Ahmadinejad bullish on nuclear bullying

UNMOVED: Iran President Ahmadinejad at the press conference. PHOTO BY STEPHEN WANDERA.

The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday concluded his much-anticipated maiden 2-day state visit to Uganda. At a press conference shortly before his departure, Mr Ahmadinejad, calling his host President Museveni as “my very good friend” three times within minutes, exalted Ugandans for being warm-hearted and epitomising Africa’s beauty.

Daily Monitor’s senior reporter TABU BUTAGIRA covered Mr Ahmadinejad’s visit and below, reproduces key parts of his speeches – one at a state banquet on Friday and another at the press conference the next day. The Iranian leader never disappointed those who anticipated his tirade against the West over Tehran’s contested nuclear programme:
 
Dinner speech highlights


“We think it is the right of all nations to use nuclear energy. No one has a right to deny any nation this right. Iran and Uganda both enjoy this purity and integrity and believe in a world of compassion and stand firm against oppression and aggression against any country that thinks only about their own interests.

We are ready to do everything to invade other countries [that] undermine the independence and sovereignty of all nations; plunder and loot resources of other nations and ignore human dignity anywhere and anytime. We shall stand firmly against all these atrocities.
The era of colonialism is over. It has gone to archives of history. Today is the age of justice, respect for human dignity, morality and spirituality and recognising the right of all nations.
I would like to have a short reference to the nuclear issue and energy. I want to offer a short comparison. For the generation of 1,000 megawatts of electricity through fossil fuels in one year period, you need seven million barrels of crude oil. If we can (calculate) that - the price of crude oil is eight dollars a barrel - for 1000 megawatts of electricity, we need 560 million dollars (Shs620b) while nuclear power plant reduces this to 60 million dollars (Shs120b).

In addition, fossil fuels pollute the environment severely. They (western countries and their allies) want to monopolise nuclear energy and weapons. This is treason and betrayal of mankind. We think it is the right of all nations to use nuclear energy. The main danger to the world is posed by those who have stockpiled nuclear
weapons and continue to threaten other nations. The age of double standard policies and games is over. Today, we have the age of independent nations.”


Answer to a question at the press conference why he thinks the world does not believe Tehran nuclear is only for peaceful purpose.
First of all, I would like to thank the almighty God for giving me the chance to be here in this great, beautiful country and meet my very good friend His Excellency Museveni. I wish to express my sincere gratitude for the warm welcome and hospitality accorded by my very good friend. We are really feeling at home here in Uganda. And we are talking and having dialogue with our brothers and friends. Uganda is the complete manifestation of all beauties of Africa (ovation from ministers) - natural and human beauties. And the most important characteristics of people in this country are: the belief in one God, the belief in justice and the belief in beauties and love.
The two countries have been able to establish profound and friendly relationship. During the time with my very good friend, we discussed a wide range of issues; shared opinions and we have common belief in the administration of justice in the international order and relations. We are determined to extend our cooperation in all fields and possible areas.
Today, the entire international community knows that the nuclear issue of Iran has been politicised. It’s not at all a legal issue or a legal problem because Iran has observed all regulations and laws. But Iran has never enjoyed its rights. The nuclear issue in Iran has turned into a big test for the entire world because it’s going to separate those who commit to international law and regulations and those who are not
going to abide by it.

False pretext

The hostility of the United States and the United Kingdom against Iranians are not something new. They defended and supported the war imposed by [late Iraqi president] Saddam Hussein for 8 years. They defend anything which is against the Iranian people and the Iranian nation. Today they are going to use the false pretext of nuclear weapons programme.
They say they are concerned about the building of a nuclear bomb. But they are lying. They have equipped the Zionist state (Israel) with more than 200 nuclear heads. They provide all technical and financial resources for the Zionist regime. They themselves have thousands of nuclear war heads in their arsenals. But they say: We are concerned about the future of Iran’s nuclear programme; maybe if Iran decides to divert from its peaceful purposes! They repeat the same jokes all the time.

We reiterate that our nuclear activities are based on peaceful purposes. They say no, Iran is diverting. We say that in all reports issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), they have seen no diversion in Iran nuclear programme. We ask them: What’s your evidence or document that proves your claims? They say we have no evidence but let’s search everywhere in Iran to find the evidence!

The measures that have been taken or are going to be taken by the US and its allies in the (UN) Security Council lack any legal validity. Of course we have previously announced that we are seeking to cooperate

and this dialogue must be on the basis of respect and justice. We do not submit to and or accept any kind of pressures. And we don’t follow the illegal decisions. We think by issuing resolutions against us, [US President Barack] Obama will suffer more.

