There are also a lot of games being played in the background, with the western countries having spy rings inside Iran, and one of these spy rings detected the presence of another Iranian secret nuclear enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom. This detection forced the Iranians to announce the presence of this nuclear facility in a letter to the IAEA, and there are complex legalities about whether having a secret facility like this was proper or not (Iran claimed that it only had to announce once it reached a certain stage of activity). This announcement however raised more suspicions about the motives of the Iranians, and whether there were more such facilities that were hidden in the country. The Western countries are also racing against another unstated deadline, possible Israeli activity. Israel sees Iran as a deadly enemy, and may act militarily to destroy the Iranian facilities, something that would dramatically escalate tensions. Other powers in the area, such as Saudi Arabia would also be uncomfortable if Iran went ahead and built a bomb (link to article):

ElBaradei urged Iran to submit to more comprehensive inspections because its nuclear program is so advanced. “It would help the agency to have Iran subscribing again to our regulations that allow us to be informed of the construction of nuclear facilities as early as possible,” he said. He also pressed Iran to give the IAEA “the authority for more information, for access to more locations that would enable the agency to provide assurances not only about declared nuclear activity in Iran but also about possible undeclared activities.”
Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili met with William J. Burns, the U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, a senior U.S. official and a diplomatic source confirmed to CNN. The men discussed Iran’s nuclear program, a sit-down described as the first face-to-face meeting between the U.S. and Iran over the program. International powers want inspectors to have free access to Iran’s new facility and have threatened more sanctions if the Islamic republic doesn’t change its ways.

And yet, the countries interacting with Iran over its nuclear stance (primarily the countries in the UN Security Council) are unable to make a decision on how to proceed. Iran has always had the stance that it is using nuclear energy for purposes of generating an alternative to fossil fuels for electricity, a stand that other countries refuse to buy, and yet this must be one of the longest running attempts to have a discussion (link to article):

The U.S. and European Union called for a meeting with Iran to discuss stalled nuclear talks, brushing aside the Persian Gulf country’s failure to mention the dispute over its atomic program in a proposal for negotiations. The EU request for a meeting came in response to the Iranian plan to tie any discussion of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East to talks on the future of the Palestinian people and changes in the structure of the United Nations Security Council.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki presented a five-page document to China, France, Germany, Russia, the U.K. and U.S. in Tehran on Sept. 9. The proposals are a response to Western concern about the atomic work, said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who denies allegations by the U.S. and major allies that Iran’s nuclear-power development is cover for the production of weapons. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told worshippers in Tehran yesterday that Iran must “stand firm” in the nuclear dispute, saying it has the right to the technology, Agence France-Presse reported.

The members of the Security Council and the EU have not been able to come to an agreement about how to deal with Iran, given that Russia and China have not agreed with the western position. And of course, there is widespread problems even in the US, and the EU about trying to move ahead with a military and hard decision.

The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Japan met Monday for a second closed-door session to hammer out a response to North Korea’s weekend rocket launch in defiance of international opposition. But, as happened on Sunday following a called emergency session, there was no official statement from the council. Security Council Resolution 1718 was unanimously adopted in 2006, imposing a series of economic and commercial sanctions on North Korea. The resolution called for Pyongyang to conduct no further nuclear tests and to suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile program, including launches.
However, not all Security Council members are onboard with Japan and the West. Russia and China are pushing for a technical assessment of the rocket launch before further actions are undertaken.
Earlier Monday, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said it was important to avoid an “emotional knee-jerk reaction because what we do need is common strategy and not losing sight of the goal — and this is the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.”

Russia and China are not fully behind the US and Japan in this area, partially because they do not quite like the concept of seeming to act to further the interests of the US. As a result, they will stick to the stand that if the North Koreans were seen to be launching a satellite, then there is no need to take any action.

US President George W Bush has signed into law a nuclear deal with India, which ends a three-decade ban on US nuclear trade with Delhi. The landmark agreement was approved by the US Congress nearly a week ago. The deal will give India access to US civilian nuclear technology and fuel in return for inspections of its civilian, but not military, nuclear facilities.

India says the accord is vital to meet its rising energy needs. Critics say it creates a dangerous precedent. They say it effectively allows India to expand its nuclear power industry without requiring it to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as other nations must. The US restricted nuclear co-operation with India after it tested a nuclear weapon in 1974.

