THE TOUCHSTONE

The international community has begun to suggest again that the Iran issue might bring about rapprochement between Russia and the United States.  The mass media have already spread reports that resolving the Iran problem will completely eliminate the necessity for the deployment of components of the US missile defence system in Europe, in other words, the United States might suspend plans to establish a third positioning area in Eastern Europe if Russia agrees to pressure Iran into suspension of its nuclear programme.  The New York Times reported that Obama's letter to Medvedev conveyed precisely this proposal.  The Russian newspaper Kommersant reported the same.

Russia continues to consider the deployment of components of the US missile defence system in the Czech Republic and Poland a threat to its national security.  "As for the missile defence system, we have already said publicly more than once and explained at a professional and expert level, including via channels of communication with our US partners that we are deeply convinced that the programme has nothing to do with the Iranian nuclear programme, but it has everything to do with strategic stability, strategic parity and the strategic arsenal of the Russian Federation," Sergey Lavrov said.  However, the Americans say that their sole objective in Europe is defence against rogue countries: Iran and North Korea.  As a result, it does indeed seem plausible that if the Iranian nuclear programme ends, the third positioning area of the US missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic will also become redundant.  However, Moscow and Washington have disclaimed association with this formula for now.  Both Medvedev and Obama admit that they are engaged in diplomatic correspondence, but categorically reject any link between the missile defence programme and Iran.  "If you talk about any kind of swap or exchange, I can tell you that the issue has not been raised in this manner, it is unproductive," Medvedev said.  Obama noted for his part that journalists had misunderstood him:  in reality, he had only offered Russia an "open dialogue".  Moscow reacted by stating that it is ready to discuss "only truly constructive proposals."

Hefty dossier

In the mean time, the Iranian dossier is growing thicker:  the country is still suspected of planning to design a nuclear bomb under the guise of a peaceful nuclear programme, and of supporting terrorism.  Western countries grew more concerned after Iran launched its first satellite into orbit in early February.  Experts believe that this is indirect evidence that Iranians have the capability to deliver a nuclear charge at long range.  Furthermore, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that, on 8 March, the Iranian English-language channel Press TV announced that Iran had conducted a test of a new long-range missile.

Iran stoically denies all these accusations.  As Iranian Vice President Golamreza Agazada, head of Iran's Nuclear Energy Organi-zation said, Iran remains a country which possesses peaceful nuclear technology, regardless of whether the West wants this or not.

As for how close Tehran is to creating weapons of mass destruction, there are different opinions and, incidentally, this remains one of the reasons for the lack of coordination in the actions of the international community against Iran.  For example, US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen said on CNN that Iran is effectively ready to create nuclear weapons.  The admiral's press secretary stressed that Mullen meant the possession by Iran of nuclear fuel which has to be enriched in order for a nuclear weapon to be manufactured.  Mullen is certain that "if Iran develops nuclear weapons, this will be very bad for the region and for the world."  Earlier, the admiral had said at a news briefing for foreign journalists in Washington that the Barack Obama administration did not rule out the possibility of using armed force to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions, although a strong-arm scenario would be chosen only if no other choice remai-ned.  Earlier, US experts had spoken about Iran's closeness to the creation of a nuclear weapon.

In the mean time, Defence Secretary Robert Gates effectively refuted Mullen's statement on NBC when he said that Iran had not yet accumulated the nuclear potential sufficient to create a nuclear bomb.  "They do not have the reserves yet, and they are not close to creating a weapon at this stage, so we still have time," Gates said, admitting at the same time that the nuclear threat from Iran is an increasingly important problem.  Gates stressed that, at the moment, it is a matter of whether or not Europe and the United States will be able to tighten sanctions against Iran and thereby make the price the Iranians pay for their nuclear ambitions excessive.  At the same time, the Pentagon chief is certain that the door should remain open to Tehran, in case it wants to talk to the Europeans or Americans.

On 20 February 2009, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) admitted in its latest report that Iran has created sufficient reserves of low-enriched uranium to manufacture one nuclear bomb (at the nuclear centre in Natanza) and that earlier the country's activity in this field had been underestimated.  The agency reported that, by mid-November 2008, Iran already had 839 kilograms of enriched uranium and, by late-January 2009, an additional 171 kilograms had been produced.  In November 2008, Iran had 3,800 enrichment centrifuges, and an extra 164 had been put into operation after that.  At the same time, IAEA specialists say that Iran still does not have the equipment to produce high-enriched uranium.  IAEA General Director Mohamed El-Baradei said that the agency finds it difficult to produce unambiguous answers because of Tehran's continuing refusal to cooperate on issues which raise concern.

