Collision Course with the International Community
As expected, the exploratory talks on the Iranian nuclear power program that took place on December 21 in Vienna brought no real results. The EU trio of Germany, France and Great Britain were able only to gain Iran's consent to meet again in January.
The leader of the French delegation, Stanislav Laboulaye, described the talks as "open and frank," by which he presumably meant that both sides had formulated their standpoints clearly. These stances apparently remain irreconcilable, however.
Iran insists on carrying out the entire nuclear fuel production cycle within the country. Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki had already announced to journalists in Tehran before the negotiations that his country would "not agree to any preconditions." Iran did not wish to enter into "talks just for the sake of talks, but rather only to achieve the goal of maintaining nuclear technology in Iran."
Resistance from China and Russia
In contrast, the Europeans, and even more so the USA, demand a final and permanent stop to uranium enrichment in the country. The nuclear talks last August were broken off when Iran resumed uranium enrichment at its Isfahan plant.
The Europeans threatened to follow the unyielding course taken by the USA and to call in the UN Security Council; they were stopped however by resistance from China and Russia. Both countries maintain intensive economic relations with Iran.
In order to resolve the conflict peacefully, Moscow proposed allowing Iran to convert uranium within its own borders, while Russia would take charge of the subsequent uranium enrichment and production of fuel.
The USA and the EU gave their approval, knowing full well that Iran would reject the proposal. Then Russia would have no other choice but to agree to UN Security Council sanctions against Iran.
"Peaceful use of atomic energy"
In fact, Iran did reject Moscow's proposal. "We welcome every initiative," remarked Hossein Entezami, speaker for Iran's National Security Council, in an interview with the daily paper "Shargh." "But we will accept no proposal that denies Iran the chartered right to produce fuel on its own soil for the peaceful use of atomic energy."
If the negotiating partners stand firm in their viewpoints, an appeal to the World Security Council will be unavoidable.
Since President Mahmud Ahmadinejad was elected in July, the fronts have become further entrenched. His predecessor, Mohammad Chatami, also insisted on the country's right to produce nuclear fuel as guaranteed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
But while Chatami showed a willingness to compromise, Ahmadinejad has from the very start of his term set off on a collision course with Europe and the USA.
Stupidity? Naiveté? Tactics?
One is forced to ask what compels the government leader to act so as to veritably provoke the dangers menacing his country. Is it stupidity, naiveté, tactics, or is he simply acting based on his convictions?
Ahmadinejad, who comes from a modest background, is certainly no intellectual. In his worldview there is room only for friends or enemies. He sees the Islamic camp as being surrounded by decadent Westerners, by infidels, and by oppositionists and reformers at home who in his eyes are nothing but the minions of foreign powers.
He has practically no experience in shaping domestic or foreign policy. He can only shore up his power by spouting populist slogans in an effort to garner the support of the "have-nots and the slandered" whom he has promised to rescue.
He travels from city to city, holding fiery speeches, painting a vivid picture of "the enemy," generating fear, stirring up hatred. He accuses the previous administration of being corrupt. It supposedly gorged itself on the property of the people and led the country to ruin.
A situation more than chaotic
Since entering office, he has chased away hundreds of experienced civil servants and replaced them with clueless cronies and relatives. Seven state bank directors let go without notice, and forty ambassadors recalled.
A 26-year-old has been appointed to help Tehran's stock exchange, lying idle for months now, back onto its feet. Most of the cabinet members are former revolutionary guards and secret service agents.
The economy is shaken and unstable, with many entrepreneurs transferring their capital out of the country, while investments from abroad have dried up completely. The situation is more than chaotic.
The president has wreaked havoc on the foreign policy front as well. His plan is to turn away from the West and turn toward the East instead. Ahmadinejad would like to strengthen relations with Russia, China and India and to establish an alliance of Islamic states under the leadership of Iran as major regional power.
It was with this strategic goal in mind that he steered his country onto a collision course with regard to the nuclear strike, destroying everything his predecessor Chatami had set into motion. And then he began his unspeakable attacks on Israel.
