Enriched offer

Drawing a red line with Iran


Share/Save/Bookmark

Enriched offer
by Anatol Lieven & Trita Parsi
29-Jul-2008
 

Below, please see an op-ed that Anatol Lieven and I published in the International Herald Tribune on the need for real red lines with Iran that are rooted in international rules and that enjoys the support of not just the EU, but Russia, China and India as well. Essentially, we are arguing that a nuclear armed Iran can be prevented if we begin treating the NPT as an asset rather than a burden and shift our bottom line to “no nuclear weapon” rather than “no uranium enrichment.”  -- Trita Parsi

The Bush administration's decision to open direct contacts with Iran is to be welcomed, but precisely because it marks such a break with previous U.S. policy, it also carries a great danger. This is that hard-liners in the American and Israeli governments will treat this Western proposal as a last chance for the Iranians, to be followed by an attack if Tehran fails to accept it.

Meanwhile, it is already clear that much of the Iranian establishment interprets the latest Western conditions not as a final red line, but as yet another pink line, a vague basis for further negotiations. In consequence, it is unlikely that the Iranians will agree to a complete suspension of uranium enrichment within the six-week deadline set by the West.

Apart from anything else, Iranian leaders know that as long as they stop short of weaponization, neither the Europeans nor much of the U.S. uniformed military will approve an attack on Iran, with all its potentially devastating consequences for Western security. An attack will open up disastrous splits not only between the United States and Europe, but possibly within the U.S. security establishment itself.

If we in the West are to set a genuine red line that the Iranians can recognize as such, two interlinked things are necessary. This line needs to be rooted in international rules that the Iranians themselves have formally recognized, and it needs to have the full support not only of the Europeans, but of the Russians, Chinese and Indians as well.

In other words, our red line must be strict, verifiable adherence to the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NTP, accompanied by a list of detailed, concrete and severe sanctions that leading members of the international community undertake to impose if Iran breaks the treaty and moves to weaponization.

The nonproliferation treaty - with all its flaws - must therefore be treated by the West as an asset rather than a burden.

According to Hans Blix, former director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the idea that Iran's past violations and secretiveness has canceled out its right to uranium enrichment under the treaty is a "thin legal argument." Even officials of the U.S. State Department are privately beginning to admit Iran's right to enrichment, and the dead end into which the current strategy has led the West.

On the other hand, the nonproliferation treaty does provide the West with a very strong legal ground to pursue what should be our red line: to place a verifiable cap on Iranian enrichment and other nuclear capabilities well short of weaponization.

This is a red line that all states of the UN Security Council agree on, and which Iran itself has always said that it accepts. Through the NPT, Tehran can be held to its own oft-repeated position that it does not want weapons and that its program is for peaceful purposes only.

Russia, China and India all strongly dislike being forced to support what they regard as unilateral and illegal American pressure on Iran, but equally, strongly oppose Iran developing nuclear weapons.

The NPT therefore gives the West a strong basis on which to go to these countries and say: We will go back to the letter of the nonproliferation treaty and allow strictly limited and inspected Iranian enrichment if you will sign a binding international agreement setting out in public, in detail and in advance the sanctions that you and the other signatory nations will impose if Iran moves toward weaponization.

These threats should include removing Iran from all international organizations, ending outside investment, imposing a full trade embargo, ending - as far as possible - all international flights to Iran, and inspecting all transport headed to that country.

By way of an additional incentive, Russia or China might be allowed to appear to take the diplomatic lead in this mater, boosting their regime's international status and domestic prestige.

On the other hand, Russia in particular should be clearly warned that if Iran did weaponize and Moscow failed to impose the sanctions that they had promised, the results would be an increase in anti-Russian policies by the West across the entire spectrum of our relations.

Such a deal is the best that we can realistically hope for. The Iranian establishment has talked itself into a position where it would be virtually impossible for Tehran to abandon enrichment altogether.

As for an attack on Iran, this would at best only delay the Iranian program, while catastrophically undermining American efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and indeed the entire U.S. position in the Muslim world. A settlement along these lines, on the other hand, would prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and open the way for a resumption of the aid that Tehran provided in 2001 against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, which we badly need and which the Bush administration spurned.