The philosophy of Obama’s coming to power was to make a change in the behaviour of the government of the US. Mr Obama came to power to change and improve the double standards and discriminatory policies of the western countries. The fact that he is going to take decisions against Iranian people is an end to his stature.
In fact those who said Mr Obama is nothing more than a mask will prove to be right. They said Obama came to power to hide the real face and nature of the United States. To continue the same policies of the Bush administrations will certainly remove the new mask. Of course we don’t welcome such a thing. We have made great efforts to help President Obama.

Obama’s task

But naturally, we do give all this support with an understanding of justice. While according to laws and the regulations of the IAEA, they have the commitment and obligations to provide the enriched uranium of 20 per cent for our research reactors but we have accepted to exchange fuels with them. The situation has changed now but the principles of the proposal are still on the table.

We hope that President Obama will have a long period of making constructive policies in the country. But he can do so if he remains committed to justice and respect for all. Any policy other than this will not be acceptable (thunderous applause by bureaucrats).
Answer to question on using nuclear technology without foray into weapons manufacture and impact of likely fourth sanctions on Iran’s policy towards Africa.


Our foreign policy about Africa will not change. We are friends with African countries, including Uganda. And we have profound amicable relationships. The major source of concern today is the presence of nuclear arsenals in the West and all American bases throughout the world.

One hundred and eighteen nations of the non-aligned movement have already endorsed Iran’s policies and position as well as other groups in international forum. We think the problem of the world is the continued coercive and intimidating policies of the US because they want to continue monopoling nuclear energy and weapons in the world, deny other nations the peaceful use of nuclear energy and impose their own will on them. A resolution which is going to be based on discrimination has no value. Iran is a powerful and great country. Mr Obama needs us more than we do. So we are not concerned by whatsoever measures of Mr Obama. They are not able to do anything. So we have no worries (ovation).

tbutagira@monitor.co.ug

Election 2010: Gloves off in second leaders' debate

Fiery clashes in TV leader debate

Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg lock horns in the second prime ministerial TV debate, focused on global affairs.

The gloves came off in the second prime ministerial debate as Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg clashed over global affairs .In fiery exchanges, the three leaders locked horns on Europe, climate change, tax, nuclear weapons and sleaze.
Mr Brown and Mr Cameron agreed less with Mr Clegg than last week and instead stressed policy differences.
BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson said all three performed well and it proved "we are in a tight three horse race".
Opinion polls taken immediately after the debate gave conflicting verdicts over whether Mr Cameron or Mr Clegg came out on top but they agreed that the margins between all three contenders were much tighter than in the first debate.
But BBC polling expert David Cowling said there had been a significant drop in the number of people who thought Mr Clegg won, with Mr Brown having the most improved ratings.

The debate itself was livelier than last week, with flashes of anger from Mr Cameron in particular as he accused Labour of spreading "lies" about Tory policy on benefits for the elderly in election leaflets, telling Mr Brown he should be "ashamed" of them.

'Desperate'
At several points, both Mr Cameron and Mr Brown attempted to take a leaf out of Nick Clegg's book by pointing to the squabbling of the other two.
But they avoided saying "I agree with Nick" in an effort to win the Lib Dem leader over and at one point Mr Cameron even said "I agree with Gordon" over nuclear weapons.
Mr Brown made a point of attacking Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg equally, rounding off his closing statement by telling his two rivals: "Nick you would leave us weak, David you would leave us isolated in Europe."

I think it's quite an insult that we were not represented in that debate
Alex Neil

SNP hAnalysis: 'Game on' in campaign

In quotes: Reaction to debate

Nick Robinson: What a difference
But the Labour leader's main pitch was to tell voters anything other than a Labour majority risked damaging the economy, telling voters: "Don't do anything that puts this economic recovery at risk."

Mr Cameron said Mr Brown sounded "desperate" and accused him of "trying to frighten people". In his closing statement, he said Britain needed a "clean break from 13 years of failure".

Mr Clegg, who was the last to deliver a closing statement, sought to strike an optimistic note, saying "people are beginning to hope that we can do something different this time" and "if we do things differently we can be a force for good in the world".
The three leaders began by calling each other by their first names, but as the debate developed Mr Clegg in particular started calling his rivals by their full names when he addressed them.

'Hypocritical'

Mr Clegg said he believed it was time for a "fundamental debate" on Europe and said "of course there are daft rules, of course it does daft things but it seems to me that we punch above our weight when you stand together in Europe".
Mr Brown said he was determined to work with the "sensible" people in Europe, and accused Mr Cameron of aligning himself with "right-wing extremists" after pulling his MEPs out of the main centre-right European People's Party grouping.
But the Tory leader said it would have been "hypocritical" to stay in the EPP.

