With the United Nations Security Council's permanent five - the US, Russia,
China, France and Britain - banding together to recommend that Iran be reported
to the council, at least for now the clear winner is the US, which has allowed
the diplomatic option to play itself out.
The loser is Iran, which seems to have lost the support - or at least
understandings - given by Beijing and Moscow that it would not be referred to
the UN over its nuclear program.
Nevertheless, Iran has responded by threatened to halt all cooperation with the
UN's nuclear watchdog, the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), if it is sent to the Security Council when
the IAEA meets in Vienna on Thursday.
The Thursday meeting comes after the five major powers agreed that the
35-member IAEA board should "report to the Security Council on the steps
required from Iran". But they added that the council should wait until IAEA
secretary general Mohamed ElBaradei reports on Iran's nuclear program at a
regular IAEA meeting on March 6 before deciding on any action.
Iran is in the process of being isolated. No major power wants to be on its
side. Much of the international community does not believe that Tehran does not
have intention to develop nuclear weapons. Even Russia - which has earned
billions from Iran's various nuclear plants - is not willing to state
categorically that Iran would not want to become the next nuclear-armed power.
Tehran had the chance of accepting a Russian proposal that would have enabled
Iran to enrich uranium on Russian soil, thereby allaying international concerns
that Iran would divert nuclear material for weapon use. However, the Iranian
government declared that proposed deal to be insufficient, and insisted it
would conduct its nuclear research on its own soil, as per what it says are its
legal international rights.
Now China and Russia will go to Tehran and explain the London agreement. They
are expected to ask the government to provide "precise answers" to the
questions that the IAEA has presented.
But there is more to the London agreement than meets the eye. This, in reality,
is a compromise between the US and the EU-3 (France, Germany and Britain) on
one side and China and Russia on the other.
The former group wanted to refer Iran to the Security Council immediately,
while Beijing and Moscow wanted a more cautious approach. Thus they agreed to
allow the referral of Iran to the world body only if it refuses to back down
from its resolve to enrich uranium on its own soil. The IAEA is expected to
submit its own report on Iran to the world body next month. That
would allow time for Iran either to accept the original proposal to enrich
uranium on Russian soil or work out some other arrangement with ElBaradei.
In the meantime, the media are reporting that, according to the IAEA, Iran
obtained a document on the nuclear black market that "serves no other purpose
than to make an atomic bomb". To be fair, a reference to that document was
originally made in a long report of the IAEA late last year. In that report,
the agency only reported that the document contained descriptions of how to
cast "enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms".
The IAEA did not go beyond that description. Experts, on the contrary,
concluded that the document included discussion of "how to mold highly enriched
grade uranium into the core of warheads". Now the IAEA bluntly states that the
document in question has a description on "how to cast fissile uranium into
metal", and it is "related to the fabrication of nuclear-weapon components".
The fact that Iran obtained that document is ammunition for those countries
that want to believe that Iran really wants to develop nuclear weapons, and not
secure alternative energy sources as it has all along claimed.
Russia is also reported to have promised the US that in the next 30 days it
will persuade Iran to accept the original deal of enriching uranium on its
soil. If it were to fail, Moscow has assured that it would back tough
diplomatic action against Iran. If Iran changes its mind and accepts the
Russian deal, then it is not likely to be referred to the Security Council.
From Iran's perspective, the fact that Moscow and Beijing went along with the
London agreement is not a good signal. It was hoping that great-power tensions
and disagreement would enable it to count on a veto from Russia and China once
the issue went to the UN, but this can't be guaranteed now.
As a related diplomatic maneuver, Iran attempted to use the OPEC card by asking
members of that organization to use the oil weapon against the West if it is
referred to the UN. However, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
is in no mood to cause further turbulence in the international oil market.
At a time when Arab states are worried about a rising tide of democracy and the
growing popularity of Islamist parties within their borders, they have no
stomach to add further to their worries by alienating the US. Another important
driving force that is working against Iran's interests within the framework of
OPEC is that no Arab state is eager to see it develop nuclear weapons.
What are Iran's choices? After brewing for several months, the nuclear crisis
has reached a crucial point: the ayatollahs will have to decide exactly want
they want. If they don't wish to develop nuclear weapons, then the Russian deal
of enriching uranium in Russia is good option. That would bring an end to all
Western threats against Iran. However, if they really wish to develop nuclear
weapons, then they should declare their intentions clearly - and then get ready
to face the consequences.
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 .)
