Sir, Iran hardly needs to resort “to the old tactics of creating a foreign threat to divert attention” (leading article, April 13); the presence of the US in Afghanistan, Central Asia and Iraq, with whom Iran shares its borders, is conspicuous enough for every Iranian to see.

Since 9/11, the number of US military bases around Iran has proliferated. The US is a superpower with unparalleled military dominance. It does not need to encircle Iran unless its long-term policy is to impose a regime change on Tehran. It is this perception, coupled with President Bush’s description of Iran as an axis of evil, which has helped to fuse Iran’s nuclear programme with its national identity.

As a country that has historically been the subject of foreign intervention and the imposition of various capitulation treaties, Iran is inordinately sensitive of its national prerogatives and sovereign rights. It, therefore, wants a respected role in regional security and respect for its legitimate security needs. The cessation of its nuclear programme might be possible if its genuine security needs are addressed.

RANDHIR SINGH BAINS,
Gants Hill, Essex

Sir, Iran is to be congratulated on its achievement and direction. Nuclear energy, as France has discovered, is the way forward from the use of fossil fuels and the generation of greenhouse gases. If the US uses military force to cease this advancement it will be hypocritical from a country which uses nuclear power for both energy and weaponry. The interference of the United States in Afghanistan, Israel, Iraq, Korea and Vietnam has contributed immeasurably to world instability. Let us hope, for all our sakes, that they can learn from experience.

DR ROBERT J. LEEMING
Balsall Common, Coventry

Sir, Bronwen Maddox’s analysis (“Iran is racing down the nuclear route before UN can put up roadblock”, April 13) raises many salient points, and is balanced and informative. The focus at the moment is naturally on uranium enrichment. With a cascade of 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz by the close of 2006, Iran could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a single bomb in under a year. With 50,000 such centrifuges, it would take only a few weeks.

But 3,000 centrifuges also means it can mass-produce fuel for the reactor at Bushehr, and for additional reactors it plans to build at that site in coming years. From these reactors emerge the second, and perhaps more sophisticated approach to building a nuclear bomb — via reprocessing of spent fuel into plutonium for smaller, lighter nuclear weapons that are more suited for missile delivery. It takes 25kg of highly enriched uranium for a bomb, but only 4kg of plutonium.

Reprocessing of reactor waste for producing weapons grade plutonium is not a trivial or easy task, but it can be done in a small location, which makes it ideal for hiding from international inspection.

The only missing component for a plutonium option, once the reactor at Bushehr is working (presumably fuelled by reactor-grade enriched uranium from Natanz), is the political will of the Iranian Government to break out of its existing agreement to return the reactor waste to Russia. Iran has demonstrated ample political willingness to “break out” of agreements when it suits it. Once they have Natanz up and working, and Bushehr running, they have all they need.

If we have not passed the “point of no return” this past week, we soon will be.

DR MALCOLM R. DAVIS
Lecturer in Defence Studies,
King’s College London

Explore Letters

• Feedback