HAVE YOUR SAY Thought Labour and Conservative were better prepared tonight, although the complete turnaround from 'I agree with Nick' to 'get real' was interesting, to say the least!
Pippa
Send your comment Mr Clegg weighed in by accusing Mr Cameron of working with "nutters, anti-Semites, people who deny climate change exists, homophobes".
Mr Brown accused his two rivals of behaving like "my two boys at bath time - they are squabbling," gaining him the first laugh of the evening.
He went on: "I am afraid David is anti-European, Nick is anti- American. Both of them are out of touch with reality."
Mr Cameron hit back: "What you are hearing from the other two is, frankly, do not trust the people. Do not ask them when you pass powers from Westminster to Brussels.
"Just give in to everything that comes out of Brussels and do not stand up for your country."
Mr Clegg came under attack from his two rivals over his proposal to include Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent in the strategic defence review which all three parties have promised to hold after the election.

The Lib Dem leader cited a group of retired generals who have warned that replacing Trident could take money away from frontline troops and that US President Barack Obama had identified the threats of the future as terrorism and failed states.

But Mr Brown told him: "I have to deal with these issues every day and I say to you, Nick, get real."

Mr Cameron agreed with the Labour leader, arguing "we are safer having an independent nuclear deterrent in an unsafe world ... a proper replacement for Trident."
There was also lively debate over immigration policy, with Mr Clegg denying he wanted an "amnesty" for illegal immigrants and facing claims from Mr Cameron that his plan for regional targets did not make sense. Mr Cameron faced a similar claim from Mr Brown about his plan for an annual cap on immigration.

Turning to the war in Afghanistan, Mr Clegg said the government had not pursued the right strategy or given the right equipment to British troops.
Mr Brown said British troops were in Afghanistan because there was a "chain of terror" linking al-Qaeda groups across the world to action which could happen in the UK.

Hung Parliament
The leaders also clashed over cleaning-up politics, with Mr Brown saying he was "ashamed" of the way MPs had behaved and Mr Cameron said no party should put itself on a pedestal over expenses.
But the Tory leader insisted there should not be voting reform to get rid of the first-past-the-post system.

"Don't let us give up the way you can sack your government and throw them out, let us not have permanent hung Parliaments."

Mr Clegg urged young people to register to vote, saying they could make it the "most exciting election in a very long time".
Asked about the Daily Telegraph's allegations during the televised leaders' debate, Mr Clegg said: "It's a complete nonsense story... complete rubbish."

The leaders were also quizzed about what they would do in the event of a hung Parliament, with Mr Clegg urging voters to ignore "ludicrous scare stories" about meltdown in the financial markets.
Anti-war protesters were involved in a stand-off with police outside the venue in Bristol which hosted the debate. Six people were arrested for public order offences.
A number of opinion polls placed the Lib Dems ahead of Labour and gaining on the Conservatives after last week's prime ministerial TV debate. Others, such as the YouGov/Sun survey of 20 April, have even put the Lib Dems in first place.

Where's the change when the three Westminster leaders tonight, Cameron, Brown and Clegg, were as one in their support for continuing a war in Afghanistan
Adam Price, Plaid Cymru

dot.Rory: how it unfolded online

Debate uncertainty over world role
It has increased speculation that the general election on 6 May will result in a hung parliament - polls suggest the Conservatives are still slightly ahead but would not have enough seats to get an overall majority.

Thursday's debate was held at the Arnolfini Gallery in Bristol, hosted by Sky's political editor Adam Boulton.

Ahead of the debate the BBC Trust rejected a joint appeal from the Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties against the BBC's decision to exclude them from the prime ministerial debates - separate leaders' debates are being held in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Plaid Cymru's Adam Price branded the prime ministerial debate a "farce", saying: "Where's the choice? Where's the change when the three Westminster leaders tonight, Cameron, Brown and Clegg, were as one in their support for continuing a war in Afghanistan - a war with no end in sight and which has cost us dearly in lives and in funds?"
Angus Robertson, for the SNP, said: "If people in Scotland want to avoid the exclusion of Scottish interest which we saw on display again tonight, the only mention of Scotland came once when the prime minister talked about the weather, that is simply not good enough."
UK Independence Party MEP Nigel Farage, said there had not been a "proper debate about the European Union in this election campaign."
Mr Farage, who campaigns for Britain to leave the EU, said: "Was that it? A ten-minute debate in the entire general election campaign about the institution that now makes 75% of our laws. And what we saw was total agreement that we must be part of the European Union."

Green Party deputy leader Adrian Ramsay said the debate showed the three main parties were "not taking climate change seriously."
Simon Darby, of the British National Party, also complained about the lack of debate on the EU: "There wasn't anybody there suggesting we should remove ourselves from the European Union. On the question on the war in Afghanistan, they are all in favour of the war in Afghanistan. We shouldn't be there."
The English Democrats, who campaign for an English Parliament, said the debate was a "no score" draw for England: "Roll on a hung parliament with representatives from the English Democrats to stand up for England, like the SNP stand up for Scotland."