Iran Sanctions Could Fracture Coalition

Iran has given it's response to what newspapers have been calling a "broad-ranging incentive package", which was - in reality - an American demand that Iran suspend Uranium enrichment before negotiations could begin. I have always argued that the US was, in effect, asking that Iran concede all the main points before talks could even begin. It was a perfect example of neo-con arrogance.

It can come as a surprise to no-one that Iran has rejected this offer. Nor that Iran has come up with a "comprehensive" counter proposal, including an offer to discuss the temporary suspension of Uranium enrichment during future talks.

Ahmadinejad has already proved himself as more than adequate at taking the neo-cons on and beating them at their own game, and I feel that he is once again preparing to split the UN rather than lining himself up to face possible sanctions, which is already the aim of the US.

Condaleezza Rice now has to persuade the Security Council to carry out it's initial threat.

That will not be easy, in part because the entire United Nations Security Council is supposed to vote on the sanctions package. While only the permanent members can veto, the rising fear, particularly among European diplomats, is that smaller countries on the Council are so angry over how the United States, and now France, have handled the Lebanon crisis that they will give Russia and China political cover to balk against imposing tough sanctions.

While France, for instance, has been almost as insistent on a tough stance against Iran’s nuclear program as the United States, France has also in recent days alienated many members of the Security Council by offering only 200 troops to a peacekeeping effort in Lebanon.

“The Lebanese situation has caused a lot of bad faith and I think that will play into this,” said one European diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity under normal diplomatic rules.

Russia and China have never been keen on imposing sanctions on Iran as both have strong economic ties to the Iranian regime. The US had hoped that, if Iran turned down their "broad-ranging incentive package", then Russia and China would have no choice other than to back their calls for sanctions. However, world opinion has been affected by the war in Lebanon. Especially with the news that the US was actually hoping to encourage Israel to widen the war to Syria and Iran.

There is now a chance that, suspicious of the US's overall intent, the smaller nations might now refuse to go along with sanctions.

“Lebanon has proven that there’s no military solution to the problem in the Middle East,” said Trita Parsi, the Iranian-born author of “Treacherous Triangle: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the United States,” which Yale University Press plans to publish next year.

While there is no talk among the world powers right now about hitting Iran militarily, European diplomats in particular said they worried about a downward spiral if the sanctions did not work. “They’ve been dragged into three wars over there by the U.S.,” Mr. Parsi said, referring to Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon. “They don’t want a fourth.”

The US apparently remain confident that sanctions will follow the Iranian refusal to accept their package and I have no doubt that they may succeed in getting some meaningless sanctions like travel suspension for Iranian diplomats. However, Bush and the neo-cons have, as always, overplayed their hand, and the world is very suspicious of granting them any form of sanctions that may pave the way for an eventual war.

With Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon all in tatters, there is no way that the Security Council is going to aid Bush in adding Iran to that list of conflict zones.

Bush has, no doubt unwittingly, strengthened Ahmadinejad's hand with every move he has made in the Middle East.

Iran has benefited from US actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq, where Shia groups once exiled in Tehran have come to power in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein's overthrow. The catastrophic war just fought between Israel and Hizbullah in Lebanon, partly playing proxy roles for the US and Iran, can be counted a big success for the latter.

The Bush regime has always appeared to revel in the fact that it "doesn't do nuance". There is almost a pride amongst them in the macho arrogant swagger of this administration. However, nowhere does nuance matter more than in the Middle East where seemingly separate items have a way of dramatically converging.

The truth is that Bush has always lacked the intellectual curiosity required for dealing with the Middle East, preferring to attempt to impose his will through sheer military strength. It has, so far, not served him very well; nevertheless, it is a lesson that he continues to refuse to learn.

He has, more than any previous US President, strengthened Iran by picking off Iran's enemies one by one and strengthening Shias across the region. He is now about to reap the winds of what he has sown.

Ahmadinajed has just flicked him off like a fly. Bush is about to discover just how little - because of his own actions - that he can do about that.

Click title for full article.

Tags: Bush, Ahmadinejad, US, Iran, UN, Security Council, resolutions, Uranium, enrichment, sanctions, China, Russia, Lebanon