No sledgehammer,
though, is likely to perforate the limitless fog
of delusion hovering over a US elite that a
relentless propaganda campaign tries to sell as
"the international community".
See, for
instance, this
bland op-ed, where we discover that "the
international community is now on watch for cracks
in Iran's defiant stance: Will increased sanctions
compel Tehran to make real concessions and allow
for a diplomatic solution to the standoff?"
Here's your short answer: no.
For
starters, the "international community" is not the NATOGCC
compound plus Israel.
Not only the BRICS group of emerging powers but
also de 110-plus members of the Non-Aligned
Movement (NAM) - that is, the absolute majority of
a de facto "international community" - are
appalled at how Iran has been treated as a pariah
in its negotiations with the P5+1, the five
permanent members of the UN Security Council plus
Germany.
The piece goes on, noting that
"the Iranians didn't seize the opportunity" to
essentially submit to Washington's roll over and
die brand of diplomacy on show at the nuclear
negotiations. "Instead, they demanded recognition
of their right to enrich". Of course they have the
right to enrich uranium - as subscribers of the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
What makes this op-ed noticeable is that
it was not written by a rabid neocon. The author
is "an international affairs professor at Harvard
University's Kennedy School, a former deputy
national security advisor and a fellow at the
Council on Foreign Relations." If this is a
measure of the level of intellectual debate
prevalent in the revolving door between academia,
punditry and policymaking, US elites can't help
seeing the future as worse than the Black Death.
Watch your step Now for the
real world - where facts collide.
Russia
favors a "step-by-step approach" in the ongoing
nuclear negotiations. This means Iran would
gradually increase cooperation with the
International Atomic Energy Agency, and in return
sanctions are gradually revoked.
Take a
long hard look at this
document, leaked earlier this week by Iran's
mission to the UN. It contains the essence of the
Iranian position, calling for a "long-term
cooperation" that would finally demolish the wall
of mistrust erected between the US and Iran since
1979.
Every informed observer and
participant knows this interminable geopolitical
drama goes way beyond Iran's nuclear dossier. But
a solution has to start somewhere - and the
"somewhere" is the recognition of Iran's right to
enrich uranium, and then the progressive easing of
sanctions.
It's exactly the rational "step
by step approach" favored by Moscow. The
next-to-final step would be "a comprehensive
agreement on collective commitments in the areas
of economic, political, security and international
cooperation".
This means recognizing
Iran's sovereignty and rights - instead of
demonizing and punishing it because the NATOGCC
compound plus Israel abhors/fears a Shi'ite
majority Islamic Republic.
It does not
take a cushy job at the Kennedy School of
Government to see Washington's response will be a
resounding "no". Washington, London, Paris and
Berlin - but not Moscow and Beijing - will prevent
the negotiations going anywhere without Iran
abdicating from uranium enrichment.
It's
crucial once again to backtrack to May 17, 2010,
when Brazil, Turkey and Iran, after non-stop 18
hours of grown-up diplomacy in Tehran, reached an
agreement; Iran would send its low enriched
uranium to Turkey and would get enriched fuel for
a nuclear research reactor.
Even some Arab
countries - including GCC members - were in favor,
as well as Paris. Moscow and Beijing were wary -
because they saw it as Iran abdicating from its
NPT rights. Anyway, the day after US Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton torpedoed the deal -
essentially because it allowed Iran to continue
enriching uranium.
Cracked actors Washington "softened" up Iraq for over a
decade with extremely hardcore sanctions before it
could launch Shock and Awe and destroy a
debilitated, fragmented nation. Regardless of the
wishful thinking fog enveloping neocons and fake
liberals alike, this "strategy" won't work with
Iran.
Even if Iran is now selling less
oil, and even if it is de facto cut off from the
international financial system, Tehran will find
ways to revolve the new EU sanctions/oil embargo
and drive up oil prices. China will remain a
steady client - paying less for Iranian oil (in
yuan) but buying more. The eurozone will not break
up - for now, so its demand won't fall.
Most of all the Iranian Majlis
(Parliament) may soon pass the
bill allowing inspections of tankers carrying
oil along the Strait of Hormuz to countries that
are part of the embargo. Even if this amounts to
routine police inspection, the effect will be to
drive up oil prices. The top patsy will be - once
again - the EU, confirming Brussels' infinite
capacity to act against the national interests of
member states.
If one crisscrosses Kaveh
Afrasiabi (Iran's
Persian Gulf gambit takes shape, July 5, 2012)
with Chris Cook (Introducing
the E-3, July 4) here at Asia Times Online,
one can fully explore the multiple dimensions of
"Iran won't crack".
The Obama
administration has to make a real decision; it's
either the "roll over and die" school of
diplomacy, or real negotiations. Treating Iran
like a pariah will only lead to a blunder equaling
the Bush administration's - whose Shock and Awe
ended up with a Baghdad closely aligned with
Tehran (while the US didn't even become "the new
OPEC", as savant warmonger Paul Wolfowitz would
have it).
But this will pale compared to
Iran, Russia and China trading energy in other
currencies (as they are already doing); the
beginning of the end of the petrodollar as the
pillar of global energy politics, and thus of
American hegemony. Time for the Iran cracking gang
to go back to school.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
