Negotiations with Iran over ways to handle specific aspects of its controversial nuclear program are entering a delicate phase. But for the time being diplomacy seems to be bearing fruit, although it is too early to say that a deal will be reached soon.
Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran’s foreign minister, has said his country may be willing to ship part of its stockpile of low enriched uranium to Russia for further enrichment in accordance with an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) plan. That is an important step forward, but it is not what the West wants.
Even if Iran agrees to send part of its low enriched uranium abroad, or decides to buy the enriched material from foreign suppliers, Mottaki made it clear that Tehran will continue to enrich its own. This position will prove problematic.
The challenge for the six powers that are engaging Iran over the nuclear issue (United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany) is to convince the Iranians to stop its own uranium enrichment program altogether, which they believe could eventually produce weapon-grade material. Iran denies such intent.
Iran risks facing further UN sanctions and possibly more if it fails to agree to international demands. But in recent weeks the Iranians have demonstrated that they are willing to discuss proposals even though they had made it clear that they will never jeopardize their nuclear program, which they consider legal and within their rights.
Mottaki’s statements were made one day after IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit a second nuclear facility near Qom. That site was kept secret until the US revealed its existence.
The IAEA has so far praised Tehran for its cooperation and its head, Mohamed El-Baradei, has insisted that diplomacy will resolve the current standoff. But will a diplomatic deal be allowed to succeed?
Israel, for one, would loathe seeing a happy ending to Iran’s squabbling with the West. The Israelis have made direct threats against Tehran’s nuclear facilities and for them the most satisfying conclusion to this affair would be to physically destroy Iran’s nuclear assets. Many US politicians favor the Israeli approach, but President Barack Obama had promised to give diplomacy a fair chance and he would be reluctant to take the US into a new war against another Muslim country. In fact, the timing to plan for a fresh military confrontation could not be worse, with Iraq tilting toward violence and instability and Afghanistan on the brink of total collapse.
And if the US is hesitant so will be its European allies. Neither France nor Germany is capable of launching a new front in the Gulf at a time when public mood is downright anti-war.
Russia, which is enjoying a new détente with the US after the latter’s decision to scrap its European missile defense shield, will put pressure on Tehran but only enough to keep the Iranians engaged in the political process. And the Arabs will remain wary of Iran’s regional intentions, especially in the Gulf, but will adopt a wait-and-see attitude for the time being.
The Iranians are fully aware of such positions, and after the unrest that followed June’s presidential elections, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is adopting a new approach; one that keeps his government engaged with the West but gives little in terms of concessions. He realizes that staying in the game for as long as possible is now the end game. He probably sees Obama’s predicaments in Iraq and Afghanistan as important cards which he can use to his benefit later on.
Iran can do a lot to help the US find a decent way out of Iraq. The same can be said of Afghanistan where some reports suggest that the Taleban may have upgraded their arsenal probably with Iran’s help. A confluence of issues could lead to a number of deals, or even a mega deal; a mother of all deals that could resolve everybody’s problems.
Iran will not give up its nuclear ambitions. That is now clear and the objective today is to make sure that such a program does not evolve into a military one. Time is on Iran’s side and if it can get assurances that it can develop its peaceful programs on its own terms, it may come around and take whatever is being offered at a later stage.
Israel may turn out to be the biggest loser out of all this. If a deal is reached between the West and Iran it means that Tehran will have gained international recognition, and legitimacy, for its nuclear program. The same cannot be said of Israel whose nuclear facilities, and warheads, remain beyond the reach of IAEA’s inspectors. Israel may continue to huff and puff and threaten military strike but without US direct sanction it will never dare do it.
Negotiating with Iran may prove tedious and will take time, but it will culminate in a deal; it is not a cul-de-sac route; unlike the Middle East peace process!
— Osama Al Sharif is a veteran journalist and political commentator based in Jordan.
