The Road to Tehran Does Not Run Through Moscow
With Iran approaching what International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohammed ElBaradei calls "breakout capacity" in its alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons, one of Washington's top priorities has been to gain Russian support for a new round of UN sanctions. Despite its own concerns about Iran's nuclear program, Russia continues to resist tougher sanctions. On Thursday, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov all but ruled out Russian support for further sanctions in the UN Security Council. Washington's long quest for Russian aid has failed, and the Obama Administration needs to shift its focus elsewhere while it still has time to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Unlike the US and its allies, checking Iran's nuclear ambitions is not a major priority for Russia. Moscow remains puzzled by what it sees as the American obsession with Iran, and while Russian leaders have said repeatedly - and sincerely - that they would rather Iran not develop a nuclear weapons capability, Russia is unwilling to pay a significant price to prevent Iran from going nuclear.
Russian reticence stems from a number of sources. Given the West's reluctance to business with Tehran, Russian companies have found lucrative opportunities in Iran. Russo-Iranian trade has expanded rapidly, with turnover exceeding $3 billion last year, and slated to grow rapidly in the coming years. Much Russo-Iranian trade is in sectors considered strategically important by the Kremlin. Tehran is a major customer for Russia's defense industry, and Russian gas monopoly Gazprom is involved in developing Iran's vast South Pars gas field. Russia is also deeply involved in Iran's overt nuclear program, with firms connected to the Ministry of Atomic Energy building the reactor complex at Bushehr.
Despite their disagreements over Tehran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, Russia and Iran have forged a close diplomatic partnership elsewhere. This partnership took root during the late 1990s, when Moscow and Tehran worked together closely to end the bloody civil war in Tajikistan. Previously, Russia accused Iran of training and supplying Islamist guerrillas from Russia's North Caucasus during the first war in Chechnya (1994-96), and of exporting Islamic radicalism to Russia's neighbors in Central Asia. By the time the second war in Chechnya began in 1999, the Russo-Iranian rapprochement was already underway, and Iranian intervention was not an issue.
Given Iran's capability to export its radical ideology and to organize terrorist attacks abroad, Russian strategists are well aware that adopting a more confrontational posture towards Tehran, as the United States is urging, could have serious consequences. After a lull of several years, Russia's North Caucasus region is once again suffering serious instability, including a spate of deadly suicide attacks in Dagestan and Ingushetia. Though this instability stems from poverty and misrule at home, the Kremlin is aware of the potential for Islamic extremists to profit from local grievances, as happened in Chechnya a decade ago. Moscow wants to ensure the Iranian mullahs have no reason to re-inject themselves into the troubles of the North Caucasus.
Russia also benefits from the tense relationship between Tehran and the West: because of Western sanctions, Tehran cannot sell its gas to the lucrative European market. Instead, Russia and Gazprom remain Europe's dominant suppliers.
Were Iran to break out of its international isolation, either by abandoning its weapons program or undergoing regime change, European governments and energy companies would rush to complete deals that would reduce their dependence on Moscow. The consortium behind the planned Nabucco gas pipeline, which would bring 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas a year to Europe while bypassing Russia, are already clamoring for permission to do a deal with Tehran. The Kremlin has little incentive to do anything that would undermine its ability to use gas supplies as leverage with their European customers.
It is unlikely the US will be able to convince Russia to take any meaningful steps against Iran (Washington has already all but conceded its strongest bargaining chip, the planned anti-ballistic missile system in eastern Europe that Moscow opposes).
At this point, continuing to seek agreement with Moscow merely drags out the process while the Iranian program moves forward. The US should stop emphasizing the need for Russian cooperation, focus on developing a common front with key allies in Europe and the Middle East, and continue offering to negotiate directly with Tehran. Though Russian help might be useful in the abstract, Washington will have to find ways to solve the Iranian nuclear problem on its own.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
See Pye Ian's Profile
Informative article by Mr. Mankoff. However, he didn't mention - or outright ignores - a few things:
1) That, in addition to Russia, Iran is essentially collaborating economically, politically and strategically with China, Venezuela and others that the US also retains diplomatic ties with. In fact, the interactions between Russia, Iran and China often stop short of establishing a formal alliance when it comes to a) issues involving containment of US/NATO expansion eastward, as well as b) counteracting the effects of the US-originating global financial crisis, specifically vis-a-vis global energy pricing/trading;
2) That constantly preaching "regime change" hasn't been, isn't, and will not be, effective in dealing with a clearly heals-dug-in Iran, which, again, retains powerful friends to its north and east (and south, if South America is to be counted), and increasingly distrusts US overtures.
I.E. How can the US expect to SUCCESSFULLy "continue offering to negotiate directly with Tehran" if at the same time we continue antagonistically preaching "regime change"?!?;
3) That, possibly, an untried yet potentially potent means forward would involve the US dropping sanctions and directly engaging Iran economically ---- SO AS TO TRY AND GRADUALLY PULL IRAN AWAY from the building Russo-Chinese axis.
[plug: I blog about the whys and hows of the latter]
Much out-of-the
These stories are almost always written as if Iran is actually producing or seeking nuclear weapons instead of just nuclear energy. Now that people seem to be catching on that this probably isn't the case stories are circulating that Iran is gaining or has gained "breakout capability", I guess the ability to produce weapons grade material from fuel grade material very quickly. Pretty much always they fail to mention that in order to produce weapons from fuel the material needs to be processed from the 3% of fuel grade to the 95% of weapons grade which is orders of magnitude harder to do and hide. I wonder at the pattern of destruction the US, Europe and Israel is committing around the world, first destroying one ancient civilization, Babylon, throwing turmoil into an Islamic state, Afghanistan, spilling over into another, Pakistan, and threatening ancient Persia which is also an Islamic nation. I'm sure there are many paranoid reasons these countries seek to conquer these specific areas and I'm sure a large part of it has to do with the banking/monetary systems of these areas being vastly different (non-debt-based) than the conqueror's (fractional reserve and debt-based), and of course than the world bank's which is also fractional reserve debt-based and exploitative of it's borrowers.
