Round
The World
New
Delhi, 22 July 2015
Iran Nuclear Pact
HISTORIC
OR A BLUNDER?
By
Amrita Banerjee
(School of
International Studies, JNU, New Delhi)
Achievement of a framework between Iran and six world powers (P5+1) to end the
Islamic republic’s nuclear weapons programme opens the door to a new era of
policy in the Middle East with potentially
far-reaching implications. The landmark deal reached in Vienna,
after an 18 day marathon negotiations, among China,
Russia, France, Great
Britain, Germany
and the US offers Iran more than
$110bn a year in sanctions relief and a return to the global economy in
exchange for halting its drive for a nuclear weapon.
The conclusion of the deal has been
described as path breaking or a historic mistake, depending where these voices
are coming from. Calling it a diplomatic victory, US President Barrack Obama
stated ‘every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off’ as far as Iran is
concerned. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani too characterised the deal as
‘historic’ unleashing a ‘new chapter’ between Iran and the world. However,
rejecting it outright, Israeli Prime Minister called it ‘a historic mistake’
and Saudi Arabia
is yet to come out with a clear response.
The deal has evoked a mixed response
especially in the US and Iran who had
been tied in an acrimonious relationship with each other since the 1979
Revolution. Firstly, this deal in American domestic front faces opposition from
Republicans who control majority in both the House and Senate. Its historic
ally in the Middle East, Israel
has called it a bad deal that would endanger it, the Middle
East and world peace. In this regard, Washington
has an important role in hand in future, i.e. to demonstrate to Arab allies --
particularly Saudi Arabia
and the Gulf States
that it is prepared to be a reliable partner and counter Iranian involvement in
the region.
Secondly, Tehran’s response to this deal has also been
varied. There is no doubt in the fact that the sanctions relief in the deal has
given President Rouhani a major domestic win that may in future translate to
more political reforms, better Iranian behaviour on the world stage and most
likely win him a second term in 2017. However, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei and many conservatives see the nuclear talks as an ‘American plan'
to influence domestic politics and manage its nuclear programme. Rouhani has
also been facing ire from Iranian media outlets which highlight his declining
popularity in a recent poll and the fact that 90 per cent of Iranians do not
trust the US
government in negotiations with their country, though in general they still
support the idea of talks. The fragile condition of Iran’s economy is yet another point
of tension for him.
Thirdly, this agreement has evoked
responses from different world leaders as well. Apart from Rouhani and Obama,
one of the main gainers from this deal has been Bashar al-Assad who has hailed
the agreement as a ‘major turning point’ in the history of Iran, the
region and the world. This support comes because Tehran’s
enhanced regional position in the wake of the deal will strengthen its demands
for recognition as a key player in the Middle East, including in any
negotiations about the future of Syria.
The other gainer is Russian President
Vladimir Putin who said that the lifting of sanctions against Iran could make the easing of western sanctions
against Russia over its role
in the Ukraine
crisis more likely. An eventual end to the arms embargo against Iran would also boost Russia’s arms industry.
The losers in the deal seem to be
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State, against
whom Tehran has
vowed to fight. The other is the Saudi king Salman bin Abdulaziz who strongly
disliked Iran’s role in Iraq, Syria, Bahrain and Yemen, where the Saudis attack
the Houthi rebels who are backed by Tehran. The last is Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu who not only failed to stop this deal but also caused
serious damage to Israel’s
prized strategic relationship with Washington.
Winning and losing can be a micro
analysis of the situation at hand. A more holistic analysis reveals that the
deal is about each side compromising but still reaching important objectives.
For the first time, Iran
gets international recognition of its enrichment of uranium for civil purposes.
That legitimacy also brings the prospect of re-opened trade and investment
links, vital for an economy that has been crippled by sanctions and mismanagement
over the past decade.
The US and the other powers got defined
limits on that enriched uranium. Thus, Iran has been pushed far back from
a militarised programme for many years, even if it really was seeking nuclear
weapons in the first place. It no longer has any 20% uranium in a form that can
be developed for a bomb, and even its 5% uranium is sharply reduced.
Its nuclear facilities, including
enrichment plants and a proposed heavy-water nuclear reactor, are under an
extensive and tightly defined system of inspections. Some of its military sites
will be visited to ensure that no traces of any past quest for nuclear weapons
remain. Iran
will finally adhere to the Additional Protocol of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty.
On the other side, there are certain
apprehensions that have also been raised in the 159 page document. It is about
allowing Iran
to keep 5,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges at Natanz, and another 1,000
centrifuges at its underground enrichment facility in Fordow wherein research
and development facilities would also be available. From the information
available, it also remains unclear whether the nuclear agreement will take
effect for 10 or for 15 years. Another question mark surrounds the issue of sanctions
as to whether they would be gradually lifted, or removed in one stroke.
Even though a deal has been struck,
it remains to be seen how effective its implementation will be amidst a
quagmire of serious issues pertaining to Iraq,
Yemen and Syria. In Iraq, Tehran
is still an important backer of the Iraqi Government and Shia militias fighting
Islamic State. In Yemen,
the Iranians continue to give political and economic aid to the Houthi movement
which is challenged by the Saudis.
The Islamic Republic also continues
to shout loudly about Palestine and the need to
defeat Israel.
And in Syria, Iran has been
vital in propping up the Assad regime in the four-year
conflict, and with the release of economic pressure under the nuclear
agreement, it could bolster that support. Also, the Iranian nuclear issue is
certainly a conundrum. Repeated Iranian failures to comply with commitments do
not give any confidence that Iran
is going to stick by its commitments this time around.
In this regard, there are already
serious reservations, particularly within the Middle East
about the nature of the deal and its efficacy in limiting the Iranian nuclear
activities. Lack of compliance by Tehran
could compound the anxieties and lead to developments that are not ideal for
the region and for the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|