Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on March 27, 2013

Bookmark and Share

Iran’s Nuclear Activities Go On Despite Sanctions

Iran’s Nuclear Activities Go On Despite Sanctions thumbnail

While the U.S.-led sanctions regime on Iran has produced substantial economic hardship, analysts here are increasingly pointing out that Tehran’s controversial nuclear activities have continued unabated.

According to a study released Tuesday by the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), “there is a clear disconnect between the stated goals of the sanctions policy (a change in the Iranian calculus in regard to its nuclear program) and what sanctions have actually achieved.”

Based on interviews with senior Iranian political officials, analysts and members of the business community, the report argues that key Iranian regime stakeholders have not begun “building narratives that enable such a course correction” nor started “lobbying the government for a shift in policy”.

“[Iran’s nuclear programme] appears at best entirely unaffected by the sanctions or at worst partly driven by them in the sense that escalating sanctions as a bargaining chip also gives Iran the incentive to advance its program for the same reason,” argue report authors Bijan Khajehpour, Reza Marashi and Trita Parsi.

“…It is highly unlikely that the regime will succumb to sanctions pressure at a time when its narrative remains unchallenged, key stakeholders are not visibly lobbying for policy shifts, no proportionate sanctions relief is put on the table by the P5+1, and capitulation is seen as a greater threat to the regime’s survival than even a military confrontation with the United States,” according to the report.

Indeed, despite four rounds of U.N.-ratified sanctions on Iran imposed between 2006 and 2010, and unilateral sanctions imposed by the U.S. and EU that led to Iran’s currency losing 40 percent of its value in 2012, Tehran has not made nuclear concessions favourable to the P5+1 (the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China plus Germany) during negotiations.

“Sanctions have not induced significant Iranian concessions because the Iranians have been given little or no reason to believe that such concessions will bring significant relief from sanctions,” Paul Pillar, a former top CIA analyst, told IPS.

Calling Western sanctions against Iran “underwhelming”, Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based group which strongly advocates for sanctions on Iran, wrote in June 2012 that only “economic warfare” would compel Iran to halt its nuclear programme.

“And, if that’s insufficient to get Khamenei to strike a deal – and there is unfortunately no evidence so far that it will – the president needs to unite the country in moving beyond sanctions and preparing for U.S. military strikes against Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” concluded Dubowitz in his foreignpolicy.com article.

But Pillar was critical of the notion of sanctions as an alternative to military action.

“A fallacy in the common view of sanctions and military attack as being two alternative ways of dealing with the same problem is the tendency to think of sanctions in isolation, without regard to the diplomacy that must accompany sanctions for them to be of any help,” said the former national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005.

“Merely piling on more sanctions without providing necessary incentives would probably only increase the risk of impasse leading to military conflict – both because it would confirm the Iranian belief that the West is interested more in regime change than in making a deal, and because it would encourage those in the United States and Israel who would welcome a war to argue that sanctions had been ‘tried’ and military force was the only option left,” he said.

While Iranian Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be deeply distrustful of U.S. intentions with or without sanctions, Ahmad Sadri, an Iran expert at Lake Forest College, told IPS that a change in Iran’s nuclear policy is possible.

“The imperious attitude and the coercive politics of sanctions have left no doubt in [Khamenei’s] mind that America is not after a deal to limit Iran’s nuclear programme. In his mind, the aim of America is nothing less than regime change,” he said.

But while “the case is already prejudiced…we are talking about motivated negotiators,” Sadri told IPS.

“Although the Iranian economy is far from a collapse, the vulnerable classes are feeling the pinch of the skyrocketing prices…the effect sanctions could have are not direct. They are not smart. They do hurt the common people. But also, the government is interested in bringing them to an end,” he said.

According to Sadri, if the P5+1 wants Iran to agree to their demands, they must change their view and approach to Iran and the diplomatic process.

“They must want to end the impasse without humiliating a country with two and a half millennia of history and two centuries of resisting colonial encroachments. They must negotiate in good faith and offer Iran an honourable deal with a face-saving way out of the impasse,” he said.

