The Race for Iran

Stratfor‘s George Friedman on gasoline sanctions:

No one expects Russia or China (or even many of the European states) to fully comply with a sanctions regime on gasoline. Even if they did, no one expects the flow of gasoline to be decisively cut off. There will be too many people prepared to take the risk of smuggling gasoline to Iran for that to happen. Even if the U.S. blockaded Iranian ports, the Caucasus and Central Asia are far too disorderly and the monetary rewards of smuggling are too great of an incentive to make the gasoline sanctions effective. Additionally, the imposition of sanctions will both rally the population to the regime as well as provide justification for an intense crackdown. The probability of sanctions forcing policy changes or regime change in Iran is slim.

You can read the entire article here.

– Ben Katcher

Later this week, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors will meet in Vienna, with Iran’s nuclear program at the top of the agenda. Of course, the Board will discuss the IAEA’s recent inspections of Iran’s newly declared enrichment facility near Qom, as well as the Iranian response to outgoing director general Mohammed ElBaradei’s proposal for refueling the Tehran Research Reactor. But, as has been the case since 2006, discussions of Iranian matters in Vienna will take place under the cloud of three United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on the Islamic Republic to stop all activities related to uranium enrichment. In retrospect, the Board’s decision to refer the Iranian file to the Security Council has hardly facilitated a negotiated solution to the issue; rather, referral to the Security Council—and the Council’s subsequent insistence on suspension—has made it more difficult to reach a solution through thoughtful diplomacy.

Read the full post »

On Friday, I linked to a report in The Economist that General Raymond Odierno and Ambassador Christopher Hill, the United States’ two most senior officials in Iraq, met with General Qassem Suleimani, who commands the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force.

For the record, the CENTCOM Public Affairs office e-mailed me to deny that the meeting took place.

I don’t know whether the meeting took place or not – but it should have. The United States’ interests in Iraq are served by engaging all of the regional stakeholders, including Iran.

– Ben Katcher

Representatives from the five security council countries and Germany met today in Brussels to discuss the fact that the Islamic Republic has not accepted the P5+1 offer to ship its uranium out of the country for enrichment.

Meanwhile, President Obama is talking about sanctions and “consequences”.

Tony Karon provides an excellent analysis of the state of play in the negotiations. His central point – that neither Russia nor China will go along with meaningful sanctions – is spot on.

From the article:

President Barack Obama spent much of his time in Asia warning Iran that his patience for nuclear diplomacy is wearing thin. “Iran has taken weeks now and has not shown its willingness to say yes to this proposal,” Obama said Thursday in Seoul, referring to a deal under which Iran would export the bulk of its stock of enriched uranium to Russia for conversion into reactor fuel. “And so, as a consequence we have begun discussions with our international partners about the importance of having consequences.”

But Friday’s meeting in Brussels between representatives of the group of Western powers, Russia and China that has been negotiating with Iran produced little indication that new sanctions may be imminent if Iran continue to prevaricate. The difficulty facing Washington in mustering support for ratcheting up pressure on Iran was already clear in Thursday’s statement by a Russian foreign ministry official that, “As far as we know, there has been no final official answer from Tehran”, and that “there is currently no discussion on working out additional sanctions against Iran.” And Friday’s Brussels meeting simply reaffirmed disappointment in Iran’s failure to embrace the deal thus far, but reiterated the commitment of the Western powers, Russia and China to continue to engage in dialogue with Tehran.

You can read the entire article here.

The bottom line is that if “engagement” is going to be successful, it is going to require a much more significant commitment from the Obama administration. No one said strategic rapprochement was going to be easy, but we did say that it is the United States’ only viable option.

Does the Obama administration really think that “sanctions” or “threats of sanctions” can lead to an outcome that promotes U.S. interests?

– Ben Katcher

The Economist reports that General Raymond Odierno and Ambassador Christopher Hill, the United States’ two most senior officials in Iraq, met with General Qassem Suleimani, who commands the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, to discuss Iraqi politics.

This meeting underscores the important role that Iran continues to play in Iraq – a role that is only likely to increase as American troops leave the country.

Ensuring Iraq’s stability is one of the many reasons that it is so important that the Obama administration engage in comprehensive strategic negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

– Ben Katcher