http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\03\31\story_31-3-2010_pg3_6
Wednesday, March 31, 2010 COMMENT: Iran: an explosive issue -S P Seth The enhanced international pressure on its nuclear programme is most likely to rally the nation behind the present clerical regime. And if there is any follow up military action, there might even be a repetition of the zeal and fervour of the 1979 revolution While Pakistan and Afghanistan remain in crisis, engaging a lot of US energy and resources, Iran is emerging as a serious challenge for the Obama administration. It is evident that its nuclear ambitions are a cause for worry. Iran, of course, claims that its nuclear enrichment plans are for peaceful purposes to fuel its power plants and for manufacturing medical isotopes. The Western solution for Iran is to have the bulk of its uranium enriched in Russia and France to a level required for peaceful purposes. But Iran is not interested in this proposition, although it has shown some perfunctory interest at times to divide its opponents. Indeed, President Ahmadinejad has said that Iran can now enrich uranium to 80 percent purity, which is quite close to making an atomic bomb (at 90 percent). If it is true that Iran has the technology to enrich uranium to such a high level, then it indeed is a virtual, though not an actual, nuclear power. Iran's president still insists that its intentions are purely for peaceful atomic purposes. In any case, he has unilaterally declared Iran as a nuclear power. It has put the US in a quandary. The US and its Western allies have sought to project Iran as a dangerous nuclear power in the making. But when Iran has made their task easy by proclaiming itself as a nuclear power, albeit a peaceful one, they do not believe it. According to Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, the Iranian bluster is "based on politics, not physics". He added, "We do not believe they have the capability to enrich to the degree to which they now say they are enriching." This is probably a more honest assessment of Iran's nuclear capability. But the US runs into a contradiction of sorts here by simultaneously talking up the Iranian nuclear danger, as well as talking it down by insisting that Iran does not have the capability to enrich uranium to the level of making an atomic bomb. There is obviously an inconsistency here. The fact is that, after having enriched uranium to an admittedly low level, Iran now has the material and the technology to work the whole fuel cycle over a period of time, if it wanted to do it. It is this Iranian potential to eventually become a nuclear power that haunts the US. They believe that a nuclear Iran would be a destabilising factor in a strategically important region with the word's largest oil reserves. During her recent visit to the Gulf region, the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has rallied support against Iran's nuclear ambitions, emphasising it as a threat to regional stability by creating an arms race in the Middle East for nuclear technology and weapons. To further highlight the danger in Iran, she has hammered the message that Iran is heading toward a military dictatorship of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. And, of course, the pressure for comprehensive sanctions against Iran continues, with Saudi Arabia being enlisted to lean on China for a UN Security Council resolution to this effect. Gulf states like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are already beholden to the US for their ultimate security. The US is selling them billions of dollars worth of weapons, which means they do not need much convincing. The US has also created a security ring around Iran in the Gulf, ostensibly to protect its strategic interests and to defend its regional allies. Despite all this, Iran remains defiant. Going by the history of three sets of sanctions already in place, they have not been terribly successful. The fourth set, now under consideration, is supposed to widen the net to further increase pressure on Iran. Some comfort is drawn from the indications that Russia might come on board to further tighten the cordon. China is still in uncertainty, but pressure is mounting on it to isolate Iran. Even if China were to come on board, there is no guarantee that Beijing and Moscow would apply the sanctions as rigorously as the US and its Western allies. If sanctions do not produce the desired results, will that lead to military action against Iran under US stewardship? To put it another way, will Israel get the carte blanche to target Iranian nuclear facilities? So far, the US push is for comprehensive international sanctions, combined with diplomatic pressure. But the message is a bit mixed, with the White House spokesman saying at a recent press conference that all the options are open. There are also efforts to destabilise the clerical regime, which is under pressure from its internal political foes since the alleged rigging of the presidential election in favour of the incumbent President Ahmadinejad. This is the first time that the clerical regime has come under such concerted public pressure and protests from within its own ranks, which makes it a bit vulnerable. However, the enhanced international pressure on its nuclear programme is most likely to rally the nation behind the present clerical regime. And if there is any follow up military action, there might even be a repetition of the zeal and fervour of the 1979 revolution. Besides, any military attack on Iran, with its strident anti-Israel and anti-US rhetoric, is likely to further fuel the hostility of the Islamic world, notwithstanding the sectarian Sunni-Shia divide. Moreover, the US reliance on authoritarian rulers in the Arab world, who do not always represent their people, is a negative factor for the US. In other words, the US will have to carefully consider the explosive situation that might arise from any military attack on Iran, including the likely sky rocketing of oil prices and disruption of supplies. This alone could bring the world economy to a halt, with its nascent recovery dead in its tracks. The writer is a senior journalist and academic based in Sydney, Australia [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
