THE European Union (EU)'s imposition, last week, of a phased oil embargo on Iran over the latter's nuclear programme marked a climax in a series of diplomatic pressure on Iran by Western countries. The offensive is aimed at making Iran to abandon its nuclear development programme which the country claimed is meant to generate electricity. Last December the U.S. Senate voted on a sanction against Iranian Central Bank, with clauses punishing countries with U.S. correspondent banks, over future transactions with Iran against the backdrop of extant United Nations sanctions. Prior to these new sanctions, the UN Security Council had adopted six resolutions in response to Iran's nuclear programme. They included the December 2006 Resolution 1737, Resolution 1747 of March 2007 and Resolution 1803 of March 2008, which imposed incremental sanctions on Iranian personnel and bodies thought to have connection with Iran's nuclear programmes in order to pressure Iran to halt its uranium enrichment activities.Iran on its part has threatened to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, a passage for a third of oil import from the Gulf, amidst threats of pre-emptive military strikes from Israel and its Western allies. In a symbolic demonstration of what might be expected in the event of a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S., French and British naval forces recently serenaded the strait. This latest twist in the diplomatic row over Iran's nuclear programme will not bode well for the prevailing international environment. In the West, there are dire economic crises. The United States and its European allies are in the middle of economic meltdown. A sizeable number of the Euro zone countries have witnessed popular protest over economic hardship and are currently slammed with poor credit rating. Surely this is the wrong time to precipitate an international crisis.While the U.S. strident tone is understandable in the context of an election year, and Iran's bellicosity in the face of geopolitical relations is well advertised, both of them should however exercise caution not to plunge the world into a major military crisis, more so when diplomacy has not been exhausted in the circumstance. Rather, what has been lacking is honesty in the negotiation process. There have been many proposals on how to resolve the nuclear energy problem between Iran and the West. One is the proposal by P5+1 which includes the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany. It focuses on Iran's suspension of enrichment-related and reprocessing activities; the establishment of a mechanism to review this moratorium; Iran's resumption of the Additional Protocol on nuclear safeguards; the provision of state-of-the-art light water reactors to Iran through joint projects, along with nuclear fuel guarantees and a five-year buffer stock of fuel. The proposals also include suspension of the discussion of Iran's nuclear programme in the UN Security Council; cooperation on civil aviation, telecommunications, high-technology, and agriculture, and other areas, between the United States, EU and Iran.On the other hand, there is the Brazil and Turkey's proposal otherwise known as the Tehran Declaration. This recognises the right of all State Parties to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities). They reached an understanding with Iran that would allow it to transfer 1,200 kilogrammes of Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) to be held in escrow in Turkey within one month. Pending their approval of the Tehran Declaration, the IAEA, France, Russia, and the United States (the Vienna Group) would agree to provide 120 kilogrammes of 20%-enriched uranium fuel to Iran within one year and upon failure to fulfill the terms by the Vienna Group, Turkey would transfer the LEU back to Iran for legal possession.The failure of these proposals among others has contributed to controvert the fact that what is at stake is indeed guarantees that Iran's bid for nuclear development would be put to transparent and peaceful purposes instead of development of weapons.Both the West and Iran should get off the precipice and resume dialogue in order to resolve the escalating stand-off. Oil embargo, sanctions and threats of military blockade are not enough to resolve this conflict but more diplomacy. It is heartening to know that the Iranian leadership is disposed to negotiation; and EU spokesperson has also said the embargo is meant to nudge Iran into the negotiation table. Talks are therefore possible and this could be achieved by third party intervention and regional diplomacy rather than provocative sanctions.
Click here to read full news..
