NEWS: Saudis Declared Exempt from IAEA Inspection

On thursday the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), the UN's nuclear watch dog approved a deal that allows to Saudi Arabia to be exempt from nuclear inspections though many feel wary of such a deal.



My question arises to whether the US and other members of the UN are subject to the inspects and if so why? If Saudi Arabia, a hot bed for "Terrorism" is allowed to be free of those inspections why should the US. Believe me, I in no way accept the authority of the IAEA. The right to bear arms is that of the soveriegn nation and not that of a third party. If one is allowed to have them then all should or none.

This may also be a bargaining chip and putting pressure on Iran. However, geopolitical negoitiations can be very dangerous especially when dealing with nuclear arms. I hope tha those in charge have a clue about what they are doing.

The International Atomic Energy Agency:

* is an independent intergovernmental, science and technology-based organization, in the United Nations family, that serves as the global focal point for nuclear cooperation;
* assists its Member States, in the context of social and economic goals, in planning for and using nuclear science and technology for various peaceful purposes, including the generation of electricity, and facilitates the transfer of such technology and knowledge in a sustainable manner to developing Member States;
* develops nuclear safety standards and, based on these standards, promotes the achievement and maintenance of high levels of safety in applications of nuclear energy, as well as the protection of human health and the environment against ionizing radiation;
* verifies through its inspection system that States comply with their commitments, under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and other non-proliferation agreements, to use nuclear material and facilities only for peaceful purposes.

Article

Brief Background

The NPT is a landmark international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament. The Treaty represents the only binding commitment in a multilateral treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States. Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970. A total of 187 parties have joined the Treaty, including the five nuclear-weapon States. More countries have ratified the NPT than any other arms limitation and disarmament agreement, a testament to the Treaty's significance.

To further the goal of non-proliferation and as a confidence-building measure between States parties, the Treaty establishes a safeguards system under the responsibility of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Safeguards are used to verify compliance with the Treaty through inspections conducted by the IAEA. The Treaty promotes co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology and equal access to this technology for all States parties, while safeguards prevent the diversion of fissile material for weapons use.

Article

Iran has signed the NPT. Part of the NPT is the authorization of inspections of all nuclear sites at any time.

Saudi Arabia has tried to aquire nuclear weapons by way of Iraq. Maybe Saudi Arabia already has the bomb (from pakistan) and we do not want that fact to get out so it does not start a nuclear arms race in the middle east. It is my belief that a nuclear arms race has already started.

disturbing accusations about Saudi government expenditures, detailed last summer by Muhammad Khilewi, the high-ranking Saudi defector who abandoned his U.N. post to join the opposition. Khilewi produced documents for the London Sunday Times showing payments of up to five billion dollars from the Saudi treasury for Saddam Hussein to build a nuclear weapon. Between 1985 and 1990, up to the time Saddam invaded Kuwait, installments of the generous gift to Saddam from the princes' coffers were paid on condition that some of the bombs, should the project succeed, be transferred to the Saudi arsenal.

Article

Perhaps the following is the answer to your question about Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia also gets special treatment because they have more oil than any other country. This special treatment may end once Iraq oil production is at full capacity sometime within the next 5 years or so.

* May 6, 2005: Saudi Arabia is offering investment projects worth SR2.3 trillion ($613 billion) to American companies. A 50-member Saudi delegation begins a visit to five US states tomorrow to introduce the projects in petrochemicals, natural gas, electricity generation, water desalination, telecommunications and other vital sectors. The Saudi government plans to privatize state-run corporations and institutions with a total value of SR3 trillion ($800 billion) within the next 10 years.

* May 5, 2005: Saudi Arabia said Wednesday that it was ready to sign key nuclear safeguards agreements, including a protocol which the UN nuclear watchdog is considering eliminating as it could help a country avoid inspections. Saudi Arabia is among the 27 NPT non-nuclear-weapons states, which as of January had failed to sign comprehensive safeguards agreements. Saudi Arabia, for instance, is not believed to be a direct non-proliferation threat but there have been reports that in a crisis it could use its financial clout to get nuclear technology, or even weapons, from abroad, or from countries it backs such as Pakistan which does have nuclear arms.

Article

The NPT states that only a few countries are allowed to have nukes.

The NPT permits only the US, Britain, France, Russia and China to have nuclear weapons.

When a reporter pointed out that the Arms Control Association has taken the position that the US plans to engage in research to look for new kinds of nuclear weapons (e.g. bunker busters) and often encourages other countries to develop nuclear weapons, Boucher said that such a stand was very illogical because the US and Russia have been cutting that nuclear arsenal drastically.

Though the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty calls on the weapon powers too to give up their weapons, Boucher took the position that the US and Russia were meeting their commitments by cutting their operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to about 1,700 to 2,200, one-third of the Cold War level.

