Nuclear choice: Bush threatens Iran with consequences
The US-Iran face-off is assuming a new dimension brought about by Teheran’s repeated refusal to abandon its nuclear program by Aug. 31 in compliance with UN Security Council resolution No. 1696. Washington regards Iran’s move as a challenge to the international community, which should not be ignored.
President George Bush said that Iran should be prepared for the consequences of this refusal. “It is time for Iran to make a choice. We’ve made our choice: we will continue to work closely with our allies to find a diplomatic solution — but there must be consequences for Iran’s defiance, and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,” Reuters quotes the US president as saying.
Meanwhile, Teheran believes it has a legitimate right to embrace peaceful nuclear technology and is not going to abandon this goal. On Aug. 31, when the UN’s Security Council deadline expired, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad noted that “Iran will not back down an inch...and will not accept being deprived of its rights.” Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, pointed out that Iran is cooperating with the IAEA in the field of nuclear research and will continue this work under the agency’s control.
The UN Security Council unanimously decided that Iran should stop processing nuclear fuel by Aug. 31 — otherwise, it can face sanctions, which require a special UN decision. China and Russia, two countries that are helping Iran build a nuclear power plant in Busher, oppose the hard line on Teheran.
So far, the only thing that can be done is to introduce travel restrictions for Iranian officials and ban the delivery to Iran of materials and technology for its nuclear program, including dual-purpose goods and services. The US is proposing harsher sanctions. Yet US officials themselves admit that it will be difficult to persuade other countries to support these sanctions.
The decision of the Group of Six (US, Russia, UK, France, China, and Germany) will not be known until Sept. 7. On that day they will be meeting in Berlin to discuss the situation that has emerged in the wake of Iran’s refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment in spite of the UN ultimatum.
Can the US-Iran face-off lead to a war between the two countries? Will sanctions be applied against Iran? What role can Ukraine play in this situation? A Ukrainian expert provides answers to these questions.
COMMENTARY
Viacheslav SHVED, chief of the Middle East and Asian-Pacific department, National Institute of Strategic Studies:
“It is wrong to artificially emphasize the nuclear program issue in relations with Iran. By doing so, the Bush administration is dealing a blow, paradoxically enough, to reformist forces in Iran. The Ahmadinejad regime is largely benefiting from the current US political course, which is only helping to reinforce the mullahs’ regime in Iran. Today, owing to the American government’s short- sighted policy, they have all the economic, military, and political resources to strengthen their positions in the economy. It is no accident that Iranian reformers are ‘crying out’ to the Americans: you are pursuing a wrong policy, which only weakens our positions.
“It is likely that some formal sanctions will be imposed against Iran, which will not inflict great harm on the Iranian regime, because Russia and China will never agree to serious sanctions. Nor will Europe opt for serious sanctions that may bring about unforeseen consequences in the economic situation, especially in the energy field.
“I do not think this situation will lead to war. That is absolute fantasy today. Last year Hezbollah was considered a weak guerrilla formation, but this summer it demonstrated its ability to fight on par with a powerful force, like the Israeli army. It goes without saying that monolithic Iran with a population of 70 million has quite a powerful army with combat experience acquired during the Iran-Iraq war. The situation would be absolutely unpredictable in the event of a war. This can have such terrible consequences. I do not think the world community will allow this to happen.
“I think Ukraine should take a well-balanced and cautious stand toward the Iranian nuclear problem. Kyiv should press for a political solution. Ukraine is in a very difficult situation. Iran is one of our most important potential economic partners in the Middle East, especially if you take into account Iran’s energy resources and possible high-profile projects of supplying Iranian gas to Europe. The latter is very much interested in getting Iranian gas. Ukraine should play a key role here because this gas would be passing across its territory. This matter is already under discussion in the EU.
“Ukraine could suffer greatly if severe sanctions are imposed. This may indefinitely shelve projects for using the Ukrainian gas transit system to pump Iranian gas to Europe. It seems to me that Ukraine’s policy on Iran should essentially be part of the European policy. Ukraine should use its policy to strengthen Europe’s more innovative and creative policies, which are aimed at understanding Iran’s needs and problems.
“Europe is playing a decisive role in finding the best possible formula for resolving the problems with Iran. I’m talking about developing a new system of regional security in the Middle East and Persian Gulf area, which would also recognize Iran’s role as a global leader with a positive, stabilizing influence.
“We should recall Iran’s constructive stand after 9/11, when it seriously supported the antiterrorist coalition. I think it would have been far more difficult to topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan without Iran’s help. The most far-seeing US politicians have already understood that Bush’s policies toward Iran have in fact reached a deadlock. We need to find a new paradigm of relations with Iran.”