ABOUT
Anatol Lieven is a professor at King's College London and a senior fellow of the New America Foundation in Washington. He is co-author, with John Hulsman, of "Ethical Realism: A Vision for America's Role in the World."  Trita Parsi is the author of "Treacherous Alliance -- The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the U.S.", a Silver Medal Recipient of the Council on Foreign Relations' Arthur Ross Book Award, the most significant award for a book on foreign affairs.


Share/Save/Bookmark

 
default

Anonymous500

by Roshanbeen (not verified) on

I am sorry, but wishing war and devistation for your country is not going to make the problems to go away, and even that would not bring MEK to power anyway.

Are we suppose to believe any garbage that is printed in Alsiasah and the likes, do they have varifiable proof, or this is another lie to hide behind their jealousy.

I do not believe NIAC has any relation to IRI. yes they talk to some Ir officials as they do to U.S officials and they are honest about it,. they are doing very good job of informing Iranian-American population and using democratic venues to promot peace and stability in Iran and greater ME. You know not every one believes in solving their differences through gun barrels and tomahawk missles(I can't even spell it) :)


programmer craig

Yek Irani

by programmer craig on

As long as there is one country in the world with Atomic weapons, Iran
has every right to equip herself with Atomic bombs and delivery
systems.

Interesting opinion. OS you liek nuclear holocaust?

It would be stupid for a country to leave herself defenseless.
Iran must be strong enough, so it doesn’t have to pay ransom to others,
period.

Iran will never have a defencse against nuclear attack. Nobody does. And by aquiring nucelar weapons, Iran assures that any future attack on Iran will be a pre-emptive nuclear first strike. If Iran is foolish enough to actually provide nuclear weapons to a terrorist group, then Iran will cease to exist in a matter of hours. Quite literally. Is that the rosty future you want? Is it? It must be, since you openly are saying Iran should have nuclear weapons. I wonder if you will still ahve that opinion, if Pakistan is rendered a radioactive wasteland in teh coming years? 

What is it you think Iran can accomplish with nuclear weapons, that it can't accomplish without them?

 


programmer craig

Your "red line" is invisible.

by programmer craig on

Your "red line" is invisible.


default

To the Attention of the Supporters of the IRI

by Anonymous500 (not verified) on

Ladies and gentlemen:

Signing NPT does not allow a country to clandestinely perform activities that are inherently dangerous to your population and others in a strategically important region that Iran is located, and especailly along a waterway, the Persian Gulf, that is the energy jagular of the Western world.

The problem with the IRI is not NPT, but the fact that it is a manifest danger to world peace nd stability on the one hand. On the other hand, it is comprised of a regime that does not care for our people, nor for our national interests.

This regime is now so crises-ridden that is incapable of even securing its own Top Secrets as the following news item indicates:

افشا ساخت يك سايت مخفى براى توليد بمب اتم در زرگان اهواز
8:03:16 AM 1387/5/9
تاسيسات اتمي رژيم

روزنامه كویتی السیاسه براساس یك سند درونی رژیم آخوندی فاش كرد كه رژیم ایران ازسال ها قبل ساخت یك سایت مخفی برای تولید بمب اتمی را در زرگان اهواز آغاز كرده است.
این سند نامهیی با طبقه بندی فوق العاده سری است كه توسط سرهنگ پاسدار حسن جلالیان جانشین سركرده سپاه پاسداران اهواز برای محمد كیافر مدیرناظر شركت مهاب قدس كه در پروژه ساخت این سایت دست دارد، ارسال شده است. تاریخ این سند 19فروردین سال1387است.
السیاسه نوشت : رژیم ایران بین سال های 2000 تا 2003 زمینها وخانه های هزاران غیر نظامی عرب در منطقه زرگان واقع در ساحل رودخانه كارون را مصادره كرده است. . مقامات رسمی در پایان سال 2007 شروع به ساخت این پروژه خطرناك كرده اند. این سایت با دیوارهیی به ارتقاع سه متر در طول منطقه پوشیده شده است. . حفاظت اطراف این تاسیسات به عهده سپاه پاسداران است .
در این سند خطاب به مدیر ناظر شركت مهاب قدس آمده است: باید همه مواد ساختمانی این رآكتور بصورت كاملا سری از انبار به محل ساخت انتقال داده بشود. ازبابت احتیاط بار دیگر یادآور میشویم كه انتقال مواد، ضروری است باعث شك مردم نشود. استخدام افراد محلی و هر فرد عرب زبان یا خوزستانی در ساخت سایت زرگان ممنوع است. باید مطمئن شوید كه كارگران و كاركنان این مركز ازاستان های شمالی كشور باشند.