"So while we do maintain a deterrent for us to go down to one-quarter the level we had during the Cold War, I think, it is an example to others that these weapons are not necessary, it is not necessary to maintain the same kind of arsenals as one had in the past, and that we are, indeed, meeting our commitments under the NPT to reduce nuclear weapons and that other countries should meet their commitments as well."

"But the fact is the US is meeting its obligations under the treaty. Going down to one-quarter of where we were in the Cold War is pretty impressive and it does certainly show we are all headed in the right direction, and we are going to meet our obligations in that way, we think others should meet their obligations too."

Article

In addition, we will seek to build a consensus that the benefits of peaceful nuclear cooperation, which are the subject of Article IV of the Treaty, should not be available to those governments in noncompliance with their nonproliferation obligations under Articles II and III. All states parties must do a better job of preventing Article IV -- sometimes called the "excuse Article" -- from being used to mask prohibited activities, or to claim immunity from punitive measures once prohibited activities are uncovered.

Article

Countries that want to aquire nuclear technology through trade are supposed to sign the NPT. This treaty gives the International Atomic Energy Agency the right to inspect any nuclear facility to ensure that the technology is used for peacefull purposes. Iran signed the NPT to get nuclear technology and now it is reported that they are using that technology to make bombs with it.

Most astute & excellent information Cryptorsa1001. Wahabbi immunity = uncertainty of our longevity.

Saudi officials want to sign a deal with the IAEA that would exempt the kingdom from inspections because the amount of nuclear material it says it holds is too small.

It quoted Saudi deputy foreign affairs minister, Prince Turki bin Mohammed bin Saud al-Kabira, as telling EU officials in Riyadh that his country would be "willing to provide additional information" to the agency "only if all other parties" to the protocol did the same.

The Saudis insist they have no plans to develop nuclear weapons. However, in the past two decades, the country has been linked to prewar Iraq's nuclear program, to Pakistan and to the Pakistani nuclear black marketeer A.Q. Khan.

As Saudi officials try to get the deal signed, the agency is attempting to address what increasingly is being seen as a dangerous loophole to safeguards meant to ensure the adherence of the Nonproliferation Treaty.

www.foxnews.com...

I'm just wondering what would be inspected here? As far as I know Saudi Arabia never received any nuclear aid from a nuclear power in creating any type of civilian power plant. I was under the assumption that inspections generally inspected those types of facilities to insure no nuclear material has been diverted to a nuclear weapons program. In this case it seems there may be only thin anectodal evidence that they've ever received any nuclear material and we have no idea where it would be, so I doubt IAEA inspections would be effective anyway.

The NPT covers more than just nuclear facilities, if I was unclear or somehow misguiding I apologize.

The point about the following quote that makes me wonder is by signing the small quanities protocol that it could curtail UN monitoring of any atomic activity in Saudi Arabia. Not really sure what that means but id Saudi Arabia has no or very little nuclear material than why do they not want inspections. This seems a little confusing unless they have something to hide.

RIYADH - Saudi Arabia said on Sunday it wanted to co-operate with the United Nations nuclear watchdog and had no "nuclear installations, reactors, fissile or source materials".

But it signalled it still wanted to sign up to an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which could curtail UN monitoring of any atomic activity in Saudi Arabia.

The IAEA is studying a Saudi request to sign the "small quantities protocol" of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- an accord which states which say they have little or no nuclear material can reach with IAEA.

Article

Article 3 of the NPT
2. Each State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to provide: (a) source or special fissionable material, or (b) equipment or material especially designed or prepared for the processing, use or production of special fissionable material, to any non-nuclear-weapon State for peaceful purposes, unless the source or special fissionable material shall be subject to the safeguards required by this Article,.

Full text of the NPT

[edit on 16-6-2005 by cryptorsa1001]

The US managed to sell or give nuclear technology to the Israelis, presumably in an effort to generate some sort of good faith. When Saudi Arabia is sitting on top of the world's largest oil reserves, why wouldn't the US consider doing the same thing for Saudi in order to:

1) Assuage their fears about Israel's possession of nukes.
2) Generate good will with the owners of the world's largest oil reserves before someone else with nuclear technology does so.

On the other hand, based on #2, they could have clandestine weapons from a number of countries interested in generating good will.

To have minimal nuclear inspection of this PARTICULAR nation, home to the preponderance of the 9/11 perps, home to what is reported as 40% of the insurgents in Iraq, is beyond idiotic.
This nation containing Mecca and Medina, the twin "Vaticans" of Islam is the central hub of the Muslim world which is currently the greatest threat facing the civilized planet since the Soviet Empire in it's day. I'm stunned at the foolhardiness of this decision.

What i really want to know is why a third party is dictating who is and is not exempt from nuclear inspections. I don not agree with them at all, but i find it funny how the exemptions are thrown around as negotiation tokens rather than for the general safety and sovereignty of the Countries with in the UN ( The organization that i most despise anyways).

