Day: May 16, 2019
“Maximum pressure”
Mohammed Ataie published this interview with me in the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA):
- Today, President Rouhani declared that the remaining signatories to the nuclear agreement–the United Kingdom, France, Germany, China and Russia –had 60 days to implement their promises to protect Iran’s oil and banking sectors from US sanctions. How do you see Rouhani’s carful statement which reiterated Tehran’s continued commitment to the JCPOA and NPT?
A: Rouhani is trying hard to avoid taking the blame for the collapse of the JCPOA and to project an image of reasonableness, in particular to Europe, Russia, and China.
2. President Rouhani said that if the Europeans fail to compensate for the unilateral American sanctions, in 60 days Iran will end the limits on the enrichment of uranium. Do you think that within this period the European signatories to the nuclear agreement would take practical steps to counter Trump administration’s unilateral sanctions?
A: I doubt there is much the Europeans can do. Their companies are not willing to buck the US sanctions, because there is so much more business for them to do in the US than in Iran.
3. The European Union has vowed to counter Trump’s renewed sanctions on Iran, including by means of a new law to shield European companies from punitive measures. Do you think that France, Germany and Britain have done enough in the past 12 months to save the agreement?
A: They’ve done what they can, but more slowly than required. It is virtually impossible to shield the European companies from punitive US measures if those companies want to do business with and in the US.Reuters has quoted French officials that the EU would impose sanctions on Iran if Tehran announces actions concerning the JCPOA.
4. How do you see this French position in the context of the EU powers’ inaction to protect Iran’s economic interests against the US unilateral sanctions?
A: The French are warning that Tehran could drive the Europeans back into the arms of the US. Iran is trying to signal moderation in its response to the sanctions, while insisting on getting the benefits promised in the deal. It is not an easy road to go down, not least because of criticism from those inside Iran who would be happy to restart the nuclear program.
5. President Trump claims that the JCPOA is not able to prevent Iran from developing a military nuclear program. Do you think that his maximum pressure policy would prevent Iran from developing a military nuclear program?
A: The maximum pressure policy is far more likely to give Iran incentives to restart the nuclear program and proceed as rapidly as possible to acquire all the technology needed for building nuclear weapons. Of course the sanctions limit the availability of financial resources to Tehran, but top priority programs will always get the resources they need. The result will be further weakening of the Iranian economy, but little impact on the nuclear and missile programs or Iran’s interventions in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Those programs will get priority, not least because the sanctions strengthen the political position of hardliners in Tehran.
I would add that the Trump Administration is begging for talks with Iran. So far, Tehran is signalling that it is unwilling unless and until the US rejoins the JCPOA. I don’t really see that happening, as Trump has boxed himself in, but some kind of secret communication is possible, and perhaps even likely.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Bluff to talk
Claiming that it is responding to Iranian attack planning, the Trump Administration has added military threat to its “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran. The President has denied what I take to be intentional leaks of a plan to deploy more than 100,000 troops, saying that he would deploy many more if it comes to that. Another American official suggested that Trump might rain 500 cruise missile per day on Iran for an extended period. Non-essential US government personnel have been ordered out of Embassy Baghdad. A carrier battle group and B52s have been deployed to the Gulf.
So far, this is escalatory bluff. The B52s flew from Al Udeid airfield in Qatar, which is too close to Iran to serve as a wartime facility. The war craft are serving statecraft: sending a signal. The Iranians, if they are planning attacks, won’t limit their targets to Iraq. Al Udeid would get its share of incoming. Real war preparations would require removal of aircraft from Al Udeid as well as withdrawal of at least families and other non-essential embassy personnel from throughout the Gulf. Deployment of 100,000 troops is far too many if the plan is for cruise missile strikes and far too few to mount an invasion of even part of Iran, a country of more than 80 million people. It would require months of visible and extensive logistical preparation.
Nor is there any sign at home that Trump is preparing for war. He might try to ignore the requirement for Congressional approval, but you can be sure the Democrats would be making much more noise if they thought he would attempt that. The stock market would also be signaling concern. American public opinion will not favor war with Iran, which would be a much bigger enterprise than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The President was elected because he pledged to end US over-commitment in the Middle East, not expand it.
So what is all this about? Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo have made themselves clear for months: they want Tehran back at the negotiating table. The President has even offered to send his telephone number through the Swiss, who represent US interests in Tehran. National Security Adviser Bolton prefers war, but he has lost that debate on North Korea and Venezuela. He is likely to lose again.
The Iranians are reluctant to talk with the Americans, as they want the US back in the nuclear deal before agreeing to talk with the Americans again. Their internal politics require it. I spent a couple of hours yesterday on news outlets discussing the situation with Iranian thinktankers. They are unconcerned with the American military threat an recognize it as bluff.
So what will happen?
War could happen, more by accident rather than intention of the President or the Supreme Leader. Both the Iranians and the Americans have friends who might create an incident. The Iranian-backed Houthis have allegedly launched a drone attack on a Saudi pipeline. The Saudis have responded with belligerence. The attack on four oil tankers off the coast of the UAE’s Fujairah coast elicited a softer response. The Emirates have extensive trade and financial exchanges with Iran and have not identified the perpetrators. Israel could escalate its attacks on Iranian assets in Syria or elsewhere in ways that Iran might think require a response.
It is also possible the Americans and Iranians will do what they have done in the past: talk in secret. That is how the Obama Administration began its push for the nuclear deal. Tehran might prefer it that way, since otherwise it will be seen as abandoning “resistance” and giving in to the Great Satan. Such secret talks might leak, so anyone in Tehran who conducts them should anticipate being fired if they do. But if they lead to some relief from sanctions, the Supreme Leader might be prepared to run the risk.
Trump speaks loudly and carries a little stick. He is bluffing. He wants to talk.
RSS - Posts