The problem is that Iranian cities and twons are being turned into nuclear sites w/out any regard for this policy's long-term implications once unerthed; those who argue that Iran has a right to nuclear power, or energy, are impervious to the the IRI's depth of inhumanity and lack of concern for our people.

As to the rendition of this or that expert as what constitutes the so-called verifiable red line, or pink line, or whatever the problem is that those power-be in the Security Council don't give a hoot to these "experts" and their opinions especially if they are not perceived of being impartial. If any one believes that the likes of El-Baradei, or Hnas Blix, or Scott Ritter are "impartial" observers, I have a number of very nice covered bridges in Connecticut that I can sell them.

The problem of the IRI is that the world over is reaching the inevitable consensus: IRI is a Western created, proped up, and sustained monster whose mission has been accomplished and now it is time for it to exit.

I hope that the Western powers are now becoming cognizant that it is better to work with Iranian Resistance froces whose realistic view is that a free-Iran cleansed from the plague of the IRI from within is the altrnative to a bombed and devasted Iran that the IRI is trying to provoke the West for such evantuality.

It is NOT ironic that the likes of NIAC and CSMAII or other pro IRI xyz never discuss this Third Alternative, nor do they ever give a hoot to the fact that the absolute majority of Iranians have denounced the IRI. Instead we get these type of guidelines.

Having said all this, let me be on record: I hope that NIAC and its El-Presidente is right and the Security Council will follow these guidlines if such will save our country from devistation. There is a horrible feeling that tells me as usual, they would go for the worst w/out any regard for their utterly stupid policies that they have been follwing in the past 30 years with regard to IRI.


default

What if tomorrow Ahmadinejad

by Anonymousa (not verified) on

What if tomorrow Ahmadinejad declared that they have tested their firs nuclear weapon and it's too late to prevent them from having WMD???

What would happen next???
What would be the response of US, Israel, Eruopeans, Gulf states in the ME??


Abarmard

Dear Karim S

by Abarmard on

You have mentioned in your comment good points and I just wanted to invite you to become a proud supporter of the Iranian American community organization. Join the NIAC and be proud that you did the right thing.

The more members, the more power, the better we can serve the Iranian American issues and the future of Iran. Unity is the key.


default

Your arrogance IS bringing you down! (to BK)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Brandon Kinglsy, the "arrogance" (i.e., defending itself) might bring Iran down, but arrogance is already bringing U.S down. Look at $2-3 trillion U.S debt, billions of dollars of deficit and troubled economy, a war (Iraq war) that is at best under control (thanks to Iran, i.e., the soft power in Iraq), a war (Afghan, Pakistan war) that is not going well at all after 7 years (even W admitted that), and a war (Lebanon war) that U.S lost and Israel lost and was humiliated ......


default

Your arrogance is what will bring you down at the end

by Brandon Kinglsy (not verified) on

Keep on dreaming! that is what the Shah thought and we all know what happened to him.


default

Its hypocrytical

by Alborzi (not verified) on

For the non signer of NPT, who has hundreds of WMD and
a signer who has not lived to it for years, to come and threaten Iran with annihilation is just plain hypocritical. In the Iraq war they ignored all UN requests and attacked anyway. The NPT is just a cover and Iran will have her own wits to defend her, all other arguments are just silly.


farokh2000

Show me your WMDs first

by farokh2000 on

As it has been stated time and again before, every Country who has signed the NPT has the same rights as other Countries who have signed. Why is Iran different?

