Engaging Iran: “Bigger Carrots and Bigger Sticks”
25 Sep, 2009 · 2975
Tara Sarin assesses international efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue
After almost a decade long struggle to engage Iran, the international community seems prepared to offer an ‘extended hand’ to Iran by finally launching a direct diplomatic dialogue combined with employing a new strategy of ‘bigger carrots and bigger sticks.’ International attitude on the issue is reflected in the words of Carl Bildt, the Swedish Foreign Minister, whose country holds the EU presidency, that Iran has to choose between assistance for peaceful development of nuclear power or tougher sanctions if it fails to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons programme. An ultimatum that clearly states that if Iran is ready to interact diplomatically there will be meaningful incentives and if it continues to defy the international community by continuing its current course, it will then face the tightening of sanctions.
In what appears to be a response to the international climate, Iran has delivered a five-page proposal to the ‘Permanent Five plus 1,’ titled “Cooperation on Peace, Justice and Progress.” The document offers to hold “comprehensive, all-encompassing and constructive” negotiations on three global themes: political-security issues, international issues and economic issues. As expected the Iranian proposal fails to mention the critical issue of the status of Iran’s nuclear programme though it includes dedication to work towards universal and complete disarmament.
The lack of the key component in the proposal may actually strengthen prevailing suspicions about Iran’s determination to be the indispensable power in the Middle East. Iran has long been feared by many of its neighbours and a nuclear armed Iran would certainly destabilize the region and start a nuclear arms race in a region the world relies upon for its oil resources. Despite this the world powers have expressed willingness to press ahead with the negotiations and the talks are scheduled for 1 October 2009. While Iran is clearly not interested in dwelling on its nuclear activities, the US is intent on Iran tackling concerns about its nuclear programme head on and has acknowledged that in order for Iran to restore confidence, any future negotiations must address the issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Though Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has emphatically stated that the discussion of the Iranian nuclear issue is ‘finished’ and that he will never negotiate on ‘the Iranian nation’s obvious rights.’ Regardless of the assurances of the US that the nuclear issue will not be absent from the talks, it appears to leave Iran with the upper hand in setting the agenda.
The international community has long feared that Iran could be covertly trying to build nuclear weapons under the guise of developing a civilian nuclear programme. Since investigations by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began in 2002 on allegations that Iran is conducting clandestine nuclear activities, Iran continues to maintain that its nuclear programme is strictly for peaceful civilian purposes of electricity generation and that enrichment is its ‘right’ as a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In defense of its civilian nuclear programme, Iran maintains that its oil resources are not infinite and that enriching uranium to make fuel is permitted under the NPT. It continues to downplay the perceived threat to the region and insists its nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful. If these claims are true then Iran should demonstrate full transparency and implement all measures required to build confidence in the exclusive nature of its peaceful nuclear programme.
As the UN General Assembly commences, Iran’s nuclear programme is in the forefront and discussions include the possibility of imposing tougher sanctions if the negotiations scheduled for next month fail. President Ahmadinejad leads a country consumed with frustration and opposition to his government after the disputed election results. In this background he seems to have taken a softer stance on various issues since arriving in New York, highlighting his interest in improving relations with the US and expressing an openness to include nuclear matters on the agenda. However, he has given no indication that Iran would be willing to roll back its nuclear programme.
Relations between the US and Russia appear to be softening after President Barack Obama’s calls to scrap a missile-defence shield. Russia has opened the door to backing potential sanctions against Iran which would put added pressure on Iran to yield to demands. The prospect of a unified US-Russia front has opened the question of whether all six powers can coordinate their position on Iran. Iran has historically proved that it only uses talks as a delay tactic to continue to pursue its nuclear programme undeterred. They provide just the right amount of cooperation at strategic moments to deflect the harshest measures. As the six powers employ a new strategy, is Iran sincere about making real progress or is it wishful thinking on the part of the international community? Regardless of the answer, at this critical juncture the international community must make a rigorous effort to engage Iran diplomatically to clarify its intentions and to work cooperatively. If the negotiations fail to bear fruit they must also be prepared to readapt the strategy to represent the changing climate, particularly in reference to the current internal agitation within Iran and the momentum towards global nuclear disarmament.
In what appears to be a response to the international climate, Iran has delivered a five-page proposal to the ‘Permanent Five plus 1,’ titled “Cooperation on Peace, Justice and Progress.” The document offers to hold “comprehensive, all-encompassing and constructive” negotiations on three global themes: political-security issues, international issues and economic issues. As expected the Iranian proposal fails to mention the critical issue of the status of Iran’s nuclear programme though it includes dedication to work towards universal and complete disarmament.
The lack of the key component in the proposal may actually strengthen prevailing suspicions about Iran’s determination to be the indispensable power in the Middle East. Iran has long been feared by many of its neighbours and a nuclear armed Iran would certainly destabilize the region and start a nuclear arms race in a region the world relies upon for its oil resources. Despite this the world powers have expressed willingness to press ahead with the negotiations and the talks are scheduled for 1 October 2009. While Iran is clearly not interested in dwelling on its nuclear activities, the US is intent on Iran tackling concerns about its nuclear programme head on and has acknowledged that in order for Iran to restore confidence, any future negotiations must address the issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Though Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has emphatically stated that the discussion of the Iranian nuclear issue is ‘finished’ and that he will never negotiate on ‘the Iranian nation’s obvious rights.’ Regardless of the assurances of the US that the nuclear issue will not be absent from the talks, it appears to leave Iran with the upper hand in setting the agenda.
The international community has long feared that Iran could be covertly trying to build nuclear weapons under the guise of developing a civilian nuclear programme. Since investigations by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began in 2002 on allegations that Iran is conducting clandestine nuclear activities, Iran continues to maintain that its nuclear programme is strictly for peaceful civilian purposes of electricity generation and that enrichment is its ‘right’ as a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In defense of its civilian nuclear programme, Iran maintains that its oil resources are not infinite and that enriching uranium to make fuel is permitted under the NPT. It continues to downplay the perceived threat to the region and insists its nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful. If these claims are true then Iran should demonstrate full transparency and implement all measures required to build confidence in the exclusive nature of its peaceful nuclear programme.
As the UN General Assembly commences, Iran’s nuclear programme is in the forefront and discussions include the possibility of imposing tougher sanctions if the negotiations scheduled for next month fail. President Ahmadinejad leads a country consumed with frustration and opposition to his government after the disputed election results. In this background he seems to have taken a softer stance on various issues since arriving in New York, highlighting his interest in improving relations with the US and expressing an openness to include nuclear matters on the agenda. However, he has given no indication that Iran would be willing to roll back its nuclear programme.
Relations between the US and Russia appear to be softening after President Barack Obama’s calls to scrap a missile-defence shield. Russia has opened the door to backing potential sanctions against Iran which would put added pressure on Iran to yield to demands. The prospect of a unified US-Russia front has opened the question of whether all six powers can coordinate their position on Iran. Iran has historically proved that it only uses talks as a delay tactic to continue to pursue its nuclear programme undeterred. They provide just the right amount of cooperation at strategic moments to deflect the harshest measures. As the six powers employ a new strategy, is Iran sincere about making real progress or is it wishful thinking on the part of the international community? Regardless of the answer, at this critical juncture the international community must make a rigorous effort to engage Iran diplomatically to clarify its intentions and to work cooperatively. If the negotiations fail to bear fruit they must also be prepared to readapt the strategy to represent the changing climate, particularly in reference to the current internal agitation within Iran and the momentum towards global nuclear disarmament.
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
