Laudable EU move
by
Javed Hafiz |
|
The European plan to engage Iran in talks is the right step
Iran is an important country with a long history, rich culture, strategic location and abundant energy resources. In the 4th century BC, Iran was an empire. It attacked Greece, another emerging power and destroyed the Acropolis in Athens. In the next century, Alexander the Great attacked Iran and destroyed Percipolis. When Iranian ships arrived at Marathonas, a citizen ran all the way to Athens, 42kms away, to inform the authorities. The marathon race derives its name from that incident.
Alexander’s only wife, Roxana was from northern Iran (now Uran Teppa in Tajikistan). I visited this place in 1995, while at a posting at Dushanbe. The rich Iranian culture can be witnessed in numerous museums in Teheran and historic sites at Esfahan, Shiraz and other places. I visited Iran in 1997 and was impressed by two things: The Iranian habit of flocking to public parks on holidays and Persian translations of the latest books. Iranian hospitality was impressive and the Persian language was extremely soft and sweet. Urdu and Persian have a lot in common in vocabulary and sentence structure, both being Indo-European languages. Ghalib and Iqbal have written profusely in Persian. Iranian carpets, silver and ceramics are a treat to watch. I also availed the opportunity visit the tombs of intellectual stalwarts like Firdousi, Omer Khayyam and Attar.
In population, Iran is the largest nation in the Gulf Region. In oil and gas resources, it is in the top league. In response to the US sabre rattling, Iran has threatened to close the Straits to international navigation. While the very idea is sufficient to unnerve the international markets, the latest US naval exercise in the Gulf is aimed at keeping these vital sea lanes open.
Since the beginning of 2007, Washington has come to see the containment of Iran as the primary objective of its Middle East policy. It holds Iran responsible for the increased violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, growing intransigence of Hezbollah and Hamas and Lebanon’s problems. In May 2007, US Vice-President Dick Chenny said on board the USS John C. Stennis in the Gulf: “We’ll stand with others in preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region”. About the same time, Secretary of State Condolezza Rice expressed a similar sentiment, ”Iran constitutes the single most important single country strategic challenge to the United States and to the kind of Middle East we want to see”. Ever since 1979, both nations have used all kind of ways to demonise each other. While Washington has classified Iran as part of the ‘Axis of Evil’ Iran has been calling the United States ‘Big Satan’.
Iran’s nuclear programme is becoming increasingly controversial and the UN Security Council has, so far, adopted four resolutions. Iran has all along claimed that its nuclear programme is for entirely peaceful purposes. This kind of a programme is perfectly legitimate under the NPT, to which Iran is a signatory. It is interesting to note that the US had actively encouraged the Iranian nuclear programme in the 1970s. The present opponents of this programme like Donald Rumsfield and Paul Wolfowitz had then promoted it. However, at that time Iran was a US ally. The Iranian programme got full US support despite heightened proliferation concerns following India’s nuclear explosion of 1974. Ironically, around the same time the US was exerting pressure on France to cancel the supply of a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant to Pakistan, another US ally, on the pretext of proliferation concerns. The 1979 Islamic Revolution changed this extraordinary bilateral friendship to hostile attitudes. It may be recalled that the Iranian nationalists had doubted western intentions since 1950’s when prime minister Mossadeq’s government was toppled.
The current controversy about Iran’s nuclear programme started in August 2002 when the existence of two hitherto unknown nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak were revealed by an Iranian dissident. Since then there have been several IAEA reports and four UN resolutions. The EU has also been actively involved in discouraging Iran from uranium enrichment. Interestingly China, Russia and the non-aligned members of the IAEA Board of Governors did not favour referring this matter to the United Nations Security Council, to begin with. However, with the passage of time they yielded to US and EU pressure. In September 2005, the IAEA director-general reported that prior to October 2003, Iran had failed in a number of instances to meet its obligations under the Safeguards Agreement. The report also acknowledged that subsequently Iran did take corrective measures. The same month the IAEA Board of Governors adopted a resolution which, inter alia, said
“that Iran’s nuclear programme had given rise to questions which were within the competence of the UN Security Council”. While India voted for the resolution, Pakistan abstained.
Despite mounting international pressure against its nuclear programme, Iran has steadfastly stood its ground. The international community has been trying hard for solutions. A couple of years ago, a proposal was made to Iran to carry out its nuclear enrichment in Russia .Then came a proposal from the E-3+3 (UK, France, Germany, United States, Russia and China) offering to build state of the art nuclear power stations in Iran. Iranian authorities did not show much interest in either of these proposals. It is clear that the nuclear programme has become a symbol of Iranian national pride. A couple of days ago, the US government put sanctions on four entities for supporting the Iranian programme. Barack Obama has spoken in favour of additional sanctions against Iran.
While the sole superpower continues with its sabre rattling, Iran feels that having been locked in Iraq and Afghanistan, US would find it difficult to open a third front. Analysts do not rule out a short surgical strike. Any resort to military action against Iran would be catastrophic for the entire region and will strengthen the radicals in the Islamic world. Therefore, US talks Iran without preconditions may be the best option to ease the stand off. “Talking is not appeasement”, former secretary of state Albright wrote recently. Iran wants to be recognised as a regional power and efforts to keep it out of a regional security structure would be counter-productive. Iran has, by default, gained in stature after US interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran needs the world because its economy is not in the best shape. The world needs Iran because it is such an important country. The EU efforts to keep Iran engaged in talks are laudable.
Javed Hafiz is a former Pakistani Ambassador to the Sultanate.
Oman Tribune
|
Other comment for Javed Hafiz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
