The United Nations Security Council deadline for
Iran to stop producing enriched uranium expires on 31 August,
and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annnan arrives in Tehran on 2
September. Washington demands UN sanctions against Iran if it
doesn’t stop, and hints at air strikes against Iranian nuclear
installations if sanctions don’t happen or don’t work. Welcome
to the crisis.
The media love a crisis, but this one seriously
lacks credibility. In June John Negroponte, US Director of
National Intelligence, told the BBC that Iran could have a
nuclear bomb ready between 2010 and 2015. But he said "could",
not "will", and only in five or ten years’ time. So why are we
having a crisis this autumn?
The US government’s explanation is that
President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad threatened in May to "wipe Israel
off the map," and that nuclear weapons are the way he plans to
do it. (Any that are left over would presumably be given to
terrorists.) As proof of Iran’s evil ambitions, it points to the
fact, revealed in 2003, that Iran had been concealing some parts
of its so-called peaceful nuclear energy programme from the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for eighteen years.
But there are a number of holes in this
narrative, and the first is that Ahmedinejad never said he
wanted to "wipe Israel off the map." This is a strange and
perhaps deliberate mistranslation of his actual words, a direct
quote from the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the font of all
wisdom in revolutionary Iran, who said some twenty years ago
that "this regime occupying Jerusalem (i.e. Israel) must vanish
from the page of time."
It was a statement about the future (possibly
the quite far future) as ordained by God. It was NOT a threat to
destroy Israel. Attacking Israel has never been Iranian policy,
and a few days later the man who really runs Iran, Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, publicly stated that Iran "will not commit aggression
against any nation." While Ahmadinejad continues to say nasty
things about Israel, he too has explicitly rejected accusations
that Iran plans to attack it.
Of course it doesn’t. Israel has had its
unacknowledged nuclear weapons targeted on Iran since
Ahmadinejad was a small boy. Even if Iran were eventually to get
some too, it could not realistically hope to catch up with
Israel’s hundreds of weapons and sophisticated delivery
vehicles. (Israel can strike Iran with aircraft, with ballistic
missiles, and possibly with Harpoon missiles fired from its
German-built Dolphin-class submarines and refitted to carry
nuclear warheads.)
If Iran doesn’t have a serious nuclear weapons
programme, why did it hide two of its nuclear facilities from
the IAEA for eighteen years? Eighteen years before 2003 was
1987, at the height of Saddam Hussein’s US-backed war against
Iran, with Iraqi missiles falling daily on Iranian cities. They
had conventional explosive warheads, but the Iranians suspected
(rightly, at that time) that Saddam was working on nuclear
weapons as well.
So the Iranians probably decided to revive the
Shah’s old nuclear weapons programme, and hid the plans for the
new facilities to keep them off Saddam’s target list and to
avoid an early confrontation with the IAEA. Then the war ended,
and work on Iranian nuclear weapons stopped too, at the latest
after UN inspectors dismantled Saddam’s nuclear programme in the
early 1990s. We can be sure of this because Iran would have had
nuclear weapons long ago if it had wanted them badly enough: it
doesn’t take over eighteen years for a country with Iran’s
resources.
The undeclared nuclear facilities remained
secret because it was embarrassing to admit that Iran had
concealed them, but no great effort went into finishing them.
(In fact, President Ahmadinejad finally opened one of them, the
heavy water facility at Arak, only this month.) But the fact
that Iran hid them for so long is the only reason that anybody
has for doubting the legitimacy of its current actions, since it
is quite legal for a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty to develop the technologies and facilities for enriching
nuclear fuels for power plants.
Iran probably does now intend to work steadily
towards a "threshold" nuclear capability (the ability to break
out of the NPT and build nuclear weapons very rapidly if
necessary) because it is surrounded by nuclear weapons powers:
India and Pakistan to the east, the Russians to the north,
Israel to the west, and US forces on both its western and
eastern borders in Iraq and Afghanistan. But a threshold nuclear
capability is still perfectly legal, and many countries that
have signed the NPT have achieved it already.
Iran’s actions are not worth a real crisis, and
the situation is certainly not very urgent. Iran’s reply to the
Security Council offered further negotiations on the issue,
though it will not agree to stop enriching uranium as a
precondition for talks. In these circumstances, neither Russia
or China, two veto-holding powers, will vote to impose serious
sanctions on Iran, nor will a number of the non-permanent
members of the Security Council. So if the Bush administration
truly believes that this is important and urgent, it will have
to act alone and outside the law.
Would it really do such a foolish thing again after the Iraq
fiasco? Unfortunately, it might.