The focus on Iran's nuclear-power programme by officials in Washington and diplomats of the European Union trio of France, Germany and Britian (the "EU3") has been consistent and longstanding. A repeated charge has been made that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons under the cover of civil nuclear research.
The United States and the European Union (familiarly combined as "the west" in Iranian literature) argue that Iran's nuclear programme will accelerate the arms race in the middle east and damage the fragile stability of the region. They also believe that the acquisition of nuclear power by Iran will pave the way for non-state terrorist actors to endanger the west's interests across the world.
The west seizes on every development in Iran from Iran's decision to restart its uranium-enrichment research to the speeches of Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regarding Israel to convince other states in the international community that their viewpoint is founded on reality.
Also in openDemocracy on Iran, Europe, and the United States, dont miss Paul Rogerss weekly global security column. Recent highlights include:
"Targeting Iran"
(July 2005)
"Iran and the United States: a clash of perceptions"
(November 2005)
"Iran in Israels firing-range"
(December 2005)
"The United States, nuclear weapons, and Iran" (January 2006)
If you find this material valuable please consider supporting openDemocracy by sending us a donation so that we can continue our work for democratic dialogue
Perhaps the only way to improve this difficult situation is to try to see the issues from an Iranian perspective. If we do so, the first word that comes to many Iranians' minds is "injustice". This term can be widely heard in Iranian official statements and media, and even from members of the public, regarding the west's behaviour towards Iran. This perspective too has some relevant facts to draw on:
- Israel started its own nuclear programme in the early 1950s and is now believed to have 100-200 nuclear weapons and an array of medium-range missiles that could deliver them.
- Iran has signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) while Israel has not.
- Iran has accepted the NPT protocol on more precise and unannounced monitoring by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, yet no IAEA monitoring camera has inspected even one minute of Israels nuclear activities.
- Iran has offered to enter into partnerships with foreign companies to provide additional assurances that its uranium enrichment is devoted solely to civilian purposes (recall that uranium enrichment for Iran's reactors is currently at levels of 3%-5%, while weapons require levels of 90%).
- Israeli officials have publicly threatened to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, even though they are still being constructed, yet such remarks have not received the vast condemnation of the Iranian president's first speech about Israel (and Israel, moreover, attacked the Iraqi nuclear plant at Osiraq in 1981).
- No Iranian, at least during the last ten years, has engaged in any terrorist attack against US national interests around the world so accusing Iran of attempting to endanger US interests is at best unproven.
- Iran is now a close neighbour of the United States; tens of thousands of US troops are just across Iran's western and eastern borders, in Iraq, Pakistan, and the Persian Gulf (its military bases in countries to the north of Iran should also be considered). Tehran's officials are, naturally, aware of this critical issue.
- Iran wants and needs a stable Iraq, a stable Afghanistan and a stable region. Most of the damage to Iran's territory and interests have been the result of instability inside neighbouring states from the Saddam-initiated war (1980-88) to trade via Afghanistan. The Islamic Republic of Iran would benefit from a stabilised Afghanistan and Iraq.
- Iran's officials have several times announced a "détente policy" as its priority; improved relations with the country's southern neighbors in recent years is just one result. Iran has shown that it needs to live in a region which is calm and free of tension.
Anyone who wants to analyse Iranian foreign policy should consider these facts. Iran's possession of a nuclear bomb to threaten the US or its allies would not advance any of Irans strategic goals. It's true that the national interests of the Islamic republic and of the United States differ in some respects, but if Iran was recognised as an important regional actor and was treated as such this would lessen any resulting tensions.
Stability in Iraq and Afghanistan are two clear examples of areas where American and Iranian interests coincide; without Irans cooperation, the USs troubles in these countries increase. Meanwhile, denying Iran its legitimate concerns in the Persian Gulf, central Asia and the southern Caucasus will always be counterproductive. The way out of the current crisis is to listen to Iran.