Alain Gresh wrote in Le Monde:“During the Gaza war, South Africa expressed its strong solidarity with the Palestinians. No one here has forgotten the collaboration between Pretoria and Israel under apartheid, and many see parallels between the Palestinian situation today and that of Black and cloured South Africans back in the days of White rule”

link to rehmat1.wordpress.com

Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons

Exclusive: Secret apartheid-era papers give first official evidence of Israeli nuclear weapons

link to guardian.co.uk

Personally, I believe Tehran should not go for the swap because it could be a trap – based on my following reasons:

link to rehmat1.wordpress.com

In a little over a year, so many promises have been broken – it is so disheartening that a man with so much promise would turn out in this way.

A supercarrier is a phenomenal weapons system, but unless it happens to be nearby when the next war starts, it will be pretty much useless. It’s aircraft can only go out about 750 miles before they have to turn back. So, they have to loiter where we project they will be needed. Airbases in Qatar and Pakistan are much better ideas.
.

Turkey and Brazil, with full backing from Washington DC and in close cooperation with the Obama administration, had apparently succeeded by Monday morning in negotiating a deal whereby Iran would send over half of its low enriched uranium to Turkey, which would then send it on to (presumably) France and Russia for enrichment to 19.75 percent for use in Iran’s medical reactor for the production of medical isotopes. The deal was nearly identical to the one sought last October in Geneva by the Obama administration. Iran had agreed to something like this arrangement, but then reneged.

1) By now 1200 kgs is probably slightly less than Iran has on hand, but it is very close. Saying over half is probably slightly less accurate than saying about half. But I would not consider that misleading.

2) The LEU, though is not to leave Turkey until Iran gets the fuel. It will not be Iranian uranium that makes the fuel plates but rather Russian uranium diluted from weapons grade back to whatever France requests for the fuel plates.

3) Iran did not renege on any agreement. Iran accepted a fuel swap in principle in early October 2009. By late October a) there was the terrorist attack, which Iran believed was supported by the US that killed many Iranian officers b) the West presented an offer that gave no assurances that Iran would ever actually get the fuel, and that left the US room to use returning the fuel as negotiating leverage to try to force Iran to stop enriching uranium. But while Iran was not in a mood to accept a take it or leave it offer from the West with unacceptable terms, that does not mean it reneged on any offer. The late October offer, to this day, has never been spoken of positively by any Iranian official at any level. The idea of a swap has always been acceptable, but never the late October offer.

There are four domestic political forces affecting Iran policy. The War Hawks, including the more hard line of the Israel lobbies, would like to see the US back on the war footing with Iran characteristic of the late Bush administration.

4) This is a common misconception. The late Bush administration was far more cooperative with Iran than the Obama administration. You’ll notice that a new NIE is being produced about Iran’s nuclear program. This NIE will not be released to the public the way the 2007 NIE was. If you ask, why was the 2007 NIE, which reduced essentially to zero the chance that Bush could either attack Iran or even get new sanctions was released if the Obama administration demonstrates that the White has the power to refuse to release an NIE, the answer is that it was released as a deliberate gesture. A tangible gesture far more convincing than any of Obama’s speeches to the Iranian people.

Along with that the Bush administration by the end of its term was in close cooperation with Iran regarding a US exit plan for Iraq.