In the
protracted standoff between Iran and the West over
Tehran's nuclear program, diplomacy appears to be
heading down a dead-end, but it's not too late to
reverse the situation.
Iranian President
Mahmud Ahmadinejad has declared his country's
position on nuclear development non-negotiable,
and this week Iran refused to attend a meeting in
Vienna called by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) for Tehran to explain its latest
move - a plan to resume nuclear-fuel research next
week.
There is a widespread belief that
Iran is bent on building a nuclear arsenal,
although it insists that its program is a peaceful
one and
in line
with its obligations as a member of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The US and
Europe, spearheaded by the EU-3 - Britain, Germany
and France - have expressed their concern over
Iran's apparent intractability, raising the
inevitable question of whether a collision course
has been set. But there is still time.
The
election of Ahmadinejad surprised not only much of
the world, but also many Iranians. In a national
poll conducted soon after his election last year,
40% of the respondents said that they regretted
not going to the polls. Not many experts residing
in Iran expected him to defeat a candidate of the
caliber of former president Hashemi Rafsanjani.
Ahmadinejad has shown little inclination
for rapprochement with the US, and has launched
some blistering verbal attacks on Israel, even
calling for its annihilation. Ahmadinejad's
spiritual mentor is Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi - a
cleric who makes some of the more conservative
clerics in Iran look like moderates. From him he
draws his strong anti-Americanism and support of
martyrdom.
Even without Ahmadinejad at the
helm - the nuclear issue predates him by some time
- Iran's continued involvement in building a
nuclear program in tandem with its highly
proactive ballistic-missile program was viewed
with the utmost concern, especially by the US,
Israel, Europe and some Persian Gulf states. What
Ahmadinejad has done is raise the level of that
concern.
The Gulf states have manifestly
expressed their level of concern by using
international forums. For instance, Abdulrahman
al-Atiyah, the secretary general of the Gulf
Cooperation Council, told the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization's parliamentary assembly
meeting in Doha, Qatar, in November that Iran's
nuclear program "would trigger an unjustified
nuclear race in the region ..."
But the
Gulf states will not be able to initiate their own
nuclear programs. Instead, they are seeking to
enhance their anti-ballistic-missile defense
capabilities.
Iran's stance on continuing
its nuclear program has almost alienated the EU-3.
Perhaps in light of this, a recent report by the
London Guardian cited a leaked document from
European intelligence sources. Dated last July 1,
it claims that Iran has been combing Europe to
purchase weapons and ballistic missiles capable of
reaching Europe.
Considering that Iran
already possesses such missile capabilities
through its long-established technology transfer
programs with China, Russia and North Korea, the
timing of the leak must be questioned. The
Guardian report states that the purpose of the
leak was to mount pressure on Iran.
As far
back as 1997, Iran was reported to have developed
Shahab-4 ballistic missiles with a range of
1,350-1,500 kilometers. Shahab-4 is believed to be
a derivation of North Korea's No-Dong missile.
Iran has said the research it plans to
begin next week is in a separate category from
other issues. The senior official in charge of
nuclear issues, Ali Larijani, stated, "Research
has its own definition. It is not related to
industrial production. Hence it was never part of
the negotiations" with the EU-3.
Iran says
its uranium-enrichment program is perfectly
legitimate in terms of its NPT commitments.
These developments are taking place at a
time when the Middle East is going through a high
level of tension and uncertainty, especially with
the grave illness of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon. The 77-year-old is fighting for his life
after suffering a massive stroke and brain
hemorrhage.
From the perspective of the US
administration, the picture in Iran's neighborhood
is not pleasing. Iraq is on the edge of civil war,
Lebanon is having a resurgence of sectarian
tensions, Palestine is as volatile as ever and
Syria is under pressure from the United Nations
regarding former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri's
assassination last February.
In this
environment, one would expect diplomacy to be
given a further chance. From the EU-3 side, the
shortsighted approach to embarrass Iran, such as
by leaking intelligence documents, serves only to
harden Iran's position. Energy would better be
spent in opening new diplomatic channels.
Washington could be well served by
engaging Moscow and Beijing over the issue. Both
countries have veto powers in the UN Security
Council, where the US wants to take Iran for the
imposition of sanctions. Neither Russia nor China
stands to benefit from the turbulence stemming
from potential US or Israeli military action
against Iran, so they could be convinced that the
best course of action is to put pressure on Iran
for it to re-engage in its dialogue with the EU-3.
The urgent need for the US is to minimize
all potential of military conflict with Iran and
attendant political turbulence in an already
tumultuous region. That requires not overreacting
to the string of seemingly irresponsible
statements and behavior that Iran is manifesting
under its new president.
Ehsan
Ahrari is a CEO of Strategic Paradigms, an
Alexandria, Virginia-based defense consultancy. He
can be reached at eahrari@cox.netorstratparadigms@yahoo.com.
His columns appear regularly in Asia Times
Online. His website: www.ehsanahrari.com.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact us for information
on sales, syndication and republishing
.)
