Skip to main content

Republican victory and Iran N-talks





US Secretary of State John Kerry (R), former top EU diplomat Catherine Ashton (2nd L), Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif (L) and Omani Foreign Minister Yussef bin Alawi (2nd R) pose for a photo in Muscat, November 9, 2014.


Finian Cunningham




US ‘must soften tone’ on Iran
‘US not after win-win nuclear solution’


It seems like a cruel twist of fate that the mid-term US elections should result in a Republican-controlled Congress - only weeks ahead of the November deadline for a nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers.

With the more hawkish Republican Party now dominant in both the Senate and House of Representatives, it looks certain that we can kiss goodbye to a possible resolution of the nuclear dispute and the lifting of Western sanctions on Iran.

Delegates from the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany are to meet with counterparts from Iran in the coming days to begin the final countdown to sealing an accord on the nuclear standoff - set for November 24 - after a year of negotiations.

This week, US President Barack Obama said that Washington had presented a framework which would allow Iran to achieve its peaceful nuclear energy goals and rescind the punitive sanctions regime that the Western powers have imposed on Tehran.

However, Obama hedged the outcome by saying, "Whether we can actually get a deal done, we'll have to find out over the next three to four weeks."

But given that Obama has just lost control of Congress to a Republican Party that is deeply hostile to any diplomatic solution with Iran, it is extremely improbable that a deal can be struck.

Obama said prior to the mid-term rout of the Democrats that he is prepared to invoke "executive powers" independent of Congress to push through an accord at the P5+1 forum. That Obama will stand up to a boorish Congress for the sake of an Iranian breakthrough is wishful thinking. His track record over two terms in the White House shows that he has no spine for such a face-off.

Already the lame-duck president has been making conciliatory gestures to the Republicans. The Washington Post reports this week that Obama wants to "forge compromises with the newly empowered Republicans."

Besides, over the remaining two years of his presidency, Obama will be more interested in appeasing opponents to salvage his domestic legacy of healthcare reform. He is not going to jeopardize that in a wrangle over the Iranian nuclear issue.

But more ominous is the underlying geopolitics of why Washington engaged in the seeming detente with Iran in the first place. The assumption that the Obama administration genuinely wants to find a resolution with Iran is questionable.

We refer here to Russia's top intelligence official, Nikolay Patrushev, who last month gave an insightful interview to Russian media on the deteriorating relations between Washington and Moscow.

Patrushev, who is head of Russian National Security, said that the "reset" policy that Washington embarked on in 2008-2009 under Obama appeared to offer a diplomatic partnership with Russia. But, he said, the overture transpired to be disingenuous.

"It soon became clear that Washington is not inclined towards real cooperation. It confined itself to mere statements of friendliness and the devising of certain negotiation tracks from which the benefit to Russia, in the end, proved almost zero. After a while even totally non-binding positive dialogues of this kind came to an end and the US attitude towards our country began once again to be reminiscent of Cold War times."

The proof of Washington's underlying intent towards Russia is the current Ukraine crisis and the pretext that provides for slapping on sanctions against Moscow. The true, ugly face of ashington has been revealed because Russian President Vladimir Putin refused to acquiesce to Washington's geopolitical hegemony over the global economy. In recent years, Putin has pushed ahead with strategic partnerships with China and other emerging economies of the BRICS.

The real reason why Washington engaged with Russia under the Obama reset policy was not so much "reset" but to "offset" the development of a multipolar global economy which would hasten the demise of American hegemony and the dominance of the US dollar in particular.
Because Putin has not played ball according to American schemes this has incurred a wrathful response from Washington, which is evinced now in the present Ukraine crisis.

The relevance to Iran is that this was also the geopolitical background for why Washington moved from a policy of overt hostility under the Bush administration to one of apparent engagement under Obama.

As Patrushev noted, "In the context of the growing world financial and economic crisis, major new players in the international arena such as the PRC [People's Republic of China], India, Brazil, and Iran as well as the growing economies of Southeast Asia and South Korea became
increasingly significant factors for the United States. Hence, incidentally, the emergence of new conceptual principles such as the American-Chinese special partnership, the strategic collaboration between the United States and India, the establishment of direct dialogue between Washington and Iran, and so forth."

Thus, the rationale behind Washington's diplomatic engagement with Iran was never really about resolving the decade-old nuclear dispute, but rather it was always about the US reasserting its hegemonic interests over the global economy by trying to forestall Iranian partnerships in alternative spheres of development.

After a year of tortuous negotiations and commendable efforts by Iran to find a resolution, it is perplexing that US negotiators are still pressing Iran for "reassurance on its peaceful nuclear ambitions."

That old chestnut keeps being brought up with mind-numbing tedium, which actually betrays the cynical disinterest in Washington in finding a genuine solution to the nuclear dispute and to bring an end to the sanctions on Iran. As with Russia, sanctions are just a means of political control for Washington.

The Republican-controlled Congress will most likely deliver a hammer blow to the year-long diplomacy with Iran. But that should come as no surprise given Washington's ulterior motives towards Iran.

Nonetheless, the end of the P5+1 charade is a good thing. For it will allow Iran to free up its political energy and to get on with reinforcing new global partnerships.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary
Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations.

However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states.

Analysis


Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria. Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was recently …

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge


In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east.

Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies.

This has forced…

In Yemen, a Rebel Advance Could Topple the Regime

Shia loyal to the al-Houthi movement ride past Yemeni soldiers near Yaz, Yemen, in May. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary


The success of a rebel campaign in northern Yemen is threatening to destabilize the already weak and overwhelmed government in Sanaa. After capturing the city of Amran, a mere 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the capital, in early July, the rebels from the al-Houthi tribe are in their strongest position yet. The Yemeni government is developing plans to divide the country into six federal regions, and the rebels believe this is their chance to claim territory for the future bargaining.

The central government is nearly powerless to fend off the rebels; its forces are already stretched thin. Neighboring Saudi Arabia has intervened in Yemen before and still supports Sunni tribes in the north, but the risk of inciting a Shiite backlash or creating space for jihadists to move in could deter another intervention.

Analysis


Followers of Zaidi Islam, a branch of Shiism, rul…