocrisy and conspiracy allowed AQ Khan to transfer sensitive nuclear technology to a few countries. I will discuss AQ Khan’s role in the illicit transfer of nuclear weapons technology to other countries, including Iran. Pakistan is a good example of where the NPT has failed. It became a member of the Nuclear Club in 1998 and became an example for other developing countries.

Examples of lies and deceptions on the part of Pakistan regarding the developments of their nuclear weapons will be discussed. This Chapter will show how Presidents Zia and Musharaf of Pakistan lied to the US presidents during the time they were building their nuclear weapons.

While Pakistan has not used its nuclear weapons against any neighbors, today, in 2015, Pakistan presents the most dangerous situation in the region. Pakistan has been reported to have around 100 nuclear weapons and is in the process of manufacturing more weapons. The government of Pakistan is not stable. The world is concerned about the security of nuclear weapons in Pakistan. There is fear that the Taliban may somehow get access to the Pakistani nuclear weapons.

6. India

As in the case of most countries, the US supplied India with a 200 MWe nuclear power plant designed by General Electric. India’s nuclear program was started by a small group of influential scientists who were interested in nuclear energy. After the independence in August 1947, the government led by Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru launched an ambitious nuclear program. Its goal was to exploit India’s large natural thorium reserves. The focus was to produce cheap nuclear power, but in parallel, a decision was made to have access to the complete nuclear fuel cycle including mining, processing and fuel fabrication facilities, research and power reactors, spent fuel reprocessing plants, heavy water production plants, waste treatment and disposal facilities. This vision led India to develop the technical capability to build nuclear weapons.

The author has visited India’s nuclear facilities twice. The second visit was in December 1975, a State visit, when I accompanied Dr. Akbar Etemad, the Deputy Prime Minister and the President of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. On this visit, we met the senior nuclear scientists in India, some of whom were responsible for the design and detonation of their first nuclear weapon in 1974.

I will discuss the details of a wrong and misguided US policy with India, the Indo-U.S. Nuclear 123 Agreement and India’s Participation in International Nuclear Commerce.The concept was developed in 2005 and the US congress ratified the agreement in 2008. India signed and approved the agreement in February 2009. I argue this agreement had a lot to do with India buying a number of large size nuclear plants from the US/West. It is important to know that the US made an exception to the rules and rewarded India with this agreement, knowing India had not signed the NPT and exploded a number of nuclear weapons. In this case, politics, business and greed overruled logic and common sense by the US.

I will provide a brief history of nuclear power in India as well as discussion on their lies, deceptions and hypocrisies. While India is a great democracy, it has consistently refused to sign the NPT. Similar to Pakistan, India has nearly 100 nuclear weapons.

7. The United States of America

The US, a powerful nation and a super power has a very high ranking for nuclear hypocrisy, lies and deception in the past 60 years. It was the US government which developed two types of nuclear weapons, uranium and plutonium, and dropped them on Japan. During my visits to Japan over the years, I was told by Japanese intellectuals that they believed that dropping the second bomb on Nagasaki was NOT necessary, as the Japanese government, with high probability, would have surrendered after the first massive nuclear bomb on Hiroshima.

In this chapter, the US hypocrisy and double standard as far as how it treats different countries with respect to nuclear power and the NPT will be described. The US government’s unconditional financial and military support for Israel will be discussed. The US government had many chances in the late 50’s and 60’s to stop Israeli from developing nuclear weapon. This did not happen. When the Israeli government officials lied to three US presidents, these presidents decided to look the other way until it was too late and Israel had developed nuclear weapons.

Other US lies and deceptions will be discussed including the lies in the 2003 Iraq war, lies and misinformation about Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities and more. Also, a discussion is included on why the US media, in general, does not have a questioning attitude in their daily work such as the case in 2003 before the Iraq invasion. Some examples of how the US media has misinformed the public are provided.

Finally, the role of the US in Iran and P5+1 nuclear negotiation since November 2013 will be described. This actually is a positive role as Obama did not take us to a war in Iran as the Bush Administration did in Iraq in 20023.

This book discusses the nuclear proliferation issues in the past 60 years. It is based with on many credible references for each chapter. Some information in this book is based on my own personal observations and experience. This publication presents different and opposing viewpoints on nuclear proliferation which may be perceived to be non-mainstream.

