| |
EU and Iran talk trade, not
war
By Hooman Peimani
Iran
and the European Union (EU) this week met for three days
in Tehran to conduct their fourth round of talks on a
Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The talks also
included negotiations on political issues of interest to
both sides. As reflected in these talks, the EU's
declared policy of engagement towards Iran is in clear
opposition to the American policy of isolation and
regime change. While reflecting its interest in Iran for
its own merits, such policy also demonstrates the EU's
long-term plan to remodel itself as a political,
economic and military block to prevent the creation of
an American-led unipolar international system, despite
all the recent hand-shaking between European and
American leaders.
The EU and Iran began their
talks towards a TCA last December. As Iranian Foreign
Ministry spokesperson Hamid-Reza Asefi stated on Monday,
"An initial understanding has been reached between Iran
and the European Union to come up with a commercial
agreement and the two sides believe the agreement would
meet their mutual interests."
Based on that
understanding, they have conducted four rounds of
negotiations dealing with various aspects of the desired
comprehensive agreement covering a wide range of
economic issues. Parallel to these, they have also
conducted political negotiations to find a common ground
on a range of issues, including terrorism and drug
trafficking, weapons of mass destruction and human
rights. Last December they held a meeting on the latter,
with the participation of government officials and
non-governmental organizations to encourage a dialogue
on the issue.
As provided by EU regulations, the
European Commission, the EU's executive organ, has
conducted the TCA talks with Iran. They have been led by
the EU states holding the rotational EU presidency.
Thus, Greece, the current president, chaired the fourth
round. Italy, the next president, will conduct the fifth
round scheduled for an unspecified time in the second
half of 2003. As evident in the recent round, the
continuation of negotiations towards a TCA when the
American government seeks to destabilize Iran indicates
the EU's disapproval of such policy. On the one hand,
this EU behavior reveals Iran's importance for the
Europeans for political, economic and security reasons.
Being located in a strategically important region, that
country is a rich regional power with a growing
undersatisfied market and with a capability to resist
the US's efforts to consolidate itself as the leader of
a unipolar international system. It therefore shares the
European objective of forming a multipolar system.
Hence, quoting the EU delegation, the Iranian news
service IRNA reported the EU's characterization of Iran
as "a key player on the regional and international
levels".
On the other, the EU's behavior also
signifies a growing rift between it and the US. In the
post-Saddam Hussein era, the efforts on both sides to
improve their damaged relations have not eliminated the
root causes of their differences, although economic,
political and security necessities have forced them to
tone things down. These differences manifested
themselves in their two different approaches to Iraq,
although the roots can be traced to the the 1960s.
The evident schism between the EU and the US is
the natural outcome of the "maturation" of the European
economies after their destruction or severe weakening
during World War II. The growth and technological
advancements of those economies now give the EU the
confidence to ask for a larger share of international
markets, as well as for commensurate international
status. Launched in the late 1990s, the EU's program for
a common European military force, though still in its
infancy, has sought to create a military capability
separate from the American-dominated North Atlantic
Treaty Organization to back its political and economic
demands. Briefly, these developments have put the EU on
a collision course with the US.
The fourth round
of talks were meant to pave the way to a TCP whose
actual conclusion requires more negotiations to hammer
out all differences, including political ones. However,
its concrete achievements are yet to be released, even
though they seemed to be positive, as evident in Asefi's
Monday statements. Accordingly, the two sides "agreed to
institutionalize their ties and [to] draw up a new
framework for economic and political relations touching
all areas". Moreover, they decided to strengthen their
parliamentary ties due to the "very sensitive role"
their parliaments could "play in support of their
[respective] governments and social institutions". Asefi
described the talks as "very constructive, transparent
and positive", while acknowledging the two sides' having
"different views in some cases" which he termed as
"natural".
As Asefi stated, the fourth round of
talks indicated that the two sides were determined to
establish "serious and long-term ties". Notwithstanding
the efforts to show unanimity between the Europeans and
the Americans towards Iran, such as the Group of Eight
(G8) demand of Iran to comply fully with International
Atomic Energy Agency regulations in its non-military
nuclear program, the evidence suggests their continued
differences.
One clear example was the
distancing of French President Jacques Chirac and German
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder from suggestions of their
support of any American military action against Iran. To
the dismay of the American government, they rejected
right after the mentioned show of solidarity an
interpretation that the G8 common demand and backing of
nuclear non-proliferation implied their approval of an
American war against Iran.
Another was the
holding of the fourth round of EU-Iran talks exactly
parallel to the G8 meeting (June 1-3). Thus, while the
American government was presumably trying to sell its
plan of a regime change in Iran to the European G8
members in Evian, the 20-person EU delegation in Tehran
was reiterating its respective membership's commitment
to continue the process of dialogue and engagement with
the targeted regime.
Dr Hooman Peimani
works as an independent consultant with international
organizations in Geneva and does research in
international relations.
(Copyright 2003
Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
