Putting the pressure on Iran

Last night in his State of the Union address, President Bush referred to Iran specifically.

Yet liberty is the future of every nation in the Middle East, because liberty is the right and hope of all humanity.

The same is true of Iran, a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people. The regime in that country sponsors terrorists in the Palestinian territories and in Lebanon -- and that must come to an end. The Iranian government is defying the world with its nuclear ambitions, and the nations of the world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons. America will continue to rally the world to confront these threats.

Tonight, let me speak directly to the citizens of Iran: America respects you, and we respect your country. We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom. And our nation hopes one day to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran.

Two things about that. First, note that President Bush said, straight out, "the nations of the world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons." That is a line in the sand, and the United States' credibility is now resting on it. If the United States and its allies do allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons, having done little to prevent it, we will be seen as weak, all talk and no action. President Bush didn't go as far as saying the United States would act alone if necessary, he roped other nations into sharing the responsibility. Also, it is not quite as strong as his father's words "This will not stand" when Hussein invaded Kuwait. But, this is a clear, direct statement that includes the possibility of armed confrontation.

Second, President Bush was right to address the people of Iran, to let them know the United States is not their enemy. He was right to say he looked forward to meeting them as a free nation. However, he did not promise them any direct help. In fact, he said "We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom." They will win their freedom. Apparently not with a lot of help from us. I think this is one of the most serious errors the Bush Administration has made in the last three years, not actively supporting regime change in Iran. President Bush can say nice words, but that's all they are without action to back them up.

Yesterday there were interesting developments as the IAEA considers whether or not to refer Iran to the United Nations. From Reuters:

The permanent five members of the U.N. Security Council agreed on Tuesday that this week's meeting of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog should report Iran to the Council over its nuclear programs, said a statement from the five.

"(Ministers) agreed that this week's extraordinary IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) Board meeting should report to the Security Council its decision on the steps required of Iran," said a joint statement after the meeting between the foreign ministers of China, Russia, the United States, France and Britain as well as Germany and the European Union's foreign policy chief.

A senior U.S. official said the statement meant Russia and China were on board with the United States and the European powers that there must be strong action taken by the IAEA on Thursday or Friday against Iran to prevent Tehran from building a nuclear bomb.

It is not insignificant that Russia and China would agree to refer Iran to the UN. However, this is not exactly the formation of a strong coalition against Iran. There is plenty of wiggle of room here for Iran, Russia and China.

For starters, part of the deal included this:

The statement said the ministers agreed that the U.N. Security Council should await the IAEA director general's report to a March IAEA meeting before deciding what further action to take.

Iran has bought another month to push its program forward. I've said before, Iran is acting like it thinks it is close to having nuclear weapons. There have been recent reports it may already have the bomb, but is working to perfect its missile technology. It's hard to know the truth, but Iran's actions are consistent with an aggressive power stalling for time so it can conduct a nuclear test this year.

As for Russia and China, they have made no commitment as to how they would vote in the Security Council. They could still veto sanctions there. Agreeing to an IAEA referral is a good deal for them. It buys them good will in the international arena, but they didn't commit to a decision on the only issue that really matters in the discussion, UN sanctions, something neither Russia and China are very eager to impose on Iran.

The agreement with the nations mentioned above came with the news that Iran had in its possession documents on casting uranium into the shape of a warhead.

A document obtained by Iran on the nuclear black market serves no other purpose than to make an atomic bomb, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday.

The finding was made in a report prepared for presentation to the 35-nation IAEA board when it meets, starting Thursday, on whether to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose economic and political sanctions on Iran.

This isn't really news. As C.S. Scott points out here, he included an item about that last November in our Winds of War Briefing (yet another to keep up with the Briefings!), when news of these documents first came to light.

And as I pointed out here, there's long been discussion about what exactly Pakistan's Dr. Khan gave to Iran. Khan is the likely source of these documents.

All in all, it seems the nations of the world that President Bush referred to just kicked the can down the road for another month. However, the sigh of relief you hear is coming from India, who doesn't have to make a difficult choice on how to vote in the IAEA meeting this week. India will probably abstain, and Russia and China gave them the cover to do so. (Though there are also reports India may still be considering its vote.)

Certainly, an abstention would still be a rebuff to the United States, but it would allow India to avoid antagonizing Iran.

Regime Change Iran links to an interesting analysis from Reuters concerning a move India made Sunday.

India has moved to secure the fate of a rickety nuclear deal with Washington by replacing its pro-Iranian oil minister with a reformist seen as having close US contacts, analysts say.

Murli Deora was handed the key post on Sunday in a surprise move, pushing aside Mani Shankar Aiyar who was a strong supporter of a projected gas pipeline from Iran - something which the Indian foreign ministry was not comfortable with and which is opposed by the United States.

Ruling Congress party sources say Deora, who currently co-chairs a India-U.S. parliamentarian forum according to his Web site (www.murlideora.com), is known to have "deep contacts" in the US Senate and business circles.

It is certainly significant if India put a person in that key role who is more friendly to the US than his predecessor.

The analysis does go on to quote a foreign policy expert (in India, I gather) that The Iran gas pipeline is now dead."

I'm not sure about that yet. That pipeline has been in the works for years. Lots of money is at stake, control of energy resources is at stake. Projects like that don't get killed for small reasons.

I mentioned Russia, and China, did India a favor by giving them cover on the IAEA referral. Such a favor is not without value in diplomatic circles. Russia may want something from India in return for this favor. We'll have to keep an eye out for what form India's appreciation might take. It might end up having something to do with this pipeline. I've mentioned before Russia has expressed an interest in being a part of that gas pipeline project. And Security Watchtower has another possibility.

The Great Game continues.