Unfortunately, most people have short-term memories. People barely remember what happened somewhere in the US or in the world a month or a year ago. To fully understand the nuclear events of the last 60 years, this book covers the nuclear profiles of the selected countries from the time they started their nuclear programs. I hope the readers will appreciate how nuclear weapons were developed in some of the countries discussed in this book and how their governments lied and deceived the world.

In 2015, considering the nuclear issues in the world, it is quite timely to write this book on nuclear lies, deception and hypocrisies. It is not a personal biography.

Considering the body of knowledge that pertains to these counties, I have provided some additional information as Attachments in the respective chapters.

This book is written for the record. The sole purpose is to document the lies and deceptions of the more hypocritical countries, all in one volume. Certainly, writing a book on this topic is a major challenge. It requires a sincere sense of conviction and professionalism to disclose issues that the affected governments typically do not wish to discuss.

It took nearly three years to complete this book. I have updated the chapters on Israel, Iran and the US to include the latest information as of April 15, 2015 regarding the negotiation between Iran and P5+1.

    1    

Chapter

Iraq

1.    Background

2.    Non-Proliferation Treaty

3.    Iraq Nuclear Profile, 1981

4.    The Israeli attack on Tammuz-1

5.    Discussion on Israeli attack

6.    Additional discussion on Israeli attack

7.    Nuclear Chronology

8.    Iraq Nuclear Facilities

9.    Conclusion

Attachment 1: UNSC Resolution 487, S/RES/487 (1981) Annex: GC (XXV)/INF/196/Rev.1, Text of the statement made by the IAEA Director General to the Security Council on 19 June 1981

Attachment 2: Iraq Nuclear Profile

1. BACKGROUND

To properly begin a discussion of nuclear issues regarding Iraq, we have to go back 34 years to June 1981. Certainly, the political situation in the world was quite different from what we have today in 2015. Saddam Hussein was the absolute power in his country in 1981. Iraq with support from the French government and industry was building a nuclear reactor, Tammuz-1 (the French call it Osiris). This was a fairly large size nuclear reactor, being 40 MW thermal power.

At the time of writing this book, the regime of Saddam Hussein is long gone as Iraq was invaded by a US-led coalition in March 2003. The justification for this war was partly based on Iraq having weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons or developing such weapons, based on interpretation of available intelligence.

On June 7, 1981, the government of Israel attacked the Tammuz-1 nuclear research reactor under construction. At the time of attack, Iraq had been a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) since 1969. This came as a shock to the international community except the US government. The reactions from the international community included labels such as the deliberate act of aggression against a sovereign State, strong condemnation, and the illegal and immoral acts of an aggression inconsistent with international norms.

Considering that the 1981 attack was the first act of aggression on a nuclear facility by a State against another State, this chapter will examine in detail the Israeli attack on the Tammuz-1 nuclear research reactor and its ramifications.

While Iraq could have had the intention of pursuing nuclear weapon capability, it will be clearly demonstrated that in June 1981, Iraq was a victim of nuclear conspiracy. It will be shown that Iraq complied with all the IAEA requirements and inspection procedures up to the time of the attack. It is the government of Israel, which is the aggressor. It will be demonstrated that Israel was, and is, one of the more hypocritical countries among countries with a nuclear program. The other countries discussed in this book have nuclear hypocrisies but none of them took the liberty of attacking other sovereign States to destroy their nuclear facilities under the IAEA safeguards. Again, it is noted that the Iraqi reactor had no fuel in the reactor core.

If we understand the details of this first attack by the Israeli government on the Iraqi nuclear facility in 1981, then we will understand why the same country, Israel, took the liberty some 26 years later to repeat another illegal and immoral attack against another neighboring country, namely Syria in September 2007. Issues regarding Israel will be discussed in Chapter 3.

This chapter will discuss the Iraqi nuclear program and provides the details of the Israeli attack on Iraq‘s nuclear facility.

2. NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY

The subject of NPT is discussed throughout this book. In order to acquaint the readers with Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), I will provide a summary of NPT in this Chapter. The full text of NPT, INFCIRC/153 Corrected, 1972, and Additional Protocols, INFCIRC 540, Corrected, 1997 are available on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) web site at IAEA.org.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT) is a cornerstone of global security. The NPT aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to additional states while ensuring fair access to peaceful nuclear technology under international safeguards (audits and inspections). There are two categories of parties to the treaty— nuclear weapon states (NWSs) and non-nuclear weapon states (NNWSs). Under the treaty, NWSs are defined as the five states that exploded a nuclear device before January 1, 1967 (United States, Soviet Union [now Russia], United Kingdom, France, and China). The IAEA Board of Governors has requested the Director General to use the material reproduced in the Document, IAEA INFCIRC 153 (corrected) as the basis for negotiating safeguards agreements between the Agency and non-nuclear weapon States party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The NPT took effect on March 5, 1970, after being opened for signature on July 1, 1968. The growth in the treaty’s membership toward universality has been steady. Beginning with 43 original parties in 1970, membership increased to 96 in 1975, 132 in 1985, and 178 in 1995. Today, there are 164 member states which have joined NPT. Cuba acceded to the treaty on November 4, 2002. As of April 2004, three States have not signed the treaty: India, Israel, and Pakistan. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, also known as North Korea) announced its withdrawal from the NPT on January 10, 2003, and its withdrawal came into effect on April 10, 2003.

Israel, India, and Pakistan are known to possess nuclear weapons today, over 100 each. Because they did not detonate a nuclear explosive device before January 1, 1967, however, they are not considered Nuclear Weapon States under the NPT. This means that if they were to join the treaty, they would have to do so as Non-Nuclear Weapon States, eliminate their nuclear arsenals, and accept comprehensive IAEA inspections on all of their nuclear activities. Following South Africa’s accession to the NPT, a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement was signed with the IAEA) on September 16, 1991.

The Nuclear Weapon States, China, France, the Soviet Union [now Russia], and the United Kingdom and the United States:

may retain their nuclear arsenals;

may not transfer nuclear weapons to anyone;

may not assist any non-nuclear weapon states to acquire, manufacture or control nuclear weapons; and

commit to pursuing negotiations in good faith towards ending the nuclear arms race and achieving nuclear disarmament.

Non-Nuclear Weapon State:

must not build, acquire, or possess nuclear weapons;

may research, produce, and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes; and

must accept safeguards (audits and intrusive on-site monitoring) on all of their nuclear activities and materials to verify they are not being used for nuclear weapons.

Many countries consider NPT as a discriminatory and unfair treaty. They believe NPT is a partial failure and has not achieved its original goals. Since 1970, when NPT took effect, the five weapon States have not complied with one of the requirements, commit to pursuing negotiations in good faith towards ending the nuclear arms race and achieving nuclear disarmament.

3. IRAQ NUCLEAR PROFILE, 1981

In this section, a brief description of Iraq’s nuclear profile around 1981 and shortly thereafter is provided. A discussion on Iraq’s nuclear profiles is provided to ensure the reader appreciates the exact situation before the Israeli attack. A more detailed nuclear profile of Iraq is provided in Attachment 2 with references. The most important evidence is the June 2008 Senate Intelligence Committee report on Iraq’s WMD program 110th Congress, second session, S-Report, 110. Public statements regarding Iraq by the US government officials were substantiated by intelligence information. It states: The post war findings revealed that Iraq ended its nuclear weapon program in 1991, and that Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapon program progressively declined after that date. The Iraq Survey Group found no evidence that Saddam Hussein ever attempted to start a nuclear weapon program. The post war finding confirmed that a high strength aluminum tubes sought by Iraq have been intended for a conventional rocket program and found no evidence that other dual use technologies were intended for use in a nuclear weapon program. Post war survey found no evidence that Iraq sought uranium from any foreign sources after 1991.

The Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) was established in 1956 with assistance from the US. The United States provided Iraq with most of the US Atomic Energy Commission unclassified reports from the Manhattan Project. Also, the US provided training for the first generation of Iraqi nuclear scientists. In 1959, Iraq sent 375 students to the Soviet Union to study nuclear technology. In 1962, construction of the first research reactor began, a 2 MW IRT-5000 supplied by the Soviet Union. The Tuwaitha Site became the Nuclear Research Center located about 30 kilometers south of Baghdad. The 2 MW research reactor went critical in 1967. Shortly thereafter, Iraq signed the NPT in July 1968 and ratified the Treaty in October 1969.¹

The fact that Iraq signed the NPT a year after its first nuclear research reactor went critical indicates that Iraq’s nuclear program was based on peaceful application. As it will be discussed in Chapter 3 on Israel, the Israeli nuclear program had all the military intentions from the beginning of their nuclear energy program in the 50s.

Coincidentally, Saddam Hussein emerges as the Vice President of Iraq at about the same month. One year later in October 1969, Iraq ratifies the NPT thereby pledging not to develop nuclear weapons.

In 1973, the French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac and Saddam Hussein reached an agreement in which France would provide Iraq with a nuclear research reactor in exchange for petroleum concessions, imports of French automobiles, and options on future military aircraft purchases. The reactor to be provided to Iraq was similar to the French Osiris reactor. The Osiris design is a pool-type reactor with 93% enriched uranium as fuel. The French called this reactor Osiris (the Iraqi Osirak). The Iraqis call this reactor Tammuz-1. The power level of Tammuz-1 was 40 MWt, which makes it a large reactor.

In 1978, the 2 MW IRT-5000 research reactor originally purchased from the Soviet Union in 1962 was upgraded to 5MW. In February 1979, the Iranian Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini exiled in Iraq, returns to Iran following a 15-year exile and the Shah of Iran was forced to leave the country. This regime change in Iran had major implications for Iraq’s nuclear program and security leading to the Israeli air force attack in June 1981.

The first Israeli attempt to prevent Iraq from having a large nuclear research reactor occurred in April 1979, when the reactor cores for Tammuz-I and Tammuz II (Isis) were damaged by saboteurs in an explosion while they were awaiting shipment to Iraq in a warehouse in the French Mediterranean town of Seyne-sur-Mer. Tammuz-2 reactor is a 600 KWt critical assembly. Authorities concluded that the bombing was done by professionals; it is suspect that Mossad was most likely responsible for the sabotage. This act of sabotage caused a delay of about 2 years.

Today, the world knows Israel had all the intentions to destroy this Iraqi nuclear research project from the beginning. They tried in France and it did not quite work. Eventually, Israel bombed Tammuz-1 in June 1981.²

Author’s Note: One would think the French Government would express its opposition to this illegal act of pure sabotage on the French soil quite violently, but they did not. This shows the politics of nuclear conspiracy that in April 1979, the French Government under political pressure kept this act of sabotage quiet. This event was not widely publicized. The French supplied a replacement reactor core about 2 years later.

In 1980, Yahiya al-Meshed, an Egyptian nuclear scientist working on Iraq’s nuclear program, was murdered in a French hotel room. Al-Meshad was sent to Paris in order to resist French attempts at amending the Osirak contract to provide a Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) reactor to Iraq. It is widely presumed that the Israeli government intelligence service, the Mossad, was responsible for the murder of Al-Meshad.³

Also, in June 1980, Iraq procured its first batch of yellowcake (U3O8) from Portugal, 429 drums containing 138,098 kg. This was done with the knowledge of IAEA ⁴.

Author’s Note: So far, we see that all Iraqi nuclear activities are under IAEA safeguards. Tammuz-1 was built above ground indicating that it was not intended for military application, otherwise it could have been built underground.

4. THE ISRAELI ATTACK ON TAMMUZ-1:

On June 7, 1981, fourteen Israeli jets destroyed the Tammuz-1 research reactor located near Baghdad in a bombing mission known as Operation Babylon. The attack took less than two minutes and a total of 13 conventional bombs were dropped. The smaller Tammuz-2 reactor, the 600 KWt critical assembly unit, and associated laboratories escaped damage. Approximately 8 or 9 men were killed in the attack, including a French technician.

Although the Osirak reactor was loaded with fuel in September 1980, it was removed during the Iraq-Iran War and no nuclear fuel was found to be in the reactor when it was bombed.⁵

During the week of June 8, 1981, the IAEA Board of Governors voted 29-2 to strongly condemn Israel for its premeditated and unjustified attack on the Iraqi Nuclear Research Center, which is covered by the IAEA safeguards, and suggested that IAEA members States consider suspending Israel’s membership in the organization.