Valuable trump card

As a result, as Hillary Clinton pointed out, Washington "considers potential steps to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by Iran" and "will do its best to prevent Tehran from supporting terrorist organizations".  For now, however, sanctions against Iran "will continue". The United States also said that it intends to cooperate with Russia on the missile defence issue because the system is being created to defend Europe and North America against rogue states, first and foremost against Iran.

Russia seems to be of the same opinion.  At the Disarmament Conference in Geneva, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Russia offers a "constructive alternative to unilateral plans; in particular, combining the efforts of all states interested in countering potential missile threats."

It is doubtful, however, that Russia and the United States will manage to agree, especially on the Iran issue.  For Moscow, relations with Tehran are a trump card of sorts in its geopolitical "games" with the West.  And resistance to the introduction of more serious sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council, the construction of the nuclear power station in Bushehr, and reports about talks between Tehran and Moscow on S-300 Russian air defence missile systems and the prospects of signing other armaments contracts - all these are elements of the same "game."  For example, as the Kommersant newspaper wrote, Russia suspended implementation of the contract to transfer Russian S-300 systems to Iran, because this might "hinder the dialogue which Moscow had begun with the new US Administration."  In addition, the Kremlin realizes very well that if the United States and the EU normalize relations with Iran, they will immediately try to involve Tehran in Western energy projects, which Russia cannot afford to allow.  As American Enterprise Institute expert on Russia, Leon Aron, told USA Today, the existence of the Iranian nuclear problem is in Russia's interests because, in addition to the direct economic benefit from contracts to construct the nuclear power station in Bushehr, the role of mediator reinforces Moscow's belief that it is a superpower.  The Russian authorities also need confrontation with the West, in the role of Iran's "defender", to consolidate their own domestic political position, which has been affected adversely by the financial crisis.  Indeed, Moscow is unwilling to part with its ambitions, despite the financial and economic crisis.  "The West now views Russia as a partner to be reckoned with.  Russia will not move an inch from its principled position," this was how Russia's permanent envoy to NATO, Dmitriy Rogozin, commented on the decision of the North Atlantic Alliance to resume political dialogue with Moscow.

For its part, the United States, too, is unlikely to give up its plans for the missile defence system, which envisage the creation of a system of so-called no-retaliation nuclear strike.  In addition, Washington has clear agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic.  Polish President Lech Kaczynski has already said that the United States' refusal to deploy components of the missile defence system in Poland would "certainly not constitute a friendly gesture" toward Warsaw.  In the Polish President's opinion, the "missile defence system is incredibly important for Poland, not from the point of view of security, but for different, political, reasons".  Forbes wrote that the Obama administration is ready to insult its two closest NATO allies, Poland and the Czech Republic, and to jeopardize their safety, in exchange for Russia's support on the Iran problem.  If this happens, Poland and the Czech Republic will willy-nilly feel again that they are either Russian satellites or hostages of US-Russian relations.

So it is quite likely that reports that the United States could abandon their plan to deploy the missile defence system in Eastern Europe in return for Russian assistance in regulating the Iranian nuclear programme crisis are simply an acid test of sorts.  The sides want to understand the real nature of the "game" and at the same time "probe" readiness for dialogue.

This is especially the case as the United States might not even need Russia's help to deal with the Iran problem.  In contrast to former President George Bush and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, incumbent US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton express their readiness to open a dialogue with Iran to tackle its nuclear problem and establish bilateral relations.  There have been no diplomatic ties between the two states since 1979, when the Islamic Revolution took place in Iran.

Washington expects that this summer's presidential election in the Islamic Republic of Iran will bring change in the form of moderate reformer Mohammed Khatami, and Washington will be able to establish a dialogue with Tehran by itself.

Afghanistan might play an important role here, as the Barack Obama administration has made normalizing the situation there one of its priorities.  On 8 March, Iranian Cabinet Secretary Golam Hoseyn Elham said at a news briefing that the United States and the international community cannot restore security and order in neighbouring Afghanistan without Iran.  This statement, to be sure, was made soon after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that Iran might be invited to a conference on Afghanistan.  Washington and Tehran are indeed interested in stability and security in Afghanistan...