Sep 27, 2004 5 min read

When the cat’s away, the mice will play. In this case, the cat is America and the mice are two members of George W. Bush’s “axis of evil”, Iran and North Korea. While not exactly absent, the cat is distracted by the third member of the axis, Iraq, and its own presidential election on Nov. 2. … The lack of progress within the six-nation forum discussing North Korea and the heightened confrontation between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), indicate that the two proliferators are playing for time diplomatically while pushing ahead with weapons development. Yesterday, Iran rejected an IAEA resolution calling on it to stop activities relating to the enrichment of uranium and threatened to ban random checks by the agency were its case to be referred to the UN Security Council. Teheran said that if the council decided on sanctions it might follow North Korea and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The clerically dominated regime … is daring the U.N., and in particular, its most powerful member, the United States, to do its worst.

… The way forward will obviously depend on whether Mr. Bush or John Kerry has won the presidential election. Whoever prevails, America will be faced with a would-be nuclear Iran which supports terrorism, denies Israel’s right to exist and, in the words of its extremists, would like to destroy the liberal democracies. Such a power has to be contained, by negotiation, military intervention or the fomenting of an internal uprising. … Whatever the result on Nov. 2, Iran will be high on the next Administration’s agenda. Both there and in North Korea, determined and wily mice have placed the cat in an unenviable dilemma.

On U.S. elections and science:

Science has reached the U.S. election campaign. The differences between the two candidates are interesting. One of the sharpest regards stem-cell research. Based on religious arguments, President George W. Bush opposes this kind of research. Democratic rival John F. Kerry favors it. Their stands are inverted when the issue is arms. Bush favors research to develop mini-nuclear bombs that might be used on battlefields, while Kerry says he would end the search for new atomic weapons. Bush also favors investment in a space defense program that would intercept nuclear missiles before they reach the United States. Kerry says it’s important to ensure that this technology really works before putting more money into it.

Another point of profound difference is the environment. Bush, as is well known, abandoned the Kyoto Protocol to reduce the greenhouse effect. Kerry is known for holding environment-friendly stands. As science enters the election debate, it is interesting to note that there are significant differences between the two candidates. It’s good to remember that, in the previous presidential election, many claimed that the choice between Bush and his rival was irrelevant, provided the president of the Federal Reserve was kept in the job. History has disproved that notion.

On the faltering authority of the United Nations:

Last week, the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Anan, for the first time, described the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, as illegal, a fact that most people in the world have known since the build-up to that invasion was commenced in 2002. …The problem of the UN system has largely been related to the near-monopoly power of the leading imperialist superpower, the United States, that has become arrogant, unilateralist and under the rule of the so-called-Neo-conservatives, has taken the path of trampling upon civilized norms of conduct of international relations.

The reality of a world system that has come under the control of a lone superpower has therefore rendered the UN system, with its tradition of multilateralism, very weak. This has made the world less safe than at any point since the end of the Cold War. …

The United States, under the rule of the neo-conservatives, has made the effort to railroad the entire international community to accepting its own priority of fight against so-called international terrorism, as being the most important problem in the contemporary world.

It is however important for the different countries of the world, united within the international system of the UN, to regain their voices and begin to speak out against the illegalities that underscore the foreign policy of the United States, which it attempts to ram down the throats of the weak and strong alike. … A more equitable United Nations Security Council should bring on board such countries as India, Japan, Brazil, Germany and Nigeria to reflect the realities of a complex world determined to build a harmonized world in a twenty-first century of infinite possibilities for human kind. …

On Shania Twain’s land purchase in New Zealand:

… Shania Twain’s … applying to buy two high-country stations near Wanaka … finally gained Government approval late last week. … The Canadian singer was required to … come back with a proposal that served the interests of New Zealanders. The upshot is an agreement that could stand as a blueprint for future land sales to foreigners. … Drafted legislation would stop people buying prime land, and treating New Zealand “as a rich man’s playground”, unless they intended living in this country. …The sale of Young Nick’s Head raised some reasonable concerns about overseas investment rules, most notably the readiness with which prime New Zealand sites, especially sensitive coastal or high-country land, could be sold.

… What has emerged is a deal that serves the interests of all parties. …Twain … has shown awareness of public access and conservation issues, and considerable generosity. And the Government has fashioned a template for future sales of sensitive land. …