White House miscalculations linger
By Shahir Shahidsaless

For those who were hoping that the Barack Obama administration had genuinely intended to resolve issues between Washington and Tehran, recent news has been disappointing.

Hillary Clinton, in her first congressional testimony since becoming secretary of state, commented, "We actually believe that by following the diplomatic path we are on, we gain credibility and influence with a number of nations who would have to participate in order to make the sanctions regime as tight and as crippling as we would want it to be."

Iranians are not blind. Clinton's blunt message means that the United States will not join the negotiation table to resolve differences. Rather, its intention is to convince other nations to

 

impose crippling sanctions on Iran, regardless of whether Iran is carrying out its nuclear activities within the boundaries of nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), even if there may be no single shred of evidence that Iran is developing nuclear military programs.

Clinton's vision is also confirmed by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. According to the LA Times, in a recent speech, while warning Israel of striking Iran's nuclear facilities, Gates asserted that the only way to prevent Iran from acquiring an atomic bomb was to make "Iranians themselves decide it's too costly".

The administration's ultimate goal is to adopt hard-to-bear policies that will drive Iranians to the point were they throw their hands up in the air and halt their nuclear program.

The problem with this approach - which is now shaping the core of US policy towards Iran - is that it simply won’t work. Iranians don't see the issue the way Americans do. Iran believes that if pursuing a nuclear program becomes costly for them, it will be even costlier for the United States to force Iran to stop it. They repeatedly have emphasized the vulnerabilities of the US in the region in case it decides to challenge Iran.

Last year, the number one man in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Mohammad Ali Jafari, after the testing of a new anti-ship missile, told reporters that Iran could sink "enemy ships". "Enemies know that we are easily able to block the Strait of Hormuz for an unlimited period," said Jafari at a press conference.

Lieutenant Commander Bill Speaks, spokesman for the US Central Command, rejected Iran's ability to block the Strait of Hormuz, stating that Iran does not have the capabilities to do so. What is important, however, is that Iranians are confident that they are capable of doing so, and strongly believe that their enemies know that as well. This view results in Iran taking a tough position when it comes to dealing with economic and military threats.

Iran will not suspend its program so long as the US continues to threaten the government with harsh consequences. Iran is a proud nation and won’t concede to bullying. Being from the region and hence familiar with the Iranian mentality, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamad ElBaradei recently said "you have to design an approach that is sensitive to Iran's pride".

While the atmosphere of suspicion between the Iranians and the US lingers, Dennis Ross' appointment to the post of special adviser on the “Gulf and Southwest Asia" region (simply meaning Iran) would close the doors on any fair solutions. The Nation's recent commentary entitled "Dennis Ross' Iran Plan" unveils that Ross was "building an empire at the State Department", and that "he has completely taken over the issue" of Iran. In the same article, a "key Iran specialist" is quoted as saying "wherever you go at State, they tell you, you've gotta go through Dennis". And this is the same man who a few months ago, as a key member of a group under the Bipartisan Policy Center, conducted a study entitled “US Policy toward Iranian Nuclear Development", in which he predicted that diplomacy with Iran would possibly fail.

The report recommended the incoming president be prepared for a series of aggressive moves, including the blockade of Iran's gasoline imports - and eventually crude oil exports - and also striking the country's nuclear sites "over a period of years".

In February, following the announcement of Ross' appointment, Iran's State radio immediately reacted by saying: "The appointment of Ross is an apparent contradiction to Obama's announced policy of introducing change to United States' foreign policy."

It wouldn't be unrealistic to conclude that, under these circumstances, extending a hand by Obama is interpreted by the Iranian government as nothing more than a tactical maneuver to prepare the world for a tough approach towards Tehran.

The United States mistakenly believes that harsh and "crippling" economic measures or military strikes will force Tehran to reverse its decision on the nuclear issue. Undoubtedly, in an environment marked by enormous hostility, Iran will not stand by as a quiet spectator for the United States to impose serious hardships on the country. The tougher the measures get the more likely an explosion in the Persian Gulf will take place.

At this stage, even convincing the Iranian government to ratify the Additional Protocol of the NPT - which allows unannounced inspections of its suspicious sites - is an unlikely option. It is hard to believe Iran would allow foreign inspectors to make surprise visits to its sensitive military facilities where they secretly build the necessary equipment, including medium range missiles, naval vessels, drones and perhaps much more. It is reasonable to assume that Sepah (the Revolutionary Guards) - which is now a major player in the nuclear issue debate - would consider these short-notice inspections tantamount to letting spies into these ultra-secret sites.

Snap inspections were a hot debate even in 2003, during the time of reform president Mohammad Khatami, when Iran voluntarily signed the Additional Protocol to the NPT, which was finally abandoned in 2006.

There are two alternatives left at this stage. Either to accept a nuclear Iran as a reality and abandon the policy of threat, or, instead, to increase monitoring and surveillance measures as much as possible and build up confidence and trust. Otherwise, the level of mistrust and enmity will end in an international catastrophe. And in selecting the route, Iranian pride, as mentioned by ElBaradei, should not be forgotten.

Shahir Shahidsaless is a Canadian-Iranian political analyst writing mainly in Farsi. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering, and has devoted the past 10 years predominantly to researching and writing about the Middle East and international affairs for Farsi-speaking magazines, papers and news websites both inside and outside the country. He has authored a book, which has been published in Iran and Germany.

(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)