On June 18, 1981, the Israeli government stated that it based its June 7 attack in part on information supplied by US Intelligence and that a highly reliable resource, led them to conclude that the Tammuz tunnel located 13 feet under the surface housed a secret chamber containing equipment capable of processing plutonium and U-235 suitable for the fabrication of nuclear warheads. ⁶

During the week of June 24, 1981, Sources in the French nuclear industry insisted that Iraq would not have been able to produce weapons-grade plutonium because of the nature of the reactor and the possibility of detection by on-site French technicians and IAEA inspectors. They disregarded the Israeli government’s concern that the Tammuz tunnel could breed plutonium through the use of a uranium blanket around the reactor core, and claimed that the plutonium production would be slow in the underground facility and would be detectable by IAEA inspectors.⁷

On November 17, 1981, IAEA safeguards inspectors G. Rabot and V. Seleznev tour the bombed facilities of the Tuwaitha complex. They establish an inventory of 39 fuel assemblies of French origin containing about 12kg of highly enriched uranium, and inspect the presence of fuel assemblies of the small research reactor.⁸

Author’s Note: According to the IAEA Safeguards documents, the Significant Quantity (SQ) for high-enriched U-235 is 25 Kg. In other words, a country needs 25 Kg of highly enriched uranium 235 before any attempts can be made to manufacture a nuclear weapon. So, the question comes up why the Israeli government destroyed Tammuz-1 when the 12 Kg of highly enriched uranium was not in the reactor core and had been removed due to concerns from an attack by Iran (as the Iraq-Iran war had started by then). My assessment is that the Israeli government was not so concerned with the 12 Kg (the exact amount varies from 11.5 to 12 Kg) of highly enriched uranium that France had provided to Iraq, but they had long term concern that this large size research reactor, once in operation, could eventually produce enough Pu-239 for nuclear weapons.

This assessment brings me back to my point about the Israeli government policy that they attack a sovereign nation under IAEA safeguards inspection and signatory to NPT because they believe down the road Iraq may use the plutonium and manufacture nuclear weapons. There are fallacies in the Israeli policy starting with the fact that Israel is the gendarme of the world. The IAEA was established exactly for monitoring the nuclear activities of member states and Iraq was one such member. In Chapter 2 on Syria, we will see one more time that in September 2007, Israel attacked Syria at a site claimed to be a nuclear facility under construction.

In late November-early December 1984, according to a Washington Post article, the war between Iran and Iraq enabled France to delay the reconstruction of the Osirak reactor bombed by Israel in June 1981. In order to expedite an agreement to rebuild the reactor, Iraq agrees to accept a French precondition of using a low-grade uranium fuel. The caramel fuel functions at 10 percent enrichment compared to 80 percent for the fuel in the original reactor. Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz tells the Post that France and Iraq were almost finalizing replacement of the reactor.⁹

In late 1984, realizing that France will not rebuild the destroyed Osirak reactor, the Iraqi government established a new project 182 with the objective of designing and constructing a natural uranium fueled, heavy water moderated and cooled reactor with a 40MWt capacity modeled on the Canadian NRX research reactor. There are however, no indications that the design of the natural uranium reactor progressed beyond theoretical studies.¹⁰

5. DISCUSSION ON ISRAELI ATTACK ON TAMMUZ-1

In this section, various IAEA and UN documents will be presented to demonstrate the illegal and immoral act of aggression by the government of Israel attacking Iraq’s nuclear facility.

One day after the June 7, 1981 attack on the Iraqi nuclear facility, the IAEA submitted the following text to the UN Security Council. The following is the presentation by Dr. Sigvard Eklund, the IAEA Director General submitted to the UN Security Council and General assembly regarding the attack on the Iraqi nuclear facility by the government of Israel on June 7, 1981.¹¹

I have been requested by the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency to transmit to the Security Council urgently the following resolution on military attack on a Iraqi nuclear research name center and its implications for the Agency, adopted by the Board of Governors on June 12, 1981.

