|
...In Persia first arises that light which shines itself and illuminates what is around... The principle of development begins with the history of Persia; this constitutes therefore the begining of history. |
| West Is Confused in Confrontation with Iran |
|
|
| Wednesday, 27 January 2010 | |
|
Ali Mousavi Khalkhali
Some sources in the United States have noted that Washington is mulling air sanctions to replace earlier proposed gasoline sanctions against Iran. Some media also claim that the US officials are changing their policies toward Iran and are trying to introduce air sanctions instead of gasoline changes. It is not still clear whether the United States is totally forgetting about fuel sanctions, but sanctioning Iranian flights to international airports is seriously pursued. European countries are also seeking to impose tougher sanctions against Iran. Such policies are spearheaded by France, Germany and UK, all of them countries with high trade volume with Iran. Although that volume has been dwindling year after year, it is still high. For example, transactions between Iran and Germany amount to one billion dollars while big French carmakers like Peugeot and Citroen have signed hefty contracts with Iran. In addition, the French oil major, Total, is still eyeing Iranian oil fields. At the same time, sharp rhetoric has been aimed at Iran from the French President Nikolai Sarkozy, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The latter talked about more pressures against Iran after her recent meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Berlin. Katherine Ashton, the new foreign policy chief of the European Union who has succeeded Javier Solana, made her first trip to Washington on Thursday, January 21, to meet with the American Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. She then said in a joint press conference that the European Union was ready to enforce new sanctions against Iran.
On the other hand, the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has warned the Iranian officials to give up their procrastination tactics and noted that the West will not withdraw from its positions and Washington will continue to work with 5+1. The main issue which has made Iran’s nuclear program more complicated and has made the Western side more cautious is rooted in three factors. Firstly, there are 35 nuclear sites in Iran which are not concentrated in a single province, but scattered across the country. The second factor, according to Western sources, is that some sites have been built underground as protection against air attacks. The third factor is reluctance of many financial institutes and companies in the world to comply with Iran sanctions. The high number of nuclear sites in Iran, put at 35 by Western sources, and their dispersion across Iran has made military option very difficult for Western countries who may think of attacking those sites. Israel used eight fighter planes to attack Iraq’s nuclear site and could demolish it in 40 minutes because it was a single site. This is not the case with Iran. Firstly, as Western military commanders have noted, a military assault on Iran should be a surprise attack. Secondly, Israeli and even American military forces are not sure how many fighter planes can be employed to attack those sites. They would have no choice, but to deploy all military bases around Iran and this is well-nigh impossible due to Iran’s relations with neighboring countries which makes use of those bases very hazardous for Israel or the United States. As for compliance of international companies with economic sanctions, Western countries are not so sure. In Europe, for example, although most countries are ready to impose sanctions against Iran, they are not unanimous in practice. Iran’s trade with Italy has increased despite pressures from the West and the country now enjoys the highest trade volume with Iran among European states. The same is also true about Spain and Sweden. When European countries decided to lower their diplomatic relations with Iran, Sweden opposed that decision though its government talks about isolation of Iran and human rights situation. When Siemens was put under pressure from the United States over what they called suspicious electronic trade with Iran, its managing director officially announced that his company was not ready to sacrifice its vast trade relations with Iran. He added that trade relations were different from political issues. About three months ago, the Time magazine issued a report on countries which conduct clandestine trade with Iran. They are famous companies in their countries which bypass laws and sign contracts with Iran to help Tehran implement projects which are difficult for domestic specialists. They even signed contracts on behalf of Iran with Dubai-based companies and employed Iranians for their projects in Dubai. Some of them were betrayed and fined, but as time went by, they restarted their cooperation with Iran. The Time reported that this has happened time and time again since 2006. At the same time, China and India have greatly expanded their trade with Iran in recent years as is the case with Iran’s neighbors such as Turkey, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Iraq. Another point is about the public opinion in the Middle East and the whole region. If Israel or the United States used their bases in Azerbaijan, Turkey or the Persian Gulf littoral states, the public opinion in those countries would be galvanized into action and anti-American as well as anti-Israeli sentiments will simmer again. This is like what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan which enabled the Taliban and al-Qaeda to reorganize their forces. In that case, the efforts made by the United States and the West to counter terrorism could be in vain and they would have to undertake new costs. This does not mean that Iran is cooperating with those terrorist groups. These sentiments exist in the region and will be mobilized against the West, in general, and the United States, in particular. It is exactly for this reason that various US officials are uttering conflicting remarks on a possible military attack on Iran. Robert Gates, the US secretary of defense, has warned the government about attacking Iran while David Petraeus, commander of the American forces in the Middle East, talks about serious possibility of military confrontation in the region. On the other hand, Michael Mullen, commander of US Joint Chiefs of Staff, maintains that a military option against Iran is still on the table though he admits that predicting its consequences is very difficult. Therefore, the West is confused about how to deal with Iran. On the one hand, they do not know how to apply sanctions to maximize their efficiency, and on the other hand, countries like China, Russia, Malaysia and even European states like Spain and Italy are competing over the Iranian markets. A military attack on Iran can be very costly and dangerous. The Western countries have reached the conclusion that such attack will not restrict Iran’s access to nuclear technology or even, as they claim, to build an atomic bomb. It only postpones it and will make Iran more eager to have it. Source: Iranian Diplomacy |
Now that Russia has no hope in Iran’s acceptance of proposals offered by Western countries and subsequent relative tension in Tehran-Moscow relations has augmented, Europe and the United States are putting more pressures against Iran on their agenda.
The new EU foreign policy chief also reviewed efforts made by her predecessor, Javier Solana, and noted that nuclear negotiations between international community, represented by EU, and Iran have born no fruit and called for new consultations on the subject. She added that the European Union was ready to take new measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Ashton also called for firm steps to be taken against Tehran.