Iranian officials expressed disappointment after more details of a revised package by the P5+1 that included only slight sanctions relief was revealed in Istanbul during “technical” talks on Mar. 19.

In a Mar. 20 speech marking the Iranian New Year, Ayatollah Khamenei again insisted that any deal on its nuclear programme must include acknowledgement of “Iran’s right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes”.

“Past experiences and the existing conditions show that the Americans are not after resolving this issue and they want the nuclear issue to remain unresolved so that they have a pretext to pressure and ‘cripple’ the Iranian nation. Of course, much to the dismay of the enemies, the Iranian nation will not be crippled,” he said.

Iran and the P5+1 group are due to meet again in Almaty, Kazakhstan on Apr. 5 and 6.

“The U.S. and the other P5+1 countries need to couple their demands on Iran with offers of sanctions relief more significant than they have offered so far, and they need to make clear that they accept Iran’s right to have a peaceful nuclear programme, to include enrichment of uranium,” said Pillar.

“More generally they need to make clear that they are willing to do business with the current Iranian regime and that they are not more interested in overthrowing it,” he said.

IPS



8 Comments on "Iran’s Nuclear Activities Go On Despite Sanctions"

  1. BillT on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 12:49 am 

    Iran has every right to have a nuclear program for research and medicine. There are other countries with illegal nukes that the Us should go after… hint: Israel.

  2. Kenz300 on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 5:11 am 

    Hate, anger, guns and crazy do not belong together.

  3. GregT on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 5:46 am 

    The Iranian people have every right to live peacefully on this planet, as do all others. Imposing political sanctions on a peaceful nation will only lead to more war. US foreign policy is nothing more than evil.

    The Council on Foreign Relations is not an elected body in the United States and according to the laws of the Constitution, should be disbanded and tried for treason.

    Wake up Americans! Your liberties and freedoms are being taken away. You still have a say in your future, but not for much longer.

  4. Alex R. on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 6:32 am 

    Both sides want the same thing: war. The west is unfairly imposing sanctions on the Persians. The Persians are goading the western nations with their nuclear program. Iran sees America and her allies as unreasoning and keeps reiterating their right to enrich uranium. They do have the right, yes. However, if I’m confronted by a rifle carrying crazy lunatic the last thing on my mind is to insist on my rights. Iran, just as guilty as the west for this situation, is looking for a pretext to attack Israel when they begin to be under fire.

  5. Ham on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 10:05 am 

    My sentiments exactly, well said people, it is sheer hypocracy, especially as Nixon was quite willing to give the Shah nuclear technology. Then, Iran was an ally against the Russian bear. US foriegn policy has strayed from one disastrous war to another, it solves nothing.

  6. BillT on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 1:12 pm 

    Alex, lets point the war mongering finger where it belongs, at the biggest war monger in the world, the US. We have set the all time record for wars for one country and we are less than 300 years old.

    Whereas, Persia/Iran has not started a war since … well, not in my 68 years that I can remember. I think all they want is to be left alone to develop their own resources and not be under the thumb of the Empire. That is the barb in the neck of the US. Wealthy sovereign countries cannot have their freedom to choose. Cannot be democratic. If you doubt that, look at what they have done to at least 20 ‘democratic’ countries since WW2.

  7. Alex R. on Wed, 27th Mar 2013 9:41 pm 

    I hear ya BillT. However Iran is faced with a recent problem called ‘Israel’. It’s true that America is on a war path, however this is seen as an opportunity by the Persians. They are purposely instigating the West to attack them. In turn Iran will be free to attempt to destroy that proverbial “thorn in the flesh” of Islam of the Middle East. So, yes, Iran has been peaceful for quite a while but they want to eradicate the ones who are maltreating their religious brothers. That’s just my opinion.

  8. BillT on Thu, 28th Mar 2013 2:50 am 

    Alex, it’s complicated, but you are correct. Israel is the thorn in Iran’s neck as they have some religious vendetta against those who do not believe. But then the Jews want to run the world as they believe it is their God given right. So wrong! The mistake was giving them any land after WW2. Most Jews don’t live there anyway so why not give the land back to Palestine?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *