Iran Should Be More Earnest than Ever

In his last week visit to Brazil, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman asked the South American state to use its growing ties with Iran to help thwart Iran’s nuclear efforts. On Sunday, Hillary Clinton talked of a possible defense umbrella aimed to protect Middle East Arab states from alleged Iranian nuclear threat. In Jerusalem, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates tried to soothe Israelis’ growing impatience saying that President Obama was hopeful that Iran would accept the offer of talks by late September. Iranian Diplomacy has interview Davoud Hermidas Bavand, political analyst, to discuss different aspects of Iran’s nuclear program and possible solutions:

In his Middle East visit, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has once again addressed Iran’s nuclear program. In the meantime, the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has talked of a new nuclear package Iran is preparing. What is the likely content of this package? And can it provide a solution to the existing problems?

Well it may be similar to the previous package which discussed general topics such as international peace and security and war against terrorism but did not pertain to details. That is, main topics are addressed but with no specific solution, which naturally should be set forth. There are talks on December and September timetables.

Meanwhile, Israel claims that it’s ready for military action while Americans seem to by trying to stop them to see what comes out of the September negotiations. I believe that with Iran’s current situation, both parties need to retreat from their initial stance. There are a number of mechanisms which could lead to solution of the problem such as a forming a multinational consortium for uranium enrichment or freeze for freeze. And even new solutions seem to have been developed. At any rate, I think that the issue has become more serious now and both parties are expected to reach a conclusion considering the existing realities.

Initially, Obama thought that he could resolve the nuclear dispute through direct talks with Iran. But since Obama’s presidency event have happened which put multilateral talks back on the table. Some opportunities have been lost due to pressures from the Congress, Republicans, public opinion and powerful lobbies inside the United States and Obama seems to have retracted from his initial goals.

I think this time the Islamic Republic must act more seriously. From West’s viewpoint, all these deferrals and unfocused proposals are not useful. This is an opportunity for Iran to be earnest. Otherwise we will face tougher sanctions and there is also the looming threat of Israel which we don’t know how serious it is.

Do you agree that the United States and Israel have differences on several issues including Iran’s nuclear program?

There is no doubt that they disagree over the Palestinian issue. On Iran’s nuclear program, their difference is a matter of time. Israel wants things to become clear quickly and its apparently preparing for a military strike. I think the reason Israelis are talking constantly about an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is to provoke U.S. to stop them and then use this as leverage to decrease U.S. pressure on settlement construction. It’s more like a tactical move.

In his South American tour, Israeli FM Avigdor Lieberman asked Brazil to convince Iran to stop its nuclear program. Isn’t this an Israeli policy shift?

I think Lieberman’s attempts to mobilize Latin American countries against Iran’s nuclear program were not so much successful. Lieberman of course tried to show that gaining support against Iran’s nuclear drive and persuading Brazil to be the middleman was only a part of his agenda in diplomatic visits to Latin America. Of course Turkey can be a better mediator.

Why did Lieberman choose Brazil?

Brazil is different from other Latin American countries. It has not yet been afflicted with populist movements. It’s a stable country and a regional power which will join the G8 group in near future. It is also a nominee for permanent membership in UN Security Council. And economically, it’s far more powerful than other Latin American countries. It’s a large country with a large population. And the Brazilian president, though from a blue-collar background, is not an idealist, thus gaining respect and credit. If Lieberman is asking Brazil, it’s because of its weight and influence.

Could Brazil have impact on countries such as Venezuela?

Sure. Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia and Nicaragua are countries under populist rule. Therefore Israel can not engage directly with them and ask them to intervene. Brazil is a much more influential country. Of course, even if Brazil agrees to step in, we have to wait and see if it can be successful. However, as I said, Israel is pretending that Iran’s nuclear program was only a part of its plan for the South American tour.

The U.S. Secretary of State has also talked of a defense umbrella for Persian Gulf Arab states. How is that going to affect Iran?

The criticized defense umbrella implies that in response to Iran’s access to nuclear weapon, regional states will go under a protective shelter provided by the United States. The question here is that will it be a nuclear umbrella similar to the one deployed for NATO members, or it is just bilateral and multilateral treaties signed with GCC members. If Iran goes nuclear then the United States will provide Arab states with a nuclear umbrella. Otherwise, it would be just a conventional security agreement which is already existent. Currently, U.S. has military bases in Qatar, Bahrain and Oman and its fleet patrol in the Persian Gulf. A new treaty would commit the United States to use these bases to defend the hosting country.