ElBaredei: International Man of Misery

Mohammed ElBaredei has served as the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency since 1997- an odd choice for the position since he has absolutely no scientific, let along, physics background and he hails from Egypt and previously served in that nation’s diplomatic corps. This background leads him open charges that he may lack the experience to evaluate nations’ nuclear programs and that he may be biased to favor Arab and Muslim nations. Telling is the fact that his positions are mirrored and supported by Non-Aligned members of the IAEA- giving rise to the question whether Western nations should be at the mercy of officials from parts of the world rife with resentment at being left out of the “nuclear club."

 
Furthermore, posts at the United Nation tend to become sinecures and the heads of their agencies tend to become “little emperors”-falling victim to an imperiousness that makes them impervious to other’s views or concerns. ElBaredei seems to have become a symbol of this malady.

 
The New York Times-which has along history of unalloyed support to the United Nations and to diplomats in general-has a surprisingly devastating portrait of ElBaredei on today’s front page. ElBaredei is portrayed as being dictatorial: dismissive of those who hold views at variance with his own and resistant to entreaties to consider facts as they emerge. These traits are in full display as he deals with Iran- the number one terror-sponsoring nation in the world and one that has repeatedly lied to the IAEA and to diplomats from European Union regarding the scope and nature of its nuclear program.


Despite this record, ElBaredei seems determined to curry favor with Iran-trumpeting an agreement with them that grants them the ability to continue to develop their nuclear weapons program.  He gives a pass to Iran-who has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act and is routinely violating its provisions but has exceeded his mandate by attacking Israel-not a signatory to the Act- for its putative nuclear work. He has opposed all efforts to change his positions and his rulings.

 
The Times unfortunately leaves out other media reports regarding Elbaredei problematic behavior. He recently walked out on a EU envoy’s speech that expressed concern regarding Iran and had the gumption to issue a protest statement regarding the EU envoy’s speech. There have also been reports in the past that ElBaredei “was providing advice to Iran on how to avoid sanctions from his organization for its previously undisclosed uranium enrichment programs” (this has been disputed by some). He is on record as having accepted the inevitability of Iran succeeding at mastering the uranium enrichment process-a key step in developing nuclear weapons. These skills were mastered under his watch.

 
A history of repeatedly appeasing Iran, of seemingly taking its side against even the normally dovish EU, of refusing to listen to the opinions of others, of ignoring inconvenient facts-he is the perfect embodiment of the United Nations.

 
He may also be the man responsible for allowing, if not promoting, the ability of Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal.

Mohammed ElBaredei has served as the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency since 1997- an odd choice for the position since he has absolutely no scientific, let along, physics background and he hails from Egypt and previously served in that nation’s diplomatic corps. This background leads him open charges that he may lack the experience to evaluate nations’ nuclear programs and that he may be biased to favor Arab and Muslim nations. Telling is the fact that his positions are mirrored and supported by Non-Aligned members of the IAEA- giving rise to the question whether Western nations should be at the mercy of officials from parts of the world rife with resentment at being left out of the “nuclear club."

 
Furthermore, posts at the United Nation tend to become sinecures and the heads of their agencies tend to become “little emperors”-falling victim to an imperiousness that makes them impervious to other’s views or concerns. ElBaredei seems to have become a symbol of this malady.

 
The New York Times-which has along history of unalloyed support to the United Nations and to diplomats in general-has a surprisingly devastating portrait of ElBaredei on today’s front page. ElBaredei is portrayed as being dictatorial: dismissive of those who hold views at variance with his own and resistant to entreaties to consider facts as they emerge. These traits are in full display as he deals with Iran- the number one terror-sponsoring nation in the world and one that has repeatedly lied to the IAEA and to diplomats from European Union regarding the scope and nature of its nuclear program.


Despite this record, ElBaredei seems determined to curry favor with Iran-trumpeting an agreement with them that grants them the ability to continue to develop their nuclear weapons program.  He gives a pass to Iran-who has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act and is routinely violating its provisions but has exceeded his mandate by attacking Israel-not a signatory to the Act- for its putative nuclear work. He has opposed all efforts to change his positions and his rulings.

 
The Times unfortunately leaves out other media reports regarding Elbaredei problematic behavior. He recently walked out on a EU envoy’s speech that expressed concern regarding Iran and had the gumption to issue a protest statement regarding the EU envoy’s speech. There have also been reports in the past that ElBaredei “was providing advice to Iran on how to avoid sanctions from his organization for its previously undisclosed uranium enrichment programs” (this has been disputed by some). He is on record as having accepted the inevitability of Iran succeeding at mastering the uranium enrichment process-a key step in developing nuclear weapons. These skills were mastered under his watch.

 
A history of repeatedly appeasing Iran, of seemingly taking its side against even the normally dovish EU, of refusing to listen to the opinions of others, of ignoring inconvenient facts-he is the perfect embodiment of the United Nations.

 
He may also be the man responsible for allowing, if not promoting, the ability of Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal.