ShareThis
~ “By three things is the world sustained : by truth, by judgment and by peace.”
~ The Talmud, 600.
~ “But how can you know what is the Steep? The freeing of a slave, or feeding, in time of famine, an orphan near in kin, or a poor man, dirt-poor, then joined those who believe, who enjoin patience on one another, who enjoin mercy on one another.” ~ The Qu’ran, 656.
~ “It is time to appreciate that the only manner of inducing meaningful change in the Islamic Republic’s behavior without the resort to war is to otherwise imperil its very existence.“ ~ Kenneth Pollack and Ray Takeyh, 2011
~ “Many Iranians believe the United States is waging a covert war against their country and see the Stuxnet computer worm (which seemed to target industrial equipment in Iran’s nuclear facilities) and recent assassinations of Iranian scientists as part of it.”
~ Kayhan Barzegar, 2012
~ “ No American president— not even Barack Obama— has pursued rapprochement with the Islamic Republic of Iran by dealing with it as a legitimate political entity and addressing its central interests.” ~ Flynt and Hillary Leverett, 2013
Watching the negotiations over the nuclear deal with Iran, I was struck by how tentative and narrow the focus and tone were. It seemed as if the Iran being negotiated with was the alien incomprehensible “rogue” state caricatured in the hit movie “Argo” recounting how six American captives secretly escaped in 1979, during the U.S. embassy hostage crisis. Finally, last weekend in Geneva an “interim” deal was agreed between the United States and the four other U.N. Security Council permanent members plus Germany – the so-called “P-Five-plus-One” (P5+1) and Iran. It limits Iran’s nuclear program in return for a modest – apparently reversible – easing of the crippling economic sanctions adopted in 2011-12.
Further talks will aim at a final agreement within six months. But already, the “interim” agreement has roused disagreement and debate. Much credit for progress achieved must go to Pres. Obama and Secretary of State Kerry, and their European partners. And to Iran’s new Pres. Rouhani and its able Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif. Yet, why has it proven so difficult for so long for the U.S.A. and western countries and the Islamic Republic of Iran to rebuild relations? And what are the stakes for both sides if they fail or succeed?
Key Questions : What is the nuclear challenge posed by Iran, and how much of it is political and a matter of perception and confidence-building? How does the nuclear deal fit with Iran’s situation today and its challenges economically and politically? How should negotiations be balanced to achieve a win-win outcome? And why is a sanctions-ending opening with Iran important for the Middle East and the world?
Politics of Iran’s Nuclear Program : The economic sanctions adopted 2012 grew over a long period out of earlier ones imposed first by the U.S.A. in 1979 following the U.S. embassy hostages seizure, the overthrow of the Shah and creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Ironically, back then, Ayatollah Khomeini canceled Iran’s ongoing nuclear program as “un-Islamic”! Iran later eventually re-activated the deposed Shah’s U.S. supported nuclear program in the early 1990s, and signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Again ironically, Iran began planning to enrich uranium only after the French refused to supply such fuel to Iran under an existing Shah era contract, due to the Western sanctions in force.
Continuously, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has monitored Iran’s small but growing nuclear program since. Iran has one nuclear power plant today, but plans to build many more for civilian uses. On the other hand, its uranium enrichment capacity has grown rapidly, despite failed deals in the past decade with Western countries to supply fuel, so Iran need not enrich itself. While Iran did inform the IAEA of plans to start enrichment, this was considered insufficient to allay concerns it might be developing a nuclear weapon. Both IAEA and U.S. officials have confirmed no sign of such an intention. Other regional powers have raised concerns : Israel – itself an undeclared, non-NPT signing power with a nuclear arsenal – has claimed Iran is developing a military nuclear program and threatened a military strike. Saudi Arabia and other Sunni-led Gulf States might respond to the risk of Shia arch-rival Iran becoming a nuclear power, raising regional nuclear arms race fears.
Iran’s still fledgling nuclear program has been complicated by lack of official contacts between Iran and the U.S.A. and other Western countries since 1979, until this year prompted by Pres. Rouhani’s election. There has been much Western concern over Iran’s support for groups such as Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad, considered terrorist organizations. There has also been covert Iran-USA cooperation : – after 9-11 Iran helped in fighting the Taliban; – in the 1990s Iran assisted Bosnian Moslems attacked by Serbian dictator Milosevich. Since 1989, Iran’s top political leadership has sought ties with the U.S.A.
Iran’s Political and Economic Challenges Today : While current negotiations focus narrowly upon Iran’s nuclear program, to succeed they must address Iran’s major concerns. To be sure, Iran is a repressive, authoritarian one-party (or party-less) theocratic state. But its politics are riven with factions – conservative Islamic, and liberal. In 1979 it started out as a “third way” non-aligned state – taking as its ideology “political Islam” as an alternative to the communism and capitalism of East and West. Unlike in more repressive regimes such as China, national elections are held, but candidate selection and debate are randomly suppressed by conservative clerical factions’ domination, that also infringes freedom of judiciary and press, albeit incompletely.
In line with its 1980 Constitution, Iran’s foreign policy has been largely defensive, as Iranians see it – defending itself and its Shia allies from attack. Strategically, Iranians’ worldview was indelibly seared by the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War in which hundreds of thousands of Iranians were killed, many gassed, with Western weapons supplied to Saddam’s invading armies. Western sanctions since 1979 cut Iran from access to modern high-tech conventional weapons. The West supplied these in large quantities to Iran’s Sunni-led rivals in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf states.
With the world’s third largest oil reserves, Iran remains a relatively small, backward economy. Iranian incomes are low – ranking about 116th in the world. Income per head is $4500 – like China – one-sixth of Israel and Saudi Arabia. Since 1980, economic growth has been far below potential due to sanctions, but also pervasive state control, a poor private business climate, and low foreign direct investment. Iran’s population grew rapidly doubling to 75 million. Military expenditures have been modest – about 2.5% of GDP. Investment in human capital – education and healthcare – have been strong. But unemployment is high – over 12% – exacerbated by a young population. This has led to a brain-drain of qualified Iranians abroad. Despite decades long stand-off with America, many qualified Iranians – including top government officials – were educated in top U.S. universities!
Today, Iran’s is a rather tired, bureaucratized revolution in an excessively stabilized state, with an entrenched elite and corruption. Far from the “rogue” state Israeli prime minister Netanyahu calls it, as Israel’s outgoing intelligence (Mossad) chief Meir Dagan said recently, Iran is a rational actor systematically pursuing its national interests.
Iran’s twin imperatives are economic and political reform and modernization, to realize its strong economic potential and give to its people greater prosperity and security. As the leading regional Shia power, Iran’s major strategic security concern is to manage the rapidly spreading Sunni-Shia conflict threatening to engulf the entire Middle East. As for Communist China in the 1970s, a mutually agreed opening to the West could be key in Iran’s transformation.
Achieving a “Win-Win” Outcome : In the coming six months, final negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran will enter a crucial stage. So far, the focus has been western concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. But to succeed, they need to give equal priority to Iran’s concerns to give it an equal stake in the outcome, mitigating risk of a conservative clerical faction backlash – as occurred with the Khatami government in the 1990s. Attempts – by Republicans and Conservatives, but also staunch Israel-supporting Democrats – to tighten sanctions would deal a death blow to negotiations. Ending thirty-four years of sanctions, supporting Iran’s economic modernization, and access to high-tech conventional military equipment, could enable the P5+1 to cement in stages a full rapprochement with Iran, clarifying and checking its nuclear ambitions.
Conclusion – Stakes are High on Both Sides : Against such epochal gains must be weighed the heightened risks from deepening mistrust and misunderstanding. There is risk of continuing uncertainty over Iran’s nuclear power intentions. But the West should be prepared to live with a uranium enriching Iran, so long as, like over thirty other nations, its nuclear program is peaceful.
Far more important globally will be the U.S.A.’s ability as the world’s sole super power to manage the regional Middle East balance of power to head off a wholesale, decades long Sunni-Shia confrontation. By mid-century the Arab and Muslim world will account for one third of humanity. The prospect of a sea of alienated, unemployed youth far larger than today should give us all pause. America needs to rebuild a relationship with Iran as the leading Shia power to address this. For all today’s deep distrust and animosities, it will vitally help the regional strategic security for Saudi Arabia and Israel. I, for one, hope political leaders in the West and Iran and Middle East have the courage and foresight to do so!