The Indian side faced tremendous challenges in getting this deal through. The process was started by a discussion with the BJP ruled Indian Government and the Bush Administration, and was then negotiated by the Congress Government with the US Administration a couple of years back. The Indian Government was a minority Government, and dependent on the Communist Parties and many other parties. The Communist Parties, although against the nuclear policies of the Indian Government, have always despised a closer relationship with the United States and refused to flatly support such a policy, warning of a end to the Government (and since the Government was in a minority, an end seemed quite natural if their support ended).
For a long time, it seemed that the Government had given up, after all the nuclear deal was not a vote-winner, the deal also seemed to be against the interests of the Muslim minority vote that the Congress wants, and so on. And then, after many months, Dr. Manmohan Singh finally decided that enough is enough; he literally forced the Government to agree to his stand that they back the deal; to the extent that manipulations were allowed in order to make sure that the Government retained a majority in Parliament.
Getting the deal through the Nuclear Suppliers Group was another difficult task. There were many nations wedded to the cause of denial of technology to anybody who had not signed upto the NPT, and it required intensive effort by the US to get the group to agree. China in the end tried to prod other nations, but the US pressure (and a small amount of Indian pressure) was enough to get the member to eventually agree, even though it was totally under pressure.
The United States also had to face opposition internally, both within the Administration, and outside in the strategic community; people were reluctant to approve any exemptions to the NPT; thought was that this gave India the right to use its uranium resources to push its military weapons program; also that this gave the wrong signal to others such as Iran and Pakistan.
Overall, this deal will provide a vast impetus to the nuclear energy commercial business; with India planning a large number of reactors to meet a portion of its energy needs, a number of companies worldwide will benefit.

North Korea has made another move toward possibly restarting its suspended nuclear program, the U.N. nuclear agency reports. At the reclusive nation’s request, the International Atomic Energy Agency has removed surveillance equipment and seals from the Yongbyon nuclear facility, agency spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. The move clears the way for North Korea to reintroduce nuclear material to the facility. The North has told the IAEA that it will do that in a week or so.
Last week, a South Korean news agency reported that North Korea was restoring a reactor at Yongbyon nuclear complex and no longer wanted to be removed from a U.S. list of countries that sponsor terrorism. But a senior U.S. diplomat has said the announcement could simply be a bargaining ploy in the long-running negotiations. The U.S. had seen no indications North Korea was actually rebuilding its reactor, the diplomat said. North Korea had agreed to disable the Yongbyon nuclear complex by October in exchange for a pledge from the U.S. to lift some sanctions and remove North Korea from a list of countries that sponsor terrorism.

When dealing with the North Koreans, it sometimes seems that the Bush Administration is all at sea. In the midst of the attempts by the Bush Administration (and the 6 nation effort) to try to cap the North Korean nuclear efforts, the North Koreans blew a hole into this effort and tested a nuclear bomb, becoming a declared nuclear bomb. One can only wonder what the North Koreans will do next, especially when it is not clear who the current leadership of North Korea actually is.

U.S. military intelligence officials are urgently assessing how secure Pakistan’s nuclear weapons would be in the event President Gen. Pervez Musharraf were replaced as the nation’s leader, CNN has learned. Key questions in the assessment include who would control Pakistan’s nuclear weapons after a shift in power.
The United States has full knowledge about the location of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, according to the U.S. assessment. But the key questions, officials say, are what would happen and who would control the weapons in the hours after any change in government in case Musharraf were killed or overthrown.
Musharraf controls the loyalty of the commanders and senior officials in charge of the nuclear program, but those loyalties could shift at any point, officials say. The United States is not certain who might start controlling nuclear launch codes and weapons if that shift in power were to happen. There is also a growing understanding according to the U.S. analysis that Musharraf’s control over the military remains limited to certain top commanders and units, raising worries about whether he can maintain control over the long term.

This is a very serious issue. The US takes the matter of its security against nuclear threat very seriously, and no one should be surprised if the US already has some sort of control over the Pakistani nuclear facilities. In 2001, the US had threatened Pakistan if it did not withdraw support from the Taleban, and the same set of actors are still there on the stage; both President Bush and President Musharraf are in the same positions, and it is easy to believe that the US still has the same set of influence on Pakistan.