Saturday, June 19, 2010

West’s shifting of the goalpost on Iran

And as coming weeks will unfold, getting the P-5 to see a common ground on a considerably diluted and deficient draft resolution in UNSC is far easier than managing the mandatory nine assenting votes to pass it. In all probability, even though Washington is able to hammer in new rounds of sanctions through an extremely fractured and divided Security Council, the initiative will profoundly damage its credibility. By now, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has already started questioning the UNSC’s “credibility” to resolve Iranian impasse. And if the US torpedoes the TRR deal before giving it a chance, as it will do in all probability, expect Turkey and Brazil to dent UNSC’s legitimacy with a generous help from “non-aligned” nations. As it happens, NAM is not dead as of yet.

So, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s announcement of the text of new draft of sanctions before even officially going through the nitty-gritty of the TRR deal reflects extensive disrespect, to say the least, for Brazilian and Turkish diplomatic pains. But what has the US achieved? Merely a watered down text.

To bring the Russians and the Chinese on the table, the US had to drop any idea of a prohibition on fresh ventures or other ideas that could have hampered Iran’s capability to generate and export hydrocarbons.

Secondly, Washington, on the insistence of Jewish lobbies, had asked for a wide-ranging, all-inclusive stoppage on arms sales to Iran, but it will have to be content with restrictions on sales of a few definite types of weaponries. It had also asked for a complete embargo on fiscal transactions with the Revolutionary Guards and its subsidiary entities. However, it settled for the enforcement of earlier endorsed asset freeze and movement curb to specific elements from Guards’ ranks.

Clearly, with a masterstroke, Turkey and Brazil have changed the rules of the engagement in particular and the game in general. Rami Khouri, a Middle East expert based in Beirut sums it up well. “Iran and Turkey symbolise something new and potentially momentous in the region: Muslim-majority nations that are politically poised and have guts to stand up to the US and Israel. Washington and Tel Aviv stay perplexed on how to deal with such a phenomenon.”

Now, a deservingly short comment on Indian foreign policy. While we harp on the same string of being the next superpower, Turkey and Brazil, political non-entities till not very long ago, stole the show from under our nose. In Tehran, our position as a lackey Third World nation was reinforced. That Ali Ardashir Larijani gave 20 minutes to S M Krishna after literal pleadings reflects our stature in the region.

Given the hyperbole our media and MEA indulge in, it should have been India that brokered the deal. Krishna, on his part, later came up with obtuse-sounding and ad nauseam repeated maxim of every-nation-has-the-right-to-see-its-interests, but he, his entourage, and his maxim all appeared to be completely out of sync and out of place.

It is not surprising that Iranian experts consider India’s recent overtures to Iran as merely a bargain-chip for India’s relation vis-à-vis America. Krishna’s, probably insincere, reaction got a second page mention in Tehran Times and, god forbid, third page snippets in Iran Daily. That explains everything.

For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source :
IIPM Editorial, 2009


An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Read these article :-

No comments: