By The Diplomat
Iran is almost certain to go for a full enrichment programme. But the West should still talk to it, says Abdullah Baabood.
On the sidelines of the Valdai conference in Malta, The Diplomat speaks with Abdullah Baabood, director of the Gulf Research Centre at Cambridge University, about Iran's nuclear programme.
Do you think sanctions are an effective way of dealing with concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme?
I don’t think sanctions are going to work. For Iran, this is an issue of national pride. I believe the international community should talk with Iran and discuss with it its programme, its intentions, to see how we can all convince it not to follow a military option, and instead help it achieve its stated objective of civilian nuclear power. I don’t think international efforts should stop, but I don’t think sanctions are going to work to force Iran to change course, and they may even bolster the Iranian leadership position. I think dialogue, exchanges of views and probably helping them achieve a civilian programme would probably be more conducive.
So you’d like to see the US engage properly with Iran?
Certainly. Iran hasn’t always been at odds with the United States. Iran during the Shah was a close friend and ally and one part of the US policy in the Gulf. The US was relying on Iran as one of twin pillars, the other pillar being Saudi Arabia. Of course, since the Islamic Revolution, relations haven’t been friendly, but that doesn’t mean they have to continue on this trend.
I think the United States has an interest in talking to Iran, and I believe Iran also has an interest in talking to the US. At the moment there’s a problem of who’s going to start first, but I believe that finally they’ll have to talk and I think that can resolve many issues.
Iran needs to be comfortable as far as the United States’ intentions go, and the regime needs to be recognized as a regional power–and rightly so. Iran, on the other hand, also needs to re-establish its relationship with the international community, and so it can’t continue to be at odds with the United States. They may have issues that they don’t see eye to eye on, but it’s something they can try to iron out. I think in the end, the Iranian-American relationship is going to be conducive to rehabilitating Iran and bringing it back to the international community.
Do you think it’s inevitable that Iran will continue down the nuclear programme path that it’s now on?
I think that it’s inevitable that it will go for the full enrichment programme. They’ll most likely want to achieve at least the capability of producing nuclear arms, which they believe will add a lot to their international status and their position as a regional power. Whether they’ll go all the way toward producing a bomb, though, is questionable. I do hope that they don’t and that the international community will be able to find a solution. But they believe they have a right to enrich and to have their own nuclear technology that’s not dependent on outside powers and outside supply. And as long as they do that under international supervision and scrutiny, and with the intention of it being civilian power, I think the world should be able to work with them.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Mathew
Thanks Dr.Baabood for his most realistic and logical analysis . unfortunately in recent articles in The Diplomat about Iran, one sided and biased analyses was given to readers .specially by Mr.Mir who has the Israeli nationality and his hostility with Iran is obvious.
abdullah baabood
What the international community should not stand for is to keep allowing one state in Middle East (Israel) to act with total disregard to international law refusing to implement numerous Security Council Resolutions, subjecting one and a half million inhabitants of Gaza to inhuman military blockade effectively imprisoning them and not allowing international aid to reach them, systematically grapping Palestinian land making the idea of the globally accepted two-state solution unattainable, occupying and colonising neighbouring Arab states’ land, treating its Arab Palestinian populations as second class citizens and threatening their transfer, waging wars at will against its neighbours, possessing WMDs including nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities refusing international supervision and threatening to use it against its neighbours, rebuffing the Arab Peace Plan which called for a peaceful resolution of the conflict and normalising of relations., etc.
Iran has subjected its facilities to international supervision and has always maintained that its programme is for civilian purpose and the international community should ensure that this is the case through inspections, dialogue and effective diplomacy. No one wants to see further proliferation but as long as one state (Israel) posses military nuclear arsenal and acting above international law and defying international norms other states will have reasons to follow suit. Iran and other Middle Eastern states have always called for a nuclear and WMD free Middle East and the international community should respond to such calls.
As for Iran’s threats against Israel, they are aimed at local consumption and no one with the right mind would believe such threats. Iran is simply not serious and is incapable of carrying out such threats even in the unlikely event it possesses nuclear weapons. The radical right wing government in Israel has also made such threats against its neighbours and it is indeed capable of carrying out its threats. Why no one takes notice? Double standard cries out loud!Does the international community want to sort out the crisis by talking and using international diplomacy or does it just want to create another one?
hass
ANy country with a nuclear program is theoretically “capable” of making nukes — according to the IAEA and Greenpeace that’s 40 countries right now that have the capability, and more than a 100 countries that can develop it relative quickly. Iran has repeatedly offered to place additional restrictions on its nuclear program, in excess of its legal obligations or what other countries have agreed to, that would address even the theoretical capability of making nukes (for example, they have offered to open their nuclear program to joint participation by the West.) These and other potential solutions have been ignored by the US because the entire nuclear issue is PRETEXTUAL just as “WMDs in Iraq” were pretextual. The nuclear issue is NOT the issue and so no amount of IRanian compromises on that issue will ever suffice.
MattC
How can someone sit there saying Iran has a right to nuclear arms whilst its autocratic leader sits there saying Israel should be wiped off the map. Abdullah you are truly mad if you think the world will stand for that.