What those apologists who continue to explain what Ahmadinejad really meant to say when he threatened Israel is ignore Iran's consistent tactic of using proxies so as not to get its own hands awash in the blood its training, financing and arming terror organizations causes. Who blew up Khobar Towers ? Not the Iranians but Hezbollah? Who blew up the Argentinian Jewish Community Center killing hundreds? Not Iran but Hezbollah. Who rejects all peace, all previous agreements with Israel, all peace overtures by the PLO and Fatah with Israel? Not Iran but Iranian backed Hamas. Who fires grad and Katyusha rockets into Israeli towns and cities from its Northern border? Not iran but Iranian backed Hezbollah. They have sway over Syria, Lebanon via Hezbollah, half of the Palestinians via Hamas, and wherever populations of Shia are found.
Clearly ... without any doubt whatsoever, the continuation of the terror and war between Israel and Palestinians is as a result of Iranian meddling if only because Gaza is essentially under Iranian control via Hamas. A government was impossible to form in Lebanon because of Iranian backed Hezbollah ...
To ignore Iran is only keeping up appearances by its use of proxies to carry out bombings, murder and terror on a global scale is to admit being deaf, dumb and blind
Let's talk about I S R A E L and its illegal nuclear weapons now mr. know-it -all.
illegal nuclear weapons?
What law are you referring mr no - nothing - at all ?
"Despite their disagreements over Tehran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, "
What proof do you have of Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons? The laptop computers that Mossad gave to the MEK?
Mr. Mankoff: you lying sack of spin. The US overthrew their democratic
The oft repeated comment ascribed to President Ahmadinejad, that "Israel must be wiped off the map," was addressed by Virginia Tilley, Professor of political science who wrote:
"In his October 2005 speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad never used the word "map" or the term "wiped off". According to Farsi-language experts like Juan Cole and even right-wing services like MEMRI, what he actually said was "this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
"In this speech to an annual anti-Zionist conference, Mr. Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening. He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s-a period when Israel was actually selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as so ghastly then.
"Mr. Ahmadinejad had just reminded his audience that the Shah's regime, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein had all seemed enormously powerful and immovable, yet the first two had vanished almost beyond recall and the third now languished in prison.
"So, too, the "occupying regime" in Jerusalem would someday be gone. His message was, in essence: "This too shall pass." http://www
"All things must pass, All things must pass away. Sunset doesn't last all evening. A mind can blow those clouds away. Now the darkness only stays the night-time; In the morning it will fade away. It's not always going to be this grey; All things must pass, All things must pass away."-Geo
Ahmadinejad was comparing israel to the old South Africa . . . he said that like South Africa israel would cease to exist . . . and like the old Soviet Union . . . he was refering to its apartheid regime . . . stop the zionist propaganda ... we see through it . . we know better
What about America's Nuclear Problem?
This past August 6th and 9th marked the 64th anniversary of the most brutal acts of terrorism upon innocent people; America's atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
On Armistice Day, 1948 General Omar Nelson Bradley warned, "We live in a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants, in a world that has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. We have solved the mystery of the atom and forgotten the lessons of the Sermon on The Mount. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about dying than we know about living."
"A radioactive cloud consumed rubbed out Hiroshima.
Excerpted "The 64th Anniversary of USA Terrorism Enlightened by the Wisdom of Nonviolence"
http://www
And that's NOT all!
The 'democracy' of Israel 'freed' Vanunu in 2004; but denied him the RIGHT to speak to foreigners and leave the state.
In 2005, Vanunu told me:
"President Kennedy tried to stop Israel from building atomic weapons.
"Prime Minister Ben Guirion said, ‘The nuclear reactor is only for peace.’
"Kennedy insisted on an open internal inspection. When Johnson became president, he made an agreement with Israel that two senators would come every year to inspect. Before the senators would visit, the Israelis would build a wall to block the underground elevators and stairways. From 1963 to ’69, the senators came, but they never knew about the wall that hid the rest of the Dimona from them.
"Nixon stopped the inspections and agreed to ignore the situation. As a result, Israel increased production. In 1986, there were over two hundred bombs. Today, they may have enough plutonium for ten bombs a year."
PLEASE listen to Vanunu speak for himself in 2005, 2006, 2008 video and learn about his FREEDOM of SPEECH Trial @ VANUNU ARCHIVES:
http://www
I'm a big fan of Vanunu, who's been nominated many times for the Nobel Peace Prize, including by prize winner Archbishop Tutu.
Here's his refusal to be on the list again http://www
"My main reason for this is that I cannot be part of a list of laureates that includes Simon Peres. He is the man who was behind all the Israeli atomic policy.
Peres established and developed the atomic weapon program in Dimona in Israel. Exactly like Dr. Khan did in Pakistan, Peres was the man behind the atomic weapon proliferation to South Africa and other states. He was also, for instance, behind the nuclear weapon test in South Africa in 1978.
Peres was the man who ordered the kidnapping of me in Italy Rome, Sept. 30, 1986, and for the secret trial and sentencing of me as a spy and traitor for 18 years in isolation in prison in Israel.
Until now he continues to oppose my freedom and release, in spite of my serving full sentence 18 years.
From all these reasons I don’t want be nominated and will not accept this nomination.
I say No to any nomination as long as I am not free, that is, as long as I am still forced to be in Israel.
WHAT I WANT IS FREEDOM AND ONLY FREEDOM.
Thank you
vmjc"
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