Recalling that according to article 11 of the Statute the Agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contributions of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world,

Recalling further that according to article 2.4 of the Charter of the United Nations all Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,

Recognizing the inalienable right of all member States of the Agency to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, to further their scientific, technological and economic development,

Mindful of the fact that Iraq fully subscribes to the Agency’s safeguards system and is a party to the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,

Noting the statesman of the Director General to the effect that Iraq has fulfilled its obligations under Agency safeguards, pursuant to the nonproliferation Treaty to the satisfaction of the Agency,

Informed that on June 7, 1981 Israel carried out a military attack on the Iraqi nuclear research center damaging the nuclear facilities and causing loss of human life,

Conscious that this military action, besides affecting the security and peace of the region, has shown disregard for the Agency’s safeguards regime and the nonproliferation Treaty and could do great harm to the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and

Gravely concerned by the far-reaching implications of such a military attack on the peaceful nuclear facilities in the member State,

1. Strongly condemns Israel for this premeditated and unjustified attack on the Iraqi nuclear research center which is covered by the Agency safeguards;

2. Recommends to the General Conference at its forthcoming regular session to consider all the implications of this attack including suspending the exercise by Israel of the privileges and rights of membership;

3. Reminds the member States of the Agency of the United Nations General Assembly resolution 35/157, calling for an end to all transfer of fissionable material and nuclear technology to Israel;

4. Recommends that the General Conference suspend provision of any assistance to Israel under the Agency’s technical assistance programme;

5. Urges the Agency’s member States to provide emergency assistance to Iraq to deal with the aftermath of this attack;

6. Reaffirms its confidence in the effectiveness of the Agency’s safeguards system as a reliable means of verifying peaceful uses of nuclear facility; and

7. Requests the Director General to transmit this resolution to the United Nations Security Council.

The voting on the resolution was 29 in favor and two against and three abstentions.

I have also been requested by the Board to transmit to the Security Council summary records of the proceedings of the Board relevant to this agenda item these will be express mailed as soon as possible.

Signed Sigvard Eklund

Director General. IAEA

Author’s Note: I do not believe that the Director General of the IAEA could possibly condemn Israel in any stronger language. Having said this, we will see how Israel ignored these accusations as some 26 years later it repeated its illegal military attack on a Syrian nuclear facility. This is why many developing countries embarking on nuclear power program have essentially given up hope in Israel joining the NPT. In the past decade, there has been talk of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities scattered across the country.

A copy of the UNSC Resolution 481 (1981) and its Annex are provided in Attachment 1 to this chapter. These are official UN documents.

On June 15, 1981, The United Nation’s Security Council held its 2283rd session in New York to discuss the complaint by Iraq regarding the Israeli attack on its nuclear facility on June 15, 1981.¹²

A summary of discussions at this important meeting is provided below to show the reaction of the Member States to the Israeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear facility. Some of the presentations are provided in their entirety below.

The President: Mr. Porfirio MUÑOZ LEDO (Mexico)

In accordance with the decisions taken at previous meetings [2280th to 2282nd meetings], I invite the representatives of Iraq and Israel to take places at the Council table. I invite the representatives of Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, Guyana, Hungary, India, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mongolia, Pakistan, Romania, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Zambia and of the Palestine Liberation Organization to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber

The agenda included a complaint by Iraq dated June 8, 1991 from the permanent Mission of Iraq to the United Nations. The following are statements from various members of the Security Council regarding the Israeli attack on the Iraq nuclear facility on June 7, 1981.

1. Mr. KOROMA (Sierra Leone): I have been instructed by my Government to make the following statement. The charge against Israel now before the Council is that on Sunday, 7 June 1981, deploying its military war machine, as is its wont in the Middle East region, it carried out a premeditated and unprovoked attack against a nuclear research installation situated near Baghdad, thereby causing many civilian casualties and much material damage. In the course of executing such a nefarious operation, Israel violated the territorial integrity not only of Iraq but also of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, under the Charter of the United Nations, Israel stands accused, first and foremost, of the illegal use of force against a State Member of the Organization contrary to Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter; secondly, Israel stands accused of a serious violation of the territorial integrity of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. By its action against Iraq, Israel stands accused of committing a deliberate and calculated act of aggression--the gravest of all crimes against international peace and security—against a State Member of the Organization.

It was also asserted in this forum last week, with a flamboyant display of legal chicanery, that the military attack against Iraq was both moral and legal. Israel’s plea of self-defense cannot, in any case, be justified in law. It cannot be justified because, as Israel itself argued before the Council in 1951 [551st meeting, para. 36], the plea of self-defense is untenable where no armed attack has taken place or is imminent. Israel’s decision, therefore, to take the law into its own hands was predicated on the false notion that Iraq, having completed the installation of a nuclear research station, was going to manufacture nuclear weapons and then unleash a war against Israel. On the basis of this suspicion, Israel took it upon itself to commit