COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Brazil Developing Nuclear Weapons?

"That's my man right here," US President Barack Obama once said, in praise of his Brazilian counterpart.


The same week that brings us news that a Pakistani tried to set off a bomb in New York City (forget the naturalization BS, a rat born in a barn is not a cow.) we also learn Pakistan tested two missiles capable of hauling nuclear weapons.

We know that the list of powers who have nuclear pretensions is growing, and we have a president who is clueless about the real world of nuclear deterrence and asinine about nuclear defence.

This article talks about Obama's man of the Brazilian people, Lula, and Brazil's preparations to become a nuclear power.

Here's hoping we can develop systems, hardware and the political will to do what has to be done to protect the United States and give pause to those that want to join the nuclear club. It can be done and should. Barack Hussein Obama, community organizer will not be that man.

_____________


Is Brazil Developing the Bomb?

By Hans Rühle Der Spiegel

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Hans Rühle, 72, was the director of the planning staff in the German Defense Ministry from 1982 to 1988.
AFP

Brazil has signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but experts suspect it may be working on a nuclear bomb. The country is allowed to legally enrich uranium for its nuclear submarines, but nobody knows what happens to the fuel once it is on restricted military bases.

In October 2009, the prestigious American periodical Foreign Policy published an article titled "The Future Nuclear Powers You Should Be Worried About." According to the author, Kazakhstan, Bangladesh, Burma, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela are the next candidates -- after Iran -- for membership in the club of nuclear powers. Despite his interesting arguments, the author neglected to mention the most important potential nuclear power: Brazil.

Nowadays, Brazil is held in high esteem by the rest of the world. Its president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has become a star on the international stage. "That's my man right here," US President Barack Obama once said, in praise of his Brazilian counterpart. Lula, as he is known, can even afford to receive Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with all honors and demonstratively endorse his nuclear program, for which Iran is now ostracized around the world.

Lula da Silva's self-confidence is indicative of Brazil's claim to the status of a major power -- including in military terms. The military claim is reflected in the country's National Defense Strategy, which was unveiled in late 2008. In addition to the mastery of the complete nuclear fuel cycle -- which has since been achieved -- the document calls for the building of nuclear-powered submarines.

Close to Building a Bomb

It sounds harmless enough, but it isn't, because the term "nuclear-powered submarines" could in fact be a cover for a nuclear weapons program. Brazil already had three secret military nuclear programs between 1975 and 1990, with each branch of its armed forces pursuing its own route. The navy's approach proved to be the most successful: using imported high-performance centrifuges to produce highly enriched uranium from imported uranium hexafluoride, so as to be able to operate small reactors for submarines. At the appropriate time, the country's newly acquired nuclear capabilities were to be revealed to the world with a "peaceful nuclear explosion," based on the example set by India. The 300-meter (984-foot) shaft for the test had already been drilled. According to statements by the former president of the National Nuclear Energy Commission, in 1990 the Brazilian military was on the verge of building a bomb.

But it never came to that. During the course of Brazil's democratization, the secret nuclear programs were effectively abandoned. Under the country's 1988 constitution, nuclear activities were restricted to "peaceful uses." Brazil ratified the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean in 1994 and, in 1998, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. Brazil's flirtation with the bomb had apparently ended.

Under Lula da Silva, however, this flirtation has now been reignited, and the Brazilians are becoming less and less hesitant about toying with their own nuclear option. Only a few months after Lula's inauguration in 2003, the country officially resumed the development of a nuclear-powered submarine.

Even during his election campaign, Lula criticized the NPT, calling it unfair and obsolete. Although Brazil did not withdraw from the treaty, it demonstratively tightened working conditions for inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA). The situation became tense in April 2004, when the IAEA was denied unlimited access to a newly built enrichment facility in Resende, near Rio de Janeiro. The Brazilian government also made it clear that it did not intend to sign the additional protocol to the NPT, which would have required it to open previously undeclared facilities to inspection.

