GO BACK TO SQUARE ONE ON IRAN DEAL
HAVING overhyped a nonexistent agreement over Iran’s nuclear program, President Obama now admits this “chance of a lifetime” may lead nowhere. What to do? One could always wait until the June 30 deadline to see what happens. Obama says he is still hopeful a deal could be clinched.
Yet, anyone familiar with the mood in Tehran knows that, paradoxically, Obama’s zeal to make a deal, any deal, may have rendered an agreement more difficult, if not impossible. Talks with the administration over the years have convinced the mullahs that with every new round they could change or blur the baseline in their favor.
The saga started with the demand that Iran comply with six UN Security Council resolutions, especially Res. 1929, that state precise conditions for lifting sanctions. Under Obama, that baseline was blurred into a demand that Iran modify minor aspects of its program.
When Iran rejected even that, Obama changed the baseline again by accepting Iran as a “threshold” nuclear power, demanding only that it stay one year away from making a bomb, for 10 years. Now Iran says even that is not acceptable.
The best option may be to return to the original baseline — that is, the UN resolutions, which are precise in content and form.
A return to that baseline has several advantages. First, it would prevent the issue from becoming a football in US domestic politics. It would also end the Iranians’ illusion that they are dealing with a pushover like Obama who is prepared to sacrifice US national interests in pursuit of personal grandeur.
De-Americanization of the issue would discourage Khomeinists from taking risks with Iran’s national security in the hope of thumbing their nose at the “Great Satan” — though this does not mean the US should be excluded from diplomatic efforts. An ad hoc informal group with no clear mandate from anybody, the 5+ 1 group has no legal existence, no clearly established leadership and no precise authority to report to.
This could be corrected with a newS ecurity Council resolution assigning the 5+ 1, or a variation, to a precise mission to negotiate Iran’s compliance. Such a format would lift the fog behind which Obama has pursued his legacybuilding ambitions, treating the core issue as incidental.
“Obama has said that a diplomatic accord [ on the nuclear issue] will mark a newera in Iranian American relations,” writes Hamid Abutalebi, President Hassan Rouhani’s foreign policy advisor. “The two [ nations] agree that the nuclear issue is just a measure for testing goodwill.”
By returning to its UN baseline, it would be possible to treat the threat of a nucleararmed Iran as amatter of central concern, not incidental importance. The original baseline, effaced by Obama, had several promising features. It included an Iranian accord to freeze its program, pending a comprehensive plan to enable Iran to build a modern nuclear industry for peaceful purposes. Iran, however, suddenly decided to end the freeze. The new negotiating team could start by demanding the freeze be reinstalled alongside action by the UNto help Iran recast a nuclear program.
The baseline also included legal and constitutional measures committing Iran not to build nuclear weapons. In 2008, Iran had indicated it was prepared to consider such measures. When Obama seized leadership of the 5+ 1 talks, Iran wiggled its way out of the suggestion.
Instead, it claimed that “Supreme Guide” Ali Khamenei had issued a fatwa forbidding nuclear weapons. An excitable Obama seized upon the fatwa as a ray of hope, enabling Iran to backtrack on promises of legal measures.
In the end, however, neither Obama nor anyone else saw the nonexistent fatwa.
The negotiators could demand that Iran honor its promise to adopt the additional protocols of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. And the UN could renew its offer to link Iran’s uraniumenrichment capacity to its needs.
The “need oriented” formula means if and when Iran builds a nuclear power station it would be allowed to domestically produce the fuel required. ( Right now, Iran has no nuclear power station needing domestic fuel production. The fuel for its only plant in Helliyeh, built by Russians, is supplied by Russia for its lifespan of 37 years.)
Under Obama, talks have focused on how much of the uranium that Iran does not need for peaceful purposes it could enrich. It is like demanding a bald man be allowed no more than a dozen combs. A figure of 5,600 centrifuges was plucked out of thin air.
The Obama method has caused confusion and delayed the tackling of a problem that’s cast a deadly shadow over international relations. The best thing Obama could is to temper his enthusiasm and try to do no more harm.