If anyone needs to have full monitoring of their activities, it would have to be the agressive Nations, ie, United States, Israel(Which has never signed), Russia, UK, and others.

These are the Countries that have in the recent past or currently invaded other Non-Nuclear Nations, killed their innocent people and occupied their lands.

How does that apply to Iran, which has not done any of these for hundred of years and is currently circled by the invaders from the West?

Should there be a double standdard because of so called "Super Powers" because they can and will bully others? Where is the World Court and the United Nations when these Countries violate all existing human rights of their own people and the people of other countries?

Didn't these same criminals cry wolf about Iraq's non-existing WMDs and presented fake pictures and documents to deceive people about Iraq? Now it is Iran's turn because they don't totally abdicate to the West all their territory and resources?

All the people who are following this garbage and believe in what US bullies are saying need to educate yourselves a little bit, just a little bit would be enough. Not too much because you don't want to hurt yourselves.

The Mullahs are the product of the West. Wasn't it the CIA that protected Khomaini in Iraq for over 2o years, safe from the Shah, for a rainy day that they needed him back in Iran creating the backward sitation that they had planned for them?. Wasn't Sadam the ruler(Butcher) in Iraq then, getting his orders from CIA?

Is History too hard to follow or is Politics too complicated and dirty?


Yek Irani

Stand down

by Yek Irani on

Middle East is the domain of Iranians. It has been for thousands of years. If you think all of a sudden a bunch of Israelis can come and take over, you are mistaking. If they don’t want to be threatened they should stand down and follow Iran as their wise ancestors did, period.


default

DOUBLE STANDARD and DISCRIMINATION

by Roshanbeen (not verified) on

Let's inspect every Country that is in violation of IAEA's regulations.

Roots of all problems in the world and more specifically in middle east are DOUBLE STANDARDS, and discrimination. The so called leaders of free, and civilized world are aware of it, but they pretend otherwise. If they realy want to solve the problems in M.E, they have to respect every nation and treat them equally. Is that too much to ask? after all that's what this country was established on. ALL MEN CREATED EQUAL.

%=!want Iran to suspend Enrichment, in exchange for empty promises of assisting Iran in future(empty box of chocolate). We all know that would not happened as it has not happened in the past 40 years. When the oil drys up, oil prices out of ANWAR would be $1000-2000 per barrel or even more.

I agree with this article By Dr. Parsi and Antoin Lieven, If Iran or any country breaks NPT wheather they are signatory or not, world have to go after them and stop them by all means. Producing energy is evey nations's right.

As far as suppoting terrorism?. It is barbaric and must be condemned in real sense by all . Again don't forget DOUBLE STANDARDS and DISCRIMINATION on this matter either.


default

Why don't they stop their threats?

by Brandon Kingsly (not verified) on

Mr. or Mrs. yek Irani,

Nobody could care less whether Iran has nukes or delivery system for as long as her rulers stop, once and for all, threatening other sovereign states in deed and in action PERIOD


default

I wish them success too (well said Guive)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Guive, you couldn't have said it better. I too don't agree with many of IRI policies but I wish it luck with its nuclear objectives even if it includes making the bomb. I am proud of Iranian determination ...
BTW, goot to see you back Guive.


Yek Irani

It is a crapshoot

by Yek Irani on

As long as there is one country in the world with Atomic weapons, Iran has every right to equip herself with Atomic bombs and delivery systems. It would be stupid for a country to leave herself defenseless. Iran must be strong enough, so it doesn’t have to pay ransom to others, period.


default

Fred - get over your obsession

by Karim S (not verified) on

Fred, I haven't seen a single piece by Niac or Trita Parsi without you immediately trashing it in the comments section. What's even more funny is that you often time do not seem to read the articles - you immediately attack them without ever considering their arguments.

I'm not a member or supporter of NIAC. I agree with some of the things they do, and disagree with some. I do admire their consistency and efficiency. Not many Iranian Americans out there writing as much as NIAC and Parsi, or doing so with such prominent people like Ben-Ami and Lieven. That tells you something about NIAC's professionalism and credibility.

