Six major powers, including the United
States, have offered carrots to Iran in the form
of efforts to assist the country's nuclear
industry, including guarantees of long-term fuel
assurances. This is a significant shift from the
long-standing position of the Bush administration
that Iran had no need for nuclear power.
The US is also ready to talk to Iran, on
the condition that the latter stop its uranium
enrichment program, which Iran was quick to
reject. Why this change of heart, and why did
Russia and China agree to such a package? More to
the point, why does Iran continue to reject the US
conditions for starting negotiations?
The
chief reason for the change of heart appears to be
that the Bush administration does not want Iran to
take the course of developing nuclear weapons as a
result of a prolonged absence of
direct negotiations. That is
precisely what happened in the case of North
Korea.
Early on during President George W
Bush's first term, the then-secretary of state,
Colin Powell, wanted to start negotiations
regarding North Korea's nuclear weapons program,
where the Bill Clinton administration had left
off. Bush wanted none of that. Kim Jong-il was not
to be trusted. The US wanted the communist nation
to offer a number of concessions and assurances
before negotiations would start.
Bush even
decided to ratchet up his condemnation of North
Korea during his 2002 state of the union message
by lumping it, along with Iraq and Iran, as part
of an "axis of evil". By October of that year, Kim
had a surprise for the US. His government admitted
that it had a secret nuclear weapons program. In
response, Washington halted oil shipments to
Pyongyang. By December, the North Korean dictator
expelled international nuclear inspectors and
reactivated the nuclear reactor at Yongbyon.
In October 2003, North Korea announced
that it had finished reprocessing 8,000 nuclear
fuel rods, obtaining enough material to make up to
six nuclear bombs. In February 2005, it declared
that it had built nuclear weapons for
self-defense.
It appears that at least for
now US officials have decided to yield to
international pressure and have opted for a
multilateral approach toward Iran. The most
significant development in this regard is that the
"outsourcing" of negotiating with Iran - that is,
letting just the three European countries,
Britain, France and Germany, carry out
negotiations - has come to an end.
The
US's diplomatic maneuvering involving Iran, China
and Russia is heavily calculated and intricate.
Vice President Dick Cheney is playing a leading
role in it. Bush, as usual, is relying on the good
judgment of his two "mentors", Cheney and
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Rice
is reported to be the person in charge of putting
down on paper all the ideas that are coming out of
brainstorming sessions involving her, Cheney and
the National Security Council advisor Stephen
Hadley. She is reported to have heavily
concentrated on achieving concrete results before
the end of this year, when Iran is expected to
build a 3,000-centrifuge cascade. Earlier this
year, Iran announced that it had enriched a small
quantity of uranium to 3.5% in its experimental
164-centrifuge test cascade.
Rice appears
a bit smug about getting Russia and China to go
along with the package agreed on by the six powers
- the US, China, Russia, France, Britain and
Germany. What is not clear is whether Russia and
China will agree to any measures aimed at
punishing Iran, even though they have not objected
to this vague statement. The important aspect of
this statement is that it emphasized the positive,
but uses cryptic language regarding taking tough
action.
What is even more puzzling is why
did Russia and China agree to go along with even
vague language of sanctions at a time when their
respective ties with Washington are considerably
strained? It may be because Moscow does not want
to seriously alienate Washington so close to the
Group of Eight (G-8) meeting that will be held in
Russia in mid-June.
Regarding China, it is
difficult to calculate whether it has really
changed its mind about sanctions against Iran.
There is much at stake for China if Iran is
alienated. Its mega-billion oil and gas deals with
Iran might be jeopardized in an international oil
market that heavily favors sellers. A safe bet is
to assume that the Chinese are keeping their cards
on the Iran issue very close to their chests, at
least for now.
Even the US decision to
have direct talks with Iran does not seem genuine
in the sense that by attaching conditions to it -
that Iran should stop its uranium enrichment
program - the US still wants to appear a "tough
guy".
From the Iranian side, such
toughness is not acceptable because, by
negotiating with the US regarding its nuclear
program, it is, at least in principle, willing to
abandon it. However, there is a huge price for
such an abandonment, which can only be negotiated
between Tehran and Washington. From the Iranian
perspectives, by abandoning it just for the
"privilege" of talking to the US is too steep a
price, which it is not willing to pay.
What Iran wants is not just direct
negotiations with the US. It has a long list of
issues that it wants resolved before giving any
serious consideration to abandoning its uranium
enrichment program.
First and foremost,
through direct talks, Iran would want nothing
short of ironclad guarantees that the US would not
now, or in the future, attempt to destabilize its
government. What that means is that the Bush
administration will have to agree to nullify some
legislation aimed at regime change.
Second, Iran would want a highly
comprehensive package of economic incentives,
which will also includes substantial transfer of
technology, especially in the oil sector.
Third, and a related issue, is that Iran
would want the US also to abandon its
long-standing opposition to a potential pipeline
route to Pakistan and India from Iran.
There is little doubt that, despite its
vague language, the six-power agreement to engage
Iran in an attempt to resolve the nuclear issue
peacefully is a major development. What is
urgently needed is that both Washington and Tehran
start talks.
If Iran wants to develop
nuclear weapons, one can be sure that it only
wants to ensure that it does not become a victim
of another installment of "regime change". That is
a genuine reason for Iran to take all preventive
measures.
The best way the US can persuade
Iran that it has no offensive designs against the
Islamic Republic is by negotiating with it and by
providing all the necessary security guarantees
under a multilateral forum.
Ehsan
Ahrari is the CEO of Strategic Paradigms, an
Alexandria, Virginia-based defense consultancy. He
can be reached at eahrari@cox.net or
stratparadigms@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 about sales, syndication and republishing
.)
