|
|
|
|
IRAN'S NUCLEAR
ASPIRATIONS
PART 3: In search of the
'grand bargain'
By Charles
Recknagel
(PART 1:
Circumstantial evidence)
(PART 2: Two-track
weapons program)
PRAGUE - Even
as the diplomatic initiative by the three European
Union nations proceeds, there are signs that a
final deal to end the Iranian nuclear crisis could
be very hard to reach.
One reason is
Tehran's insistence of its right under the
international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) to produce its own reactor fuel - a right
that it says it might briefly suspend but will
never give up.
Hossein Mousavian, Iran's
chief delegate to the UN's International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), put Tehran's position this
way: "We have emphasized that the suspension [of
uranium-enrichment activities] should be for
confidence-building, not as a legal obligation."
Analysts say statements like those make
Washington skeptical that Iran and the three EU
states can reach a long-term accord that satisfies
all sides. A similar "suspension" deal between
European powers and Iran in late 2003 fell apart
amid disagreements over the terms.
Iran
has already come under criticism by diplomats for
breaking the spirit of its nuclear accord with the
EU by using a loophole to keep preparing raw
uranium for nuclear enrichment.
David
Albright, a nuclear expert at the Institute for
Science and International Security in Washington,
said US officials are watching the EU deal with
interest because - if successful - it could be an
ideal solution to the crisis.
"I think
many in the US government want [the European
effort] to succeed," Albright said. "It's a dream
deal in terms of US objectives to get Iran to give
up its ability to make nuclear explosives material
and have that verified, and then have Iran shift
its civil nuclear energy program toward just
nuclear electricity production using imported
reactors."
Earlier, Bush reiterated
Washington's desire to see the nuclear disputes
with both Iran and North Korea resolved through
talks. "Diplomacy must be the first choice and
always the first choice of an administration
trying to solve an issue of, in this case, nuclear
armament, and we'll continue to press on
diplomacy," Bush said.
But Albright said
US officials do not really believe Iran is ready
to give up what Washington says has been a
determined effort to acquire nuclear weapons. Iran
has denied such allegations, saying it needs
nuclear power stations to meet domestic energy
demands.
Analysts said that means that,
over the coming months, the Iranian nuclear crisis
could go in either of two directions.
One
possibility is that the European initiative will
lead to good-faith negotiations with Iran. Then,
the US would have to decide whether to abandon its
skepticism and join the talks in an effort to
reach a final "grand bargain" that would end the
nuclear crisis.
Neil Partrick of the
Economist Intelligence Unit in London said
Washington's participation would be necessary
because Iran would most likely want incentives
from the US, too, as part of any final deal.
"The Iranian version of a grand bargain -
as far as it's possible to divine a clear line on
this - would be one that involves a significant
degree of engagement by the US," Partrick said.
"And the Europeans must be seen as really rather
secondary players on this issue, ultimately. And
along with that engagement would come some
[demands for] clear guarantees about [Iran's] own
security."
But Partrick said hostile
relations between the US and Iran could make it
difficult for any American administration to join
the EU nations in negotiating directly with
Tehran.
"It's very hard to imagine a US
administration of any kind being prepared to make
those kind of guarantees to an Iranian regime that
remains extremely controversial [in America],"
Partrick said.
Washington has had no
formal relations with Iran since US diplomats were
taken hostage for 444 days in Tehran immediately
after the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
The
second possible course for the nuclear crisis is
that Tehran could balk at abandoning its
uranium-enrichment activities. Then, a frustrated
Europe might move closer to Washington's position
- that is, that Iran must be forced to do so.
In that case, Washington would likely try
to enlist the Europeans in its own efforts to
persuade the IAEA to refer Tehran to the UN
Security Council for discussion of possible
sanctions. The US might also seek to persuade the
EU to join it in its efforts to isolate Iran
politically or economically.
With so many
variables at play, analysts said it is impossible
to predict how the Iranian nuclear crisis might
end. But many said the least likely scenario at
the moment is US military action against Iran.
Albright called US air strikes a "poor
option", precisely because Washington's greatest
worry about Iran is that it could be pursuing
weapons development work at sites that have not
yet been discovered. He said that means Washington
could never be sure its air strikes had destroyed
all of any clandestine nuclear program.
And such strikes would raise a new problem
of how to deal with an Iranian government that
would be only more convinced it needs nuclear
weapons for its own security.
TOMORROW: Iranians state their
case
Copyright (c) 2004, RFE/RL
Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW,
Washington DC 20036 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2004 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
Asian Sex Gazette Middle East Sex News
|
|
|