I assume the 3rd party you are refering to is the IAEA? Its the body set up to enforce the NPT. Its THE body to decide on inspections. The loop hole that the Saudis have exploited needs to be sewn up. They shouldnt be trusted, the Iranians are not trust so neither should the terrorist hotbed of Saudi Arabia. Just because the U.S President is good pals with their royal family and in each others pocket doesnt mean they are above international law.

This scares me a bit. Saudi gets away with too much as it is. Of course, in the scheme of things, there's no reason to worry about IAEA finding anything anyways. Saud will just buy a bomb or two, or get America or Britain or Russia or France or Germany to give them one in exchange for oil vouchers or some such.

The U.N. can have a "Oil for Bombs" programme. I'm sure Anan has some more relatives needing lucrative jobs.

(sorry, couldn't help myself)

The thing that scares me is international law. This corruption of such a large "world government" (which if you look up the definition of government, it does apply) will only lead to more of a power struggle and more infringement of soveriegnty and human rights. Who can tell a government how to run their government? Their people, not another government. We don't like it when the US is criticized about their policy and yet the US does the exact same thing all the time.

Originally posted by chaosrain
The US managed to sell or give nuclear technology to the Israelis, presumably in an effort to generate some sort of good faith.

Ironically, just as Iraq, Israel got its nuclear reactor in Dimona and a lot of its nuclear technology from the French, not the US.

but north korea got theirs from us...kinda funny how we seem to forget how stupid we were to do that...."Oh they just wanted to make some electricity"

Originally posted by CAConrad0825
but north korea got theirs from us...kinda funny how we seem to forget how stupid we were to do that...."Oh they just wanted to make some electricity"

No they didn't, they got their nuclear research reactor in Yongbyon from Russia. They were promised two light water reactors however by the US, Japan and South Korea under the Agreed Framework but those were never built. The project went through huge delays and the only thing that was accomplished were the concrete foundations, which are by now utterly useless as the ironing has rusted due to water infiltration.

according to the United States news services, under the Clinton administration the DNK did get it from us. Prove otherwise.

Originally posted by CAConrad0825
according to the United States news services, under the Clinton administration the DNK did get it from us. Prove otherwise.

Rightwing propaganda. Like I said, they were promised two light water reactors, a type not quite suitable for nuclear weapons production. All that was ever built were the concrete foundations and some other small stuff. Those concrete foundations are by now utterly useless as the ironing has rusted due to water infiltration, since the project has dragged along too long.

the horse's mouth, KEDO:
Under the TKC and its forerunner, the PWC, KEPCO created a construction complex at the LWR project site, Kumho, DPRK. Much of the work performed to date related to establishment of the infrastructure necessary to support the formidable LWR construction effort. The infrastructure work included housing, construction offices, medical facilities, dining and recreational facilities, banking offices, and other structures such as roads and bridges. In addition, KEPCO established independent supplies of reliable electricity, potable water, and communications.

At the LWR construction site, 5.4 million cubic meters of rock and soil have been removed (to include the leveling of a 60 meter tall mountain at the site) to expose the bedrock that now forms the foundation for the two LWR units (Unit 1 and Unit 2). Completion of site grading work enabled excavation of the building foundations, which began in early September 2001, after KEDO received the Construction Permit from the DPRK nuclear regulatory authority. The pouring of the foundations for the reactor's power block buildings took place in August 2002.

KEDO built a breakwater and barge-docking facility for the LWR project. The facility forms the intake channel for plant cooling water. Tetrapods, interlocking geometric shapes made of concrete, provide sturdy protection to the breakwater against ocean currents. The tetrapods were manufactured at the site. The on-site docking facility opened for operation in early April 2002. Other significant milestones included completion of a training center for operation and maintenance personnel and a simulator building.

Subsequent political events from late 2002 to January 2003 required KEDO to slow the pace of the construction work, and in 2003, to suspend the project altogether. Following the DPRK's announced withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in January 2003, and its subsequent statements that it had reprocessed spent fuel rods to extract plutonium, the Executive Board of KEDO announced suspension of the LWR project for one year beginning December 1, 2003.

www.fas.org...

[edit on 20-6-2005 by Simon666]

[edit on 20-6-2005 by Simon666]

..and you know, it's only going to get worse. The world as I knew it has crumbled I watch little kids 12 or so selling drugs to adults. IAEA can't do more than any singular Country allows that they can perform inspections there.

Iran, North Korea and the list will grow and seems to me, there's nothing that can be done about it short of an aggressive nature from power Countries - and how likely is it that will happen for the most part?

Countries such China, stay low and non-interference laden and so they remain on the NON-hit list of muslim extremists; A lesson that would better have been observed than ignored for the sake of democracy by the USA.

However, its a little late now, as even though the US has done a pretty-good job of spreading democracy around the world.
But now it may be too little too late - damn it!

Dallas

Originally posted by Dallas
Countries such China, stay low and non-interference laden and so they remain on the NON-hit list of muslim extremists; A lesson that would better have been observed than ignored for the sake of democracy by the USA.

Look up who Uighurs are.

Simon666enlighten me - what are you four or five word suggesting

Dallas