If the West had not reacted with such vehement indignation when he launched his rant, his words would have dissolved into thin air. After all, people in Iran have been listening to such screeds for 26 years now, and they have had enough of it. As it is, the overwhelming majority views the president with nothing less than derision.
Even the conservatives, who hoped that by voting Ahmadinejad into office they could unify and monopolize power in the country, have long since realized that their candidate is intolerable. They are sitting back and letting him dig his own grave.
The President versus Parliament
Meanwhile, criticism against the president is growing louder. Parliament, in which the conservatives have the absolute majority, has blackballed several of the ministers the president has proposed.
In the case of the oil ministry, they shot down three candidates before deigning to give their consent. The President's bill to set up a fund to support the poor was rejected out of hand and not even added to the daily agenda for discussion.
Ahmadinejad's foreign policy, including his verbal attacks against Israel, has been severely censured as well. Even in the conservative press, it's noticeable that the President's statements are reported in a distanced manner and without comment. Some conservative representatives have called for an extraordinary session of Parliament.
The Mosharekat Party, the largest reform organization, called the President's pronouncements "the deadly poison of fundamentalist ideologies." In a public statement, the party warned that: "Such comments do the country great political and economic harm and increasingly endanger Iran's security."
Only a few months into his first term of office, the President finds himself on shaky ground. According to rumors, the old generation of behind-the-scenes power brokers who actually pull the strings are already planning his downfall.
Waving the flag of Islam
But the protests from abroad have managed in one fell swoop to place Ahmadinejad in the spotlight. With his imminent downfall already written on the wall, he has had the privilege of feeling like a hero, at least among his followers.
He has dared to defy the superpower USA and the most powerful nation in the Middle East, Israel, in order to stand by the displaced Palestinians and wave the flag of Islam high.
The President no doubt hopes that this position will enable him to expand his power and to divert attention from his inability to govern and the chaos he has created. It's no wonder that he pays little attention to the criticism he inspires and continues to rant and rave unabated.
Can we, should we take this man seriously? Yes and no. We can with all confidence ignore his threat to wipe Israel off the map. Iran is neither interested nor in a position to attack Israel, let alone to erase it from the face of the earth.
These kinds of verbal attacks are just part and parcel of ordinary ritual; ever since the founding of the Islamic republic, they can be heard in every Friday prayer. The fact that these words have now provoked such a vehement reaction can probably be attributed to the way they now fit seamlessly into the USA's Iran policy. Viewed from this perspective, we actually should take Ahmadinejad's statements seriously.
If the man didn't exist, the USA and Israel wouldn't have been able to invent anyone better suited to their purpose. Washington has freely admitted to its intention to isolate Iran, to impose sanctions and, if that doesn't help, to trigger a change of regime through military intervention.
The Israelis also seem ready to pull their plans for a pre-emptive strike against Iran out of the drawer. If the UN Security Council did decide to impose sanctions against Iran or even to launch a military attack of whatever form against the country, the masses would rush to the aid of Ahmadinejad.
And most of his critics would also wind up supporting him, for better or worse. He would be laughing up his sleeve. For Iran and for the rest of the region, however, including Israel, the consequences would be dire.
Bahman Nirumand
© Qantara.de 2005
Translation from German: Jennifer Taylor-Gaida
Qantara.de
Nuclear Conflict in Iran
Playing With Fire
The government in Tehran has plenty at stake in its game of cat and mouse with the International Atomic Energy Agengy. What are the political goals of Iran's delaying tactics in the dispute over its nuclear program? Bahman Nirumand reports
Iran's Hardliners against Opening up the Economy
Unwelcome European Offer in the Nuclear Conflict
EU negotiators hope that economic incentives will convince Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program. However, economic cooperation with the West is not nearly as welcome as the Europeans believe. By Michael Heim
EU and Iran
Europe's Controversial Diplomacy
Since Bush declared Iran as being part of the "axis of evil", dialogue between Teheran and Washington hasn't been on the agenda. Meanwhile, Europe is trying to negotiate with Iran. But what will force the ruling clergy to change their ways? By Hamdam Mostafavi