NUCLEAR PAINS

Iran's nuclear program became one of the main topics of the video message of the country’s new president Ibrahim Raisi to the delegates of the 76th session of the UN General Assembly. Referring to the recent negotiations in Vienna with the parties to the nuclear agreement, Raisi demanded the world community to recognise in accordance with international norms his country's right to implement a nuclear program. He demanded that all parties remain committed to the norms of international laws and the previously adopted nuclear agreement.

He recalled that Iran had no intention to create nuclear weapons and there was no place for such weapons in Iran’s defense doctrine and containment policy. Raisi added that this approach was based on a religious decree by Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Big risks

However, the Iranian president's statements are unlikely to reduce the level of tension around Iran's nuclear program. Its opponents have repeatedly warned about the dangers