For the same investment, wind generates 5 times the jobs and 2.3 times the power as a nuclear reactor.
Enlarge Image
Vienna, Austria —
Somewhere out there, the only winners in the current conflict over Iran's nuclear programme are rubbing their hands with glee. They love hearing about the "inalienable right" to build nuclear power plants. They love watching nuclear superpowers try to bully non-nuclear states into agreeing not to develop nukes, yet fail to explain why they themselves haven't gotten rid of theirs. They love seeing nuclear weapons being presented as the measure of a country's greatness. That's because the only winners in this conflict sell the stuff that makes all this war drumming possible. They sell nuclear power plants. They build nuclear weapons.
The
International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Board of Governers voted on
Saturday, 27 to 3, with 5 abstentions, to report Iran to the UN
Security
Council over allegations that it is pursuing a programme to acquire
nuclear weapons.
This decision is a grave mistake which threatens to further escalate tensions in the region.
Greenpeace is opposed to any nation acquiring nuclear technology and
nuclear weapons, including Iran. But we believe the best way to ensure
that doesn't happen is for the IAEA to have continued access to Iranian facilities. Iran has
already made clear that if the matter goes to the Security Council it
will restrict inspections and no longer comply with requests to reveal
information above and beyond what is legally required under existing
treaty obligations.
As past situations have shown, in particular in Iraq, any action that
restricts inspections and that closes opportunities to rebuild
confidence can only lead to a confidence vacuum. And where hard
evidence is not available, warmongers on all sides exploit the currency
of fear and speculation.
The UN Security Council is simply not the right body to resolve a
conflict over whether a country has a right to a nuclear programme or
not. The Security Council has failed to live up to its
Charter obligations to minimize human and economic resources spent on
armaments, or to advance the goal of a Middle East nuclear free
zone. Instead the permanent members (who are permanent members
precisely because they have nuclear weapons) have participated in arms
races and weapons profiteering, stubbornly refusing to comply with
treaty commitments to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. Given this
record, how can the Security Council resolve the Iran crisis?
Given the failure to treat the nuclear weapons programmes of other
countries with the same vigilance as Iran's, how can the accusation of
hypocrisy not have a ring of truth?
The only solution to this crisis is a Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle
East. It's a vital first step towards removing all nuclear
proliferation risks in the region, as well as providing the essential
security guarantees from nuclear weapons states outside the region.
That means an end not only to existing and nascent nuclear weapons programmes, but an end to nuclear power as well.
Iran insists that it is simply exercising its rights under the terms of
the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty to develop "peaceful nuclear
technology." There is no such thing as peaceful nuclear
technology. Once a country has a nuclear power programme it is
possible for it to develop a weapons programme. That's as true for
Germany, Japan and Brazil as it is for Iran.
Our position on Iran is the same as that for all countries with nuclear
power or nuclear weapons - the ONLY basis for peace, security and
sustainable development is to abandon nuclear programmes; and to phase
out nuclear power in favour of sustainable renewable technologies - in
other words, a nuclear-free world.
Iran has an opportunity to stop this slide toward war by calling for a
regional nuclear-free zone in the Middle East. The international community has
an opportunity to stop this slide toward war by pursuing exactly the
same thing.
The current path is lose-lose for everyone except the makers of nuclear weapons and the peddlers of nuclear power.