NIAC and Parsi are consistently working to find solutions. Fred, you are only consistently obsessed them in the most negative sense of that word.

I hope you can get some help.


default

Fred: More sloganeering

by AnonymousSassan (not verified) on

I asked for proof that the IAEA has declared Iran to be in breach of the NPT and, once again, you regurgitate your old slogans ad nauseam. Are you capable of adducing evidence or do you just cut-and-paste "Islamist/Anti-Semites and their likeminded lefty allies", etc, etc? Can you find statements issued by the IAEA stating that Iran is in breach of the NPT? Thank you.


Fred

Re: Crapshoot or just full of crap?

by Fred on

The answer to the contravention of the nuke treaty by the Islamist republic can be found in this article. The authors try, apparently successfully in some cases, to excuse and explain away this contravention; they prefer to use the less disturbing “violation”. It is done in this passage: according to “Hans Blix, former director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the idea that Iran's past violations and secretiveness has canceled out its right to uranium enrichment under the treaty is a "thin legal argument." Of course they do not say a word about Islamist republic having the right under the same treaty that the authors make the centerpiece of their article to give notice and kick all the inspectors out and disconnect the monitoring devices. It is the capability that they are after; unlike artificial turfs that can always be removed once they get to that point the Islamist regime could assemble bombs at its choosing and load them up on its already operational, albeit photoshoped, ballistic missiles.  These are elementary stuff and the authors know it better than anyone but thanks to the conduct of the current administration the situation is ripe for even snake oil being advertised as legitimate remedy.  The political climate is so charged and dislike of the post 9/11 American foreign policy so pervasive that normally reasonable people are willing to err on the side of taking the Islamist republic for its word rather than caution. BTW, the article proposes draconian sanctions to be applied once the Islamist republic is allowed to continue with its nuke work and then all of a sudden goes for “weaponization”. The lack of wisdom and futility of such proposal aside, isn’t one of the authors the very same president of the NIAC lobby which condemns any form of sanction as morally reprehensible, unjustifiable and inhumane? 


default

Crapshoot or just full of crap?

by AnonymousSassan (not verified) on

I am not aware of the IAEA having declared Iran being in "direct contravention" of the NPT. I would be interested to see proof of any such statements issued by the IAEA. Thank you.


default

Redlines

by GuiveMirfendereski (not verified) on

First, when everyone is gunning for you, you better have gone underground and not let anyone know what you are up too. It si only amtter of survival, self-preservation. You want to give that up for the sale of principle? Ha! Absolute fidelity to transparency and international commitment is good only when you are not being constantly harassed by others - cheifly US and you know whos. For over 30 years, this regime , whether you like it or not (and I do not), has been looking over its shoulder - because people, internal and external have been gunning for it. Is it any wonder then, that it be what it is?!There is so much mistrust bewtween IRI (and kid not, Iran in genrral) and the West, that even assurances of no-regime-change, or no-invasion, would not erase it. The writing is on the wall -- a nucear Iran will happen, a nuclear-armed Iran has to happen. Then, maybe, on a level of prtiy, people might get enough sense to talk this out as equals. Go atom!


default

Talk Is Cheap!

by Killjoy (not verified) on

I wish these gentlemen would mention only a few of "international rules that the Iranians themselves have formally recognized" and truely observe!

Can we honestly trust a tyranical regime which has been trying to export its revolution to other neighboring countries and has, time and again, called for annihilation of another state?


Fred

crapshoot

by Fred on

Neither author seems to have grasped the problem or don’t want to. To allow a regime to master the science of dual use enrichment while in direct contravention to international treaties that itself is a signatory to clandestinely engaged in the full cycle nuclear activity for nearly twenty years is tantamount to a crapshoot.  Iranians are paying dearly for wrongly believing the promises of this Islamist regime some thirty years ago. The question is does the world trust its way of life with the promises of this messianic Islamist regime not to Atomize and is willing to roll the dice?