Strategy on Iran threatens world peace

The decision by the United States to up-yours the United Nations by implementing unilateral and, in terms of international law, suspect sanctions against Iran over dubious claims about its nuclear programme, is pushing that country deeper and deeper into a no-win corner. In the process, it is not only increasing the risk of conflict in the Middle East, but has made most of the rest of the world a more dangerous and potentially volatile place in which to live.

Not happy with the sanctions imposed against Iran by the United Nations on 9 June over its disputed nuclear programme, the US Congress has effectively declared economic war that goes way beyond the scope of the issue at hand: Iran’s development of nuclear weapons capacity.

The American sanctions were imposed despite a warning at the time by the director of the US Central Intelligence Agency Leon Panetta that so-called targeted economic sanctions would probably not deter Iran from seeking a nuclear capability.

The European Union has since followed suit and the measures have already started effectively to close down the Iranian economy. Using the leverage of the fact that the American war machine, as represented by the Pentagon, is the world’s single-largest oil consumer, the world's largest oil companies have been bullied into cutting off the supply of refined fuel to Iranian ships and commercial planes.

Although Iran is the world’s fifth largest producer of crude oil, it lacks refining capacity due to previously imposed US sanctions and is dependent on imports for 40% of its refined fuel.

However, the measures, in addition to the UN directive for member states to search Iranian ships suspected of transporting banned nuclear related freight, go way beyond merely the energy sector. The measures also target banks and financial institutions which do business with black-listed Iranian entities.

Within a week of the new American sanctions coming into effect, Lloyd’s of London announced it will not insure or reinsure petroleum shipments going into Iran. “The US is an important market for Lloyd’s and, in recognition of this, the market will not insure or reinsure refined petroleum going into Iran,” a senior company spokesperson told Reuters.

Iran has already found it more difficult to secure trade finance, as international companies fear being in breach of US sanctions. The Washington Post reported last week that “dozens of Iranian vessels that transport crude oil, industrial equipment and other goods and supplies in and out of the Islamic Republic have been denied insurance coverage for weeks...

“Iranian-flagged ships are facing problems all over the world, as they currently have no insurance coverage because of the new sanctions. Basically, most ports will refuse them entry if they are not covered for possible damages.”

How widely the sanctions impact is illustrated by the fact that even the US-based Educational Testing Service, delivering English proficiency testing required for studies at universities worldwide, has stopped online registration in Iran because it can no longer accept payments form there. This could hurt the chances of young Iranians wanting to study abroad.

These sort of spin-offs, combined with the economic hardships that the sanctions are set to have on ordinary Iranians, are likely to strengthen politically the hand of the Iranian Government, which has already accused the US and other Western countries of complicity in terrorist attacks in the southeast Iranian city of Zahedan. The attack by the Pakistan-based Jundallah Sunni group, which Iran claims is supported by Washington, killed 28 people and wounded 306. An Iranian Revolutionary Guards spokesperson warned that the US will face fallout from the incident.

In the wake of the UN sanctions, the Iranian parliament earlier already passed a bill calling for cargo inspections on any ships from countries that inspect Iranian vessels. These Iranian inspections will take place in the narrow Strait of Hormuz, which constitutes the world’s largest crude oil hub.

While some commentators are describing the latest, ex-UN, sanctions as an act of war, the threat of retaliation from Iran, while it serves to not only consolidate the Iranian population behind the government, but also to radicalise ordinary Iranians, is ominous.

However, direct military intervention in Iran, be it direct or via Israel, is an even less attractive option and could prove to be even more counterproductive.

A report by the Oxford Research Group on Military Action Against Iran: Impact and Effects concludes that “an Iranian administration under attack would experience considerable national unity and would work rapidly to redevelop its weapons programmes, withdrawing from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and prioritising nuclear weapons.”

While generally the omnipresent danger of a pre-emptive strike by Israel against Iran is presently judged to be low, the United Kingdom’s Guardian newspaper last week warned in an article that Iran may just spring a nasty surprise of its own.

Referring to US President Barack Obama’s expressed confidence that Israel would not attack Iran without first consulting him, the Guardian wrote: "nothing Obama said can remove the possibility that dangerous surprises may be in store, for both Israel and the US, emanating from Iran. The depth and breadth of the confrontation with Tehran on numerous fronts – political, commercial, geographical and physical – is growing exponentially. The situation grows less predictable, and thus more volatile, by the day. It would not take much to spark a full-blown crisis, most probably unplanned.”

With some of the world’s largest companies having been sucked into the confrontation, and keeping in mind that some four million Iranians live abroad, the surprises may also be sprung at and on non-conventional targets. A terrorist attack almost anywhere in the world on the appropriate symbolic target could easily be on the cards.

To injure a country’s honour and dignity is never a good strategy if you want to secure its co-operation to achieve a safer world. Perhaps there is good advice in the recent assessment by former head of the UK’s M15, that the war in Iraq “led to a huge increase in the terrorist threat to the UK”.

“Our involvement in Iraq radicalised, for the want of a better word, a whole generation of young people – not a whole generation, a few among a generation – who saw our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as being an attack on Islam,” she told a UK inquiry. This process is further strengthened by the involvement of UK-based companies such as BP and Lloyd’s in the economic war against Iran.

The American sanctions, and those of the EU that followed, further serve to blunt the UN as a reliable instrument for resolving international disputes if major powers simply choose to unilaterally beyond the consensus reached at UN level. The nuclear nonproliferation talks involving Iran have already gone on hold, with Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying they were prepared to resume talks only after a delay of several weeks to punish the West for imposing new sanctions. It remains to be seen how soon they can be persuaded to return to the table.

As things stand at present, Brazil and Turkey (until recently a key US ally in the Middle East) restarted talks in May this year with Iran on a deal on a swap of nuclear fuel required by Iran for a research reactor that produces medical isotopes. The US, however, turned down the deal reached.

Ahmadinejad said that when talks under the NPT resumes, which will not be before the end of August, they should be based on the uranium enrichment deal drawn up between Iran, Brazil and Turkey.

It further places wider international co-operation and relationships under stress, while at the same time probably violating international law or at least impinging on the sovereignty of other nations.

The effect of the mechanisms used by the US congress to enforce the sanctions is such that it unilaterally extends the scope of US legislation to well beyond the jurisdiction of its domestic borders.

It is reported that the US sanctions have angered many governments, including those of Russia, China and India. Russia has already gone on record as saying via its Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko it has no intention of abiding by the US sanctions.

“The sanctions cannot stop us. If there is a commercial interest and attractive terms, Russian companies are ready to supply oil products to Iran,” he is reported by the Washington Post.

While India has said it would ignore the US sanctions, it may prove to be not that simple in practice. Iran reportedly was buying about half of its July refined petroleum imports from Turkey and the rest from China, but it may become increasingly difficult in the present globalised world. Despite the public pronouncements by its politicians, some of Rusia’s oil companies have stopped supplying Iranian vessels with fuel.