In mid-January 2009, during a meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a group of nuclear supplier countries that works toward nonproliferation by controlling exports of nuclear materials, the reasons for this restrictive policy became clear to attendees when Brazil's representative did his utmost to fight requirements that would have made the nuclear submarine program transparent.

'Open to Negotiation'

Why all this secrecy? What is there to hide in the development of small reactors to power submarines, systems that several countries have had for decades? The answer is as simple as it is unsettling: Brazil is probably also developing something else in the plants it has declared as production facilities for nuclear submarines: nuclear weapons. Vice President José Alencar offered a reason when he openly advocated Brazil's acquisition of nuclear weapons in September 2009. For a country with a 15,000-kilometer border and rich offshore oil reserves, Alencar says, these weapons would not only be an important tool of "deterrence," but would also give Brazil the means to increase its importance on the international stage. When it was pointed out that Brazil had signed the NPT, Alencar reacted calmly, saying it was "a matter that was open to negotiation."

How exactly could Brazil go about building nuclear weapons? The answer, unfortunately, is that it would be relatively easy. A precondition for the legal construction of small reactors for submarine engines is that nuclear material regulated by the IAEA is approved. But because Brazil designates its production facilities for nuclear submarine construction as restricted military areas, the IAEA inspectors are no longer given access. In other words, once the legally supplied enriched uranium has passed through the gate of the plant where nuclear submarines are being built, it can be used for any purpose, including the production of nuclear weapons. And because almost all nuclear submarines are operated with highly enriched uranium, which also happens to be weapons grade uranium, Brazil can easily justify producing highly enriched nuclear fuel.

Even if there is no definitive proof of Brazil's nuclear activities (yet), past events suggest that it is highly likely that Brazil is developing nuclear weapons. Neither the constitutional prohibition nor the NPT will prevent this from happening. All it would take to obtain a parliamentary resolution to eliminate these obstacles would be for Lula da Silva to say that the United States is not entitled to a monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Americas. If that happens, Latin America would no longer be a nuclear weapons-free zone -- and Obama's vision of a nuclear-free world would be finished.


Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan



70 comments:

  1. If France, and Poland had been Nuclear Powers would we have had WWII?

    We wanted to hurry up, and take Saddam out because we thought he was becoming a Nuclear Power (knowing that once he tested a weapon Congress would Never authorize any action.)

    This is not lost on the politicians, and military leaders of the world. All countries that can find two nickles to rub together will, eventually, become Nuclear.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The War On Nuclear Proliferation is like the War On Drugs: You can spend billions of dollars and waste decades going after the supply side, but that only raises costs to buy the first guardian in the thin blue line, who then becomes a leak in the firewall for nuclear information and materials. Or you can really put a damper on the demand side. Making metropolitan Tehran into a glass parking lot with a thermonuclear volley in retaliation for them hitting downtown Tel Aviv with one of their sub-kiloton firecrackers would serve as a real damper.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Iran is hell bent for leather to go nuclear while the Obama administration and the Arabs are putting pressure on Israel to join the NPT and come clean about their nuclear status. Obama and company operate under the assumption that if we are transparent, the rogue nations of the whirled will also become transparent and feel less threatened.

    Note: "rogue nations" is my word, not your President's. He doesn't use such divisive rhetoric unless he is speaking of domestic center right organizations.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Or small town police departments or border states taking immigration matters into their own hands.

    ReplyDelete
  5. His administration's rhetoric also tends to get heated when discussing Fox News, Dick Cheney, George Bush or large corporations.

    I expect that the heat will also continue to be turned on Evangelical Christians.

    On the other hand, come a chastening November, Obama may begin singing a more healing tune.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't know about the strategic threats posed by a nuclear Brazil but the thought of non-threatening countries having nuclear capabilities doesn't disturb me. On the other hand, the thought of Iran and some of the other Islamic countries having the bomb is cause for great concern.

    Remember, Iran is governed by men who wish to hasten the return of the Mahdi.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Blogger seems to have a bit of problem posting comments in a timely manner.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hope I'm not wrong about this, but I kinda look at Ahmabuttfuck as the Super-Scary Front Man in a pretty well-played bargaining scenario.

    Although, Ahmacrazyashell might well be just as crazy as he appears (the odds of this seem fairly high,) I haven't seen much evidence that the Real rulers, the Mullahs, are anywhere near nutty enough to want to risk nuclear annihilation.

    Like I said, let's hope I'm right.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I hope you're right but I think you're wrong wrt the Islamists. This includes some at the top of Iran's power pyramid. I'm not saying there aren't plenty of corrupt poseurs in the Islamic clergy but there are enough true followers to be concerned about. Until now, they have concentrated on using suicide proxies. With the bombs, nuclear and demographic) they will become more emboldened to advance their agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Like I said, Whit, let's "Hope" I'm right. There's nothing else to do, because, They ARE going Nuclear.

    I have noticed that none of those old mullahs have strapped any bombs onto their dirty old asses.

    ReplyDelete
  11. They want to live long enough to actually see the return of the Mahdi while doing his will to hasten the end.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Come on now, Red, don't let the jackass popinjays drive you away.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Those old men are too smart and rich to believe that shit, Whit. They're ALL multizillionaires.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Don't worry, Whit. She'll be compunctioned to step in and edumacate us on something one of these days. Teresita, I think it was, got it right. It really is "Hotel California."

    ReplyDelete
  15. Please don't make me grovel like a blubbering bob.

    ReplyDelete
  16. BTW - It's always good to see Teresita and MLD chiming in.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Let the groveling begin

    All for all you barflies; Do not interpret my groveling as anything but platonic.

    ReplyDelete
  18. As one who has spent the better part of his life pissing off, and then "groveling to" women, Whit, I rather enjoy watching you do it. :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Confirmation, perhaps, that you are not alone?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Whit, when you're in "Deep" shit, it's RED Roses.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Never mind; I just saw the second "offering."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hey, I 'm fed up with you losers and I out of here.




    .

    ReplyDelete
  23. You won't have the old Quirkster to kick around anymore.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  24. You offer up some interesting observations. You expect some conversation, some education, some growth. And what do you get. Zip. Nada. A bunch of illiterate yahoos who can't write, or spell or read plain English criticizing you at every turn.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  25. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.



    .

    ReplyDelete
  26. I can't take it anymore. I won't take it anymore.


    I'm out of here.


    Life is too shoret.



    .

    ReplyDelete
  27. And I'm taking my stool with me so don't get any ideas.



    .

    ReplyDelete
  28. Vaya con Dios, amigo. :)

    ReplyDelete
  29. It's the one with the armrests.


    Fitted with the baby seat.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  30. As I expected.

    No songs. No roses.

    Zip.

    Fuck you Whit.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  31. With the Brown seat cushions.

    ReplyDelete
  32. There's GOT TO BE an appropriate country/western song for that.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Blogger whit said...

    "Come on now, Red, don't let the jackass popinjays drive you away."



    I'm guessing it was Dear Host himself that was the final straw.

    ReplyDelete
  34. There IS no "final straw" at the bar.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Hondy-tonks are forever.

    ReplyDelete
  36. It's the joints with the ferns, and Thai appetizers that come, and go.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "fat finger" for Honky Tonk

    ReplyDelete
  38. Make that, "Drunk Finger" for Honky Tonk.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hey, Trish must realize everyone here wants her back.

    She should also realize that when you put up cute, lyrical, or nostalgic posts about idyllic subjects or remembrances (i.e. kids, or camping, or travel, or some kind of...er...bacon?) it will generally solicit a favorable response. Who can argue with that stuff?
    (Well, the camping and shrimp combo maybe, but not much else.)

    If, on the other hand, you are going to post definitive statements/opinions about more weighty (albeit not necessarily more important) subjects in a room filled with drunken regenerates you logically have to expect some blowback. Especially, if you are not known for being shy about handing out criticism yourself.

    Now if you lack the guts or will to stand up to that blowback, you can avoid the weightier subjects and the subsequent blowback altogether or you can take your ball (in my case my pimped-out stool) and go home.

    This assumes that this is the actual reason Trish left and that it is not some other reason such as the upcoming election in Colombia or that she suddenly remembered some spring cleaning she needed to get done and decided to take a couple weeks away from the EB, exiting left with her usual flair.

    I hope it is one of these latter reasons. She is too big a girl to let the general bullshit get to her. In hopes that it is one of the latter reasons, let me offer this encouragement to her.

    In checking the Latin American News(my bible), I notice that Santos has come up in the latest polls. Add to that the general corruption in Colombian politics and there is a good chance that Santos will eventually win.

    If that doesn't do it, hopefully, we will see Trish in a couple of weeks when she has finished with her spring cleaning.

    Please, come back Trish.

    Whit has become an embarrassment to the entire bar.

    Is there any bright side to this tragedy? Well we've gotten to see Melody and T again. That's pretty damn good.

    Life is a box of chocolates.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  40. That should read drunken degenerates rather than drunken regenerates.

    I'm currently watching a zombie movie.

    (Although, the more I think about it the first term might apply.)

    (Naw, go with degenerate)



    .

    ReplyDelete
  41. I like a good bit of groveling, whit. Albeit lasting three agonizing days and ending with a long, sweaty shag. I'm all about the protocol.

    But Ash is right.

    And more generally there's little welcome insight for me to add to the conversation as a quite comfortably lapsed conservative and big-time Cheney hater walking into some National Lampoon version of the The Corner every day. With a bottle of rat poison in my handbag for Mark Levin.

    Some women discover they're lesbians. Others discover that their real sympathies - to the extent that they retain any - are with the liberals after all. And further, that if the Republican Party were to vanish from the earth tomorrow (friends and family members excepted...some of them anyway) it would just be a happy excuse for a block party. My treat. Thankfully the latter discovery is not grounds for divorce, as my Republican spouse is, for instance, perfectly willing to immediately turn off Fox News upon my entering his Man Cozy - as long as I do not, in turn, make him watch the Food Network. It's all good.

    But here at the Bar...Well, here it is more complicated. Isn't it? Especially as the token Federal Socialist bathing daily in the blood of Real Americans. Almost makes me pine for the long ago days of being insulted merely as the wife of a Baby Killer. (Although I've gotten that, too. There are still some of *those* aging assholes around.)

    I know what you're thinking: Boo fucking hoo.

    Yeah, well. We all have our little sensitivities. Out-of-touch Beltway Baronesses have feelings, too.

    *sniff*

    ReplyDelete
  42. Poor Baby. Life is hard. And, then, you wake up "a Democrat."

    Well, it probably aint "that easy," either.

    Your next epiphany will be that the Dems are just as big a bunch of assholes as the Pubs (and, twice as dangerous.)

    Find a niche in the middle, baby. Catch the show in "Surroundsound."

    ReplyDelete
  43. Sorry, what was that about a long, sweaty shag?

    I lost my train of thought at that point and missed the rest of your post.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  44. Good to see you back Trish.



    .

    ReplyDelete
  45. Here, is this what you're looking for? JLH - Hobo Blues

    ReplyDelete
  46. Rock'n Roll before they called it Rock'n Roll Howling Wolf

    ReplyDelete
  47. Cold Shot


    A lot of he good ones go too young.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  48. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  49. For so,e reason I wasn't able to click on the Robert Johnson lonk.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  50. Well forget the spelling. You know what I meant.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Lightnin Hopkins




    Good stuff Ruf. Now, I gotta go pick up a pizza though.



    .

    ReplyDelete

  52. Whit has become an embarrassment to the entire bar.


    I know, but at least I didn't pitch a fit and stomp my feet like a girl...

    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  53. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Ruf, before I go here's one for you and she's much easier to look at than Muddy Waters.


    Josh Stone



    .

    ReplyDelete
  55. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  56. How did we ever live through them days? Before

    ReplyDelete
  57. Aaand, just a couple of short years Later

    ReplyDelete
  58. I'm beginning to think we were safer in "Indian Country" than we would have been facing whatever those poor devils were up against.

    ReplyDelete