Last Chance for Diplomacy

Wherein Jacques Chirac comes off sounding kinda smart

from Olivier Guitta at the Middle East Times via Counterterrorism Blog

Last Chance for Diplomacy
By OLIVIER GUITTA (Middle East Times)
Published: February 02, 2009


This coming week, for an umpteenth time the P-5 plus one –the U.N. permanent five members plus Germany - will meet to talk about Iran and try to adopt a common position. It will be the first time the U.S. Barack Obama administration will take part in the discussions. With an affirmed will of breaking from the precedent administration, the Obama team has a lot at stake. At this point, with Iran inching so much closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon, the next few weeks might be the last chance for a diplomatic solution.

Obama's opening to the Tehran regime has been received quite coldly. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad replied by demanding apologies for the crimes the United States has allegedly committed. He also asked for the U.S. withdrawal from both Iraq and Afghanistan. But that is not all, when it comes to the core issue of Iran's military nuclear program, Aliakbar Javanfekr, a senior aide to Ahmadinejad, stated that Iran had no intention of stopping it.

That sounds pretty definitive. A non-starter, really. Interestingly, the White House muscled up its tone when it warned Iran that military action is still one of the options on the table. But at the same time the very dovish German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier reiterated his view that only diplomacy should be used, therefore removing a large stick from the negotiating table. Indeed, if Iran thinks there will be no major repercussions for defying the international community, then what incentive has Iran to stop?

And that is the crux of the matter: the international community has very different views about how to tackle the Iranian issue. Russia and China are more than lenient with Iran, to say the least, and are going to block real hard sanctions on Tehran one way or another.

At this point it is really "divided we stand," and the Iranians could not be happier. Furthermore, the past six years negotiating with Iran have led nowhere except buying time for Tehran. Former French President Jacques Chirac explained how pointless it is to discuss with the mullahs, "These people don't think like us, we will always have problems understanding each other: when one thinks that an agreement has been reached, then boom they will make you start negotiating from scratch with a new team. They always try to lead you astray."

Maybe that's why France and the United Kingdom have been very active in the past months to increase the pressure on Tehran by working on having the European Union adopt tougher sanctions on Iran. But the 27 members of the EU are divided at this time. Spain, Greece and Cyprus want to continue dialogue without further sanctions. Sweden wants to leave the sanctions process to the United Nations. Austria and Luxembourg are totally against upsetting their Iranian trading partner, especially since Austrian oil firm OMV has a large contract with Iran and Luxembourg financial institutions are not favorable of dumping their Iran business.

When it comes to Germany the Chancellor Angela Merkel's camp is for new sanctions while foreign minister Steinmeier is against.

The French and British plan is to target Iran's energy and banking sector. It consists in curtailing European businesses to provide equipment for Iran's oil industry, therefore choking 85 percent of Iran's revenues. Also, they want the EU to ban the two Iranian banks - Saderat and Melli - that have already been sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury. Interestingly France, the United Kingdom and Italy have since December been advising companies in the banking, insurance and energy sector to stop contracting with Tehran.

But one thing that the 27 agreed on, was announced last week: the largest anti-mullah Iranian group, the Mojahedin-e-Khalq, was removed from the EU terrorist list. That sends a message loud and clear to Tehran. Will the United States follow suit? That remains to be seen.

Actually, some Europeans are concerned that they are strongly pushing for sanctions while they have no idea about Washington's new intentions. Also European diplomats are concerned that they might be left at the station and that Washington might decide to negotiate directly with Tehran.

Several credible reports are pointing to Iran's possibly going nuclear this year. That means the international community has to find quickly ways to get Iran to give in.

A sanctions route that specifically targets energy is the most straightforward and efficient option. But if not, why not follow the French example?

After France got proof of Iran's involvement, through its proxy Hezbollah, in the wave of terror bombings in France in 1985-1986, plus the kidnapping of its citizens in Lebanon, France played hardball. Then president Chirac decided to humiliate Tehran: "Like all peoples, Iranians hate losing face. They have their dignity. So if you treat them like chimpanzees…" The best method according to Chirac was to cut off diplomatic relations. "As long as you will behave like animals, we will not have diplomatic relations with you." France did just that in 1987 and restored them in mid-1988 only after the last French hostages in Lebanon were freed.

It looks like Tehran could not bear its new image as a pariah on the international scene. Regaining its honor enticed Iran to compromise on some aspects. Maybe if some major countries were just threatening Iran of cutting diplomatic relations then possibly an agreement could be reached.

Lessons need to be learned from the past negotiations with Iran: carrots do not work. So since Israel cannot afford a nuclear Iran and will not sit on her hands, the world has to come up with bigger sticks.

Interestingly enough, when former U.S. President George W. Bush asked Chirac after Sept. 11, 2001 what he thought about a rapprochement with Iran, Chirac replied, "Don't even think about it. These people are lunatics! Don't think there are moderates with whom you can negotiate."

That's advice from the former president of France that Obama might want to consider.