Will Sanctions against Iran Ease the Nuclear Standoff?
By Dr Shakil Rai
Los Angeles, CA
The Obama administration has been on the defensive against the right wing onslaught, and has increasingly positioned itself closer to the neo-cons on the questions of the war on terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and peace in the Middle East.
The new round of UN sanctions on Iran should be viewed in this context.
The sanctions are sweeping in scope, more punitive, and crippling than the ones currently in force. The fact that sanctions have not achieved the stated objectives before, in the case of Iran or other nations, has not discouraged the forces behind the current drive.
It’s unlikely that under the pressure of the new sanctions Iran would abandon its uranium enrichment program, or weaken the clerical regime to the point of collapse. If anything the sanctions are more likely to strengthen the mullah’s grip on power. They would use the situation to their advantage and blame every hardship the people are going to face on the “great Satan”. They will use it as a rallying cry to unite the nation behind them. This would weaken democratic opposition to the regime, and strengthen collective Iranian resolve to pursue the nuclear program.
It’s significant to note that even the strongest political opponents of the theocratic regime in Iran are supportive of their country’s right to enrich uranium on its soil; on this point government and opposition stand together.
One may wonder why then the US would pursue a new round of sanctions so vigorously if they know they are not going to produce the desired result. It can be argued that those who have advocated the case for new sanctions are looking beyond the sanctions regime. The idea may be to cripple the Iranian economy, destroy its financial institutions like banks and insurance companies who cannot have any business with any company outside Iran. This
financial squeeze is expected to considerably weaken Iranian defense capability, especially its missile program, and slow down the uranium enrichment program. Economic hardships, some may think, will make the people sick of the government and receptive to the idea of a deliverer. At that stage Iran’s nuclear and military installations can be destroyed in a massive aerial attack. Will things turn out that way? That’s to be seen.
Another reason for this rush is to sabotage the nuclear swap deal worked out by Turkey and Brazil with Iran. Although this deal was not comprehensive; it did not provide a detailed mechanism for implementation, and had many a loose end. Yet it provided a solid basis on which, if they so desired, they could build a comprehensive uranium swap program with the involvement of IAEA and the UNSC. After all it was almost an identical arrangement that was proposed less than a year ago with American approval, and accepted by Iran. Iran though went back on it probably
under pressure from the hardliners within the regime, and again came round it this time. It may be a tactical move, on the part of Iran, to buy more time, and dodge the forthcoming sanctions for the time being. If that is the case, Iran needs to be exposed. That exposure could come through the implementation of the deal and not by scuttling it.
The basic point in this whole dispute is the insistence of Iran that under the NPT she has a sovereign right to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. A considerable number of Third World countries who are signatories of the NPT, including several Arab countries, do not want to give up this sovereign right to peaceful use of nuclear energy. The West, led by the USA, wants Iran and others to surrender this right, and amend the NPT accordingly.
The nuclear haves and the have-nots are poles apart in their perception of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and monopoly of a few on it. There is little room for compromise on that one point. While most of them agree on the need for a more comprehensive NPT regime to guard against cheating, they do not want to give up their right to produce nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, nor do they wish to see the nuclear haves endlessly maintain their control over this renewable source of energy.
The sanctions are coming, no matter what, but to make them work what the US really needs to do is to improve its credibility in the eyes of the world by being honest about nuclear imbalance in the world, and particularly in the Middle East. Iran seems to pose a mortal threat with its nuclear weapons which are not even on its drawing board yet, while Israel’s huge stockpile of nuclear weapons is treated as nonexistent, even benign for peace. This approach may humor the neo-cons and right wing detractors
of the Obama administration; it’s not likely to convince anyone else about the seriousness of the US administration’s efforts to achieve a lasting peace in the Middle East, or to the ultimate goal of nuclear-weapon-free world.
To this end the US need to initiate serious effort to achieve a nuclear weapon free Middle East as envisaged in the NPT Review Conference resolution in 1995. Some Arab countries closely allied with the US are trying to revive this dormant resolution and get some traction for it in the current NPT conference. Will the US and her European nuclear allies give this noble objective a chance and make a serious beginning to rid the Middle East of the weapons of mass destruction, first, and then implement the same model the world over. A step in this direction will assure the world that the nuclear haves are indeed serious in the effort to achieve a nuclear weapon free world, as envisaged in the NPT.
At the same time, Iran is not an innocent victim of a vindictive super power, as some may like to believe. Iran does share the blame for not coming clean on the matter. It started its nuclear program surreptitiously. When caught, it allowed IAEA inspections to prove its peaceful intentions. At the same time it started working on another nuclear site without informing the IAEA as required under the NPT. This gives rise to serious security concerns among Iran’s neighbors. Leave Israel aside, no one in the region wants Iran to become a nuclear weapon state; it will cause fundamental change in the security dynamics of the region. Iran must realize that and work out its strategy accordingly.
The US also needs to realize after the Iraq fiasco that it cannot dictate its will through the barrel of the gun alone, nor it can continue with traditional uneven approach to peace in the Middle East. The neo-cons cannot be pleased, no matter what you do, but you have a historic chance to bring peace to this ravaged region.
(The writer is an author and news analyst.
For comments he can be reached at drshakilrai@gmail.com)
