| |
Iran's neutrality on the
line
By Hooman Peimani
Iranian government spokesperson Abdullah
Ramezanzadeh has condemned the American war on Iraq as
"illegitimate" and "unjustifiable" and reiterated Iran's
neutrality in the war. He has also demanded that both
Iraq and the United States respect Iran's neutrality.
However, Iran might find it increasingly difficult to
remain idle when regional (Turkey) and non-regional
(United States and United Kingdom) states are seeking to
achieve long-term objectives in Iraq with potentially
dire consequences for the Iranians.
Ramezanzadeh
deplored the American government's initiating the war
despite the international community's opposition, which
he predicted to have grim consequences for Iraq, the
Persian Gulf region, the Middle East and the entire
world. In his address on the occasion of the Iranian new
year (Nouroz) on Friday, Iranian President Mohammad
Khatami stressed Ramezanzadeh's points as he stated, "We
have opposed this move from the outset and today we
again clearly condemn this military attack ... this
military attack, apart from the destructive damage which
it has for the oppressed Iraqi people, is dangerous for
the whole region and the world." Despite its intention,
though, Iran could be dragged into the American war on
Iraq. Intentional, and more likely, unintentional
military attacks on Iranian territory could push Iran
into the war. On Saturday, an American cruise missile,
presumably aimed at the Iraqi port of Basra, missed its
target and hit the nearby Iranian port of Abadan. The
Iranian government filed a protest for the incident in
which two Iranians were killed. On the same day, the
head of the legal affairs bureau of the Iranian Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, Mohammad Danesh-Yazdi, handed over
his government's protest to the British and Swiss
embassies in Tehran for the violation of its airspace by
American and British aircraft. The Swiss embassy takes
care of American interests in the absence of an American
embassy in Iran. The continuation of such military
incidents may well force Iran to take retaliatory
action, a recipe for an unwanted involvement in the war.
The entry into Iran of Iraqi military personnel
to seek shelter or to use that country for their attacks
on the American and British forces could also provoke
the latter's attack on Iran, which would drag it into
the conflict against its will. To prevent that scenario,
Ramezanzadeh stated that Iran had decided to seal off
its borders to prevent any "illegal infiltration to its
soil by Iraqi nationals", that is, Iraqi military
personnel. Yet he announced Iran's readiness to help
Iraqi refugees fleeing war-affected areas. As mentioned
last week in Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi's
appeal to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan
for refugee relief assistance, "a growing number of
Iraqi refugees" has been entering Iran.
Iran
could more likely be dragged into the war as a result of
an Iranian military intervention in that country in
reaction to Turkey's move to achieve its strategic
interests that could have an unacceptable impact on the
regional balance of power. In particular, Turkey's
determination to deploy a large military force in Iraq's
Kurdish region now sanctioned by its parliament and/or
its efforts to annex or control oil-rich Kirkuk and
Mosul to which the Turks have territorial claims since
the Ottoman Empire's disintegration could trigger an
Iranian reaction. Turkey already has a few thousand
military personnel in that region who control a 30
kilometer-wide "security zone" along the Iraqi side of
the border, while amassing its troops estimated at
20,000 to 40,000 along its border with Iraq for a future
massive deployment.
This situation also alarms
the Iraqi Kurds who are on good terms with Iran. Last
month, Massoud Barzani, the leader of the Kurdish
Democratic Party (KDP), one of the two main Kurdish
armed groups governing northern Iraq, said that the
Kurds would resist "all further Turkish intrusions" into
their territory. Nechirvan Barzani, the KDP's second in
command, went beyond that statement to say, "The Turks
must be made to understand that their presence [in Iraqi
Kurdistan] will be disastrous both for us and for
themselves." Moreover, Barham Saleh, prime minister
under Jalal Talabani, the leader of the other main
Kurdish group, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK),
clearly hinted at a possible Iranian intervention, apart
from a Kurdish reaction, when he held, "[Turkish]
military intervention would only complicate matters. If
one neighbor gets into Iraq, the others will too, and it
will be a mess."
Iran's intervention could take
a direct military form if it fails to dissuade Turkey
from pursuing its objectives through diplomacy and/or by
its Iraqi Kurdish friends and Shi'ite proteges. Iran's
ties with the KDP and the PUK have experienced ups and
downs over the past two decades. Nevertheless, the two
sides have had friendly ties during the past few years
as reflected in their receiving assistance from the
Iranian government, which has let them maintain offices
in Iran. The Iranians will likely seek to halt any
long-term Turkish gain in Iraq through those Kurdish
groups, which share Iran's concerns about Turkey.
Towards that end, the mentioned groups could
count on the Badr Brigade's cooperation, which is the
military wing of the Iran-based and backed Supreme
Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). This
pro-Iranian Shi'ite military force is reportedly have
about 10,000 well-armed and trained militias. Late in
2002, Iran brokered an agreement between the Badr
Brigade and the PUK in whose territory along the Iranian
western border the brigade has bases. The latter aims to
ensure a significant share for the Iraqi Shi'ites
accounting for 60 percent of the Iraqi population in any
post-Saddam Hussein Iraqi government. The Americans have
warned the Badr Brigade to refrain from any move to
control Iraqi territories when the Iraqi government
losses control over them. Given the SCIRI opposition to
an American domination over or occupation of Iraq and
its close ties with Iran, its military wing's control of
parts of Iraq will increase Iran's influence in a
post-Saddam era, a scenario that the Americans want to
avoid.
In the case of the mentioned Iraqi
forces' failure to prevent the Turks from pursuing their
objectives in Iraq, the Iranians might be forced to
intervene directly. As well, the Americans' repeated
expression of concern about a sudden boost in the power
and status of the Iraqi Shi'ites with a positive
attitude towards Tehran and the American government's
predictable efforts to prevent them from securing a
large share of a future Iraqi government may well force
Iran to involve itself directly in Iraq. Undoubtedly,
this scenario, if comes true, will further worsen
already tense Iranian-American relations and may well
contribute to a military confrontation between the two
sides.
Dr Hooman Peimani works as an
independent consultant with international organizations
in Geneva and does research in international
relations.
(©2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd.
All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
