|
Printer Friendly
Version
By: Meir
Javedanfar
28/07/2008
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad surprised the world
again by claiming
that Iran now possesses 6,000 uranium enriching
centrifuges. The surprising part of his message was that
the previous report
produced by the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), which was produced in November 2007, stated that
Iran possesses somewhere between 3,000 to 3,500
centrifuges. So the question is: how did Iran manage to
double its capacity in such a short
time?
It is
possible that Iran has mastered enough technical
knowledge to make such a noticeable leap, even though
some western specialists doubt this. The other
possibility is that Iran has secretly been producing
centrifuges elsewhere, away from the eyes of the IAEA,
and has now decided to declare their
existence.
One
also must not rule out the small possibility that Iran
may
be preparing to accept the recent “freeze” which the
EU incentives package has requested, and as part of
this, Ahmadinejad has decided to push the number of
centrifuges to a high figure, thus making it more
difficult to scale back as part of any future
deal.
Whatever the case may be, the fact remains that
Ahmadinejad seems to need to use the nuclear program
more and more to boost his standing at
home.
One
important factor behind this is Iran’s genuine worry
about Barack Obama’s rising profile
worldwide.
Until
now, Tehran has been exploiting President Bush’s
relative unpopularity in the international scene to its
advantage. As far as Iranian strategists are concerned,
the US will not invade Iran as it did Iraq. Therefore it
only has one real option: to push for tough
internationally backed economic
sanctions.
President Bush has not been very successful in
his effort to get the international community to do
this. But Obama is turning out to be different. If he
can pull tens of thousands of Germans
out of their homes to welcome him in Berlin, there is
more of a chance that he could get their government to
support his message
to Tehran to “take U.S. engagement
seriously.”
Things
could get worse, not better for Iran if a popular
President Obama does decide to negotiate directly with
Ayatollah Khamenei’s administration. In such a scenario,
it will be more difficult for Tehran not to compromise.
Failure to do so will make it much easier for Obama to
gather international consensus (perhaps including the
support of Russia and China) for tough economic
sanctions — something which Tehran is concerned
about.
There
is also the question of Iraq. The last thing Tehran
wants is for the US to leave Iraq, at least anytime in
the next five years. Obama first said that if elected he
would withdraw US forces within 16 months. Then he said
he would revise this figure. Despite his shifting
position, Iranians see Obama as someone who is serious
about ending America’s presence in Iraq, certainly in
the next two to three years.
Should
he do that, Tehran could be left with two possible
scenarios, both of which spell trouble for
them.
One is that the US leaves Iraq
without solving its security problems. This could spell
disaster for Tehran, as al-Qaeda
is likely to turn its guns on Iran instead. The
other possibility is that the US leaves Iraq as a stable
country, both in terms of security and politics. This
could be equally bad for Iran. A strong Iraq, even one
in which Shiites are in charge, is not in Iran’s
interests either as Shiites there could be placed under
pressure to severe their ties with Iran as means of
showing their allegiance. And if the ruling Shiites
refused to do so, the Kurds and the Sunnis could very
well start destabilizing the government in Baghdad, thus
producing a Lebanon right on Iran’s
doorstep.
Worst
of all, a strong stable
Iraq may start competing with Iran, as part of the
historical rivalry between two, dating back to 2,500
years ago where Babylon (Iraq) competed with
Persia.
These
are tough days for Iran’s conservatives. The West has
called their bluff by offering to negotiate with them.
This has not left them with much room to maneuver.
What’s worse is that this is having a negative effect on
oil price.
What
some Western politicians refuse to understand is that
Iran’s clergy view strong economic sanctions as even
more detrimental to their stability than
war.
Therefore, serious rethinking is required by
Iran’s conservative strategists. Many people, including
Iranians, believe that the conservatives are
overstepping.
The EU,
after all, is not asking Iran to dismantle its nuclear
program — it is asking for a six-week freeze to allow
for negotiations. That’s not too much to
ask.
Should
Ahmedinejad and co. decide to readjust the country’s
foreign policies to accommodate the realities of what is
happening in the international arena, then they may have
a good chance of maintaining Iran’s strong position,
especially in the Middle East.
But if
they stick with their unrealistic ideological beliefs,
they could run the risk of seeing a weaker Iran. Even
worse — as far as they are concerned — they could lose
their hard-earned domestic political power. Washington
is watching them closely, but their supreme leader Ayatollah
Khamenei is scrutinizing them even more closely. And
he doesn’t take non-performance
lightly.
This article
originally appeared in PJM
Media.
Meir
Javedanfar is the co-author with Yossi Melman of “The
Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran – Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the
State of Iran.”
For a free subscription to
the meepas Middle East Analysis Review send an e-mail to
subscribe@meepas.com
Logon to meepas.com for access to detailed background and current political and economic analysis of
16
Middle Eastern countries.
www.meepas.com All rights reserved - Site Rules
|