Iran Draws a Line In the Sand

Iran is fresh from the victory of Hizbullah in Lebanon. And they are positioning to divide the UN Security Council on sanctions for it's nuclear program. However, the situation is very complex. WaPo would have us believe the West will interpret the position Iran is taking to avoid immediate suspension of enrichment of uranium as unacceptable.

Iran's semi-official news agency reported today that Tehran has "rejected suspension of its nuclear activities" as demanded by the United Nations Security Council but has proposed a "new formula for resolving the issue through talks."


[...]Diplomats in Washington, Tehran and European capitals had said yesterday that the Iranian government is willing to enter negotiations and to consider a freeze of the program, but it will not accept a freeze as a precondition for the talks.


Earlier this month, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution giving Iran 30 days to stop the program or face the threat of sanctions. U.S. officials have said they would push for strong financial sanctions against the Tehran government if it does not cooperate and that they expect support from Europe.


[...]President Bush said yesterday that he would wait for the formal reply, but, anticipating the rejection, he urged the United Nations to respond forcefully. "There must be consequences if people thumb their nose at the United Nations Security Council, and we will work with people in the Security Council to achieve that objective," he said. But even some of Washington's closest allies worried yesterday that the effort was becoming more difficult, complicated by the recent fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, which is backed financially and militarily by Iran. "The Iranians are extremely confident following the outcome of the Israel conflict," said one senior European official, who agreed to discuss sensitive details in the matter on the condition of anonymity. "Their Syria-Iran-Hezbollah axis has gone from minority player to lionized hero of the Arab street."


A U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said senior U.S., French, German and British diplomats agreed during a conference call yesterday to press for sanctions. Even before fighting broke out in Lebanon, many Security Council members seemed skittish about imposing financial measures against a major oil exporter.

The WaPo article could have been cued by White House writers. The NY Times seems to take a more realistic pose, considering the linchpin role of China and Russia on the Security Council.
New York Times

Western diplomats in Tehran said the Iranian reply was lengthy, detailed and would take some time to analyze. They said they were ordered by their home capitals as well as officials with the European Union to keep the details secret. But in the days running up to Iran’s self-imposed deadline to respond to the incentives package, Western diplomats in Tehran said they expected the Iranian response would seek to keep negotiations going, to talk about suspending uranium enrichment rather than actually suspending it. And they predicted that such a strategy would be rejected by the West.


[...]Nasser Hadian, a political science professor at Tehran University, said that if the proposal offers concrete details to ensure that Iran does not divert nuclear material to a weapons program, it is possible that Iran will win some more support from Russia and China. The measures may include intrusive inspections and real-time monitoring of the nuclear facilities with cameras.


[...]But the nuclear issue has also been turned into an important domestic issue, one that has had profound political implications here in Iran. [...]In June 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president, and shortly after taking office he transformed the issue into a matter of national pride. President Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said that peaceful nuclear energy is Iran’s “inalienable right,” and then in defiance of the West in April he announced that Iran had already enriched uranium and would never stop.


The nuclear issue has galvanized the Iranian government, which has been disdainful of the former reformist administration of Mr. Khatami and has slowly moved to consolidate power while promoting a populist, nationalist political ideology, political analysts and diplomats in Tehran said.


[...]The nuclear dispute with the West has helped empower a new administration that trumpets the slogans of the Iranian revolution while cracking down on political descent. The recent war in Lebanon and Hezbollah’s strong showing against Israel has served to further embolden the most radical elements of the Iranian leadership while the United States is bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq.


“If sanctions are imposed, radical forces will become very happy,” said Hamidreza Jalaipour, a sociologist in Tehran and former government official. “Because no one can breathe when there is the threat of war. Whoever says anything, he will be accused of being a traitor. Intellectuals and wise forces will prefer to remain silent.”

Tehran mullahs will milk this negotiation for everything it can get, even if eventually it may be likely they will compromise. Although the Mullahs would benefit from a massive US airstrike on Iran, the economic consequences would weaken it's role as a regional player with new found influence across the Middle East. And the longer the impasse continues, the more they benefit from the premium price of oil.