Thursday's meeting in Geneva between Iran and the 'six powers' (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) is reminiscent of the December 1990 encounter between the then US secretary of state, James Baker, and Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz.
In both cases, the US wished to demonstrate its willingness to find a peaceful solution to a problem prolonged by a recalcitrant enemy before taking hostile action.
Iran surprised everyone, however, by pre-empting the ultimatum game; Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, agreed to Western demands that International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors should be allowed to inspect a second nuclear enrichment plant in a mountain near the Shiite holy city of Qom.
Jalili also asserted that far from acting secretively as its accusers would have it, Iran was acting well within the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Current uranium enrichment programmes are used solely to produce electricity and the Qom plant is not due to start production for 18 months, he said. Signatories to the NPT are obliged to announce new facilities at least one year before they become operational.
The Iranians seem to be experts in brinksmanship, outmanoeuvring the US and its allies and buying time by making the most minimal concessions. The very real threat of sanctions is unlikely to return to the table before the IAEA inspectors' report, and that will not be delivered until mid-November at the earliest. Furthermore, the inspectors are unlikely to find anything untoward at Qom since it will not be operational.
Without an imminent pretext for further sanctions or military action, the US is in something of a quandary. It is under tremendous pressure from Israel, which is already within range of the long-range Shahab-3 missiles Iran provocatively test-fired just days before the Geneva meeting.
Although the US administration would find little popular support for military intervention, given its failures in Afghanistan and Iraq and its current economic problems, there were indications that an attack on Iran was imminent.
The Israelis had stopped banging the drums of war against their arch-enemy, probably because an agreement with the US was already in place.
Despite his assertion that freezing West Bank colonies was a pre-requisite for resuming the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, US President Obama recently conceded this issue - again, a sign of a diplomatic understanding between the US and Israel regarding Iran.
Whilst Jalili may have temporarily forestalled the threat of military action, further sanctions against a prevaricating Iran remain a very real possibility. Yet they are unlikely to be as effective as they were against Iraq. Iran's geographical location precludes an effective blockade: it has borders with three failed states - Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq - with ineffectual frontier security.
Furthermore, its northern neighbours such as Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan are relatively sympathetic. We must not forget, either, that within Iraq, Iran is more influential than the US through its strong ties with many of the country's present leaders.
The US administration has gone to great lengths to form an international cartel to tighten the economic embargo on Iran. Rewards for potential allies include cancelling the planned missile defence shield in Europe to gain the trust of the Russian Federation, and economic incentives to attract China. Yet Iran is already used to US-led sanctions which began after the Islamic Revolution, and could withstand further pressure for several years, giving it long enough, if it so desired, to produce nuclear weapons.
Some Arab countries are finding themselves part of the new coalition against Iran which places them in an uncomfortable alliance with Israel. China and Russia are reluctant to join the blockade of Iran, hence the introduction of an economic strategy designed to tie them to the Gulf and Saudi Arabia rather than Iran.
Saudi Arabia is currently negotiating a deal to buy weapons from Russia, worth $2 billion (Dh7.3 billion). This is the first and largest deal of its kind, in accordance with a bilateral agreement that was signed last year.
The objective of this deal is not to enhance Saudi Arabia's military capacity but to dissuade Russia from selling SA-300 missiles with advanced anti-aircraft capabilities to Iran. It is ironic that Netanyahu secretly visited Moscow for the same goal ten days ago.
On offer to China, in addition to oil exploration contracts in the region, are visas for one million Chinese workers. Various projects implemented by Chinese companies throughout the Gulf could greatly reduce the unemployment crisis in China.
It seems the US is trying to create a new coalition to replicate the course of action taken against Saddam Hussain's Iraq, starting with sanctions, possibly to be followed by military attack.
The presence of an active and vociferous political opposition in Iran is perceived as a strategic advantage, yet Mir Hussain Mousavi announced on Thursday that he opposes both sanctions and military interference. The Iranian people may be divided when it comes to democracy and ballot boxes, but they are united against any threat to their country.
Abdel Bari Atwan is editor of the pan-Arab newspaper Al Quds Al Arabi.
Your comments
The west continues to enhance their nuclear and military abilities, Israel continues to develop nuclear weapons without botheration about sanctions, what if Iran develops nuclear facilities for power generation under agreed conditions of NPT? I suggest all Gulf countries should go for Nuclear power generation
Rahman K.
Sharjah,UAE
Posted: October 03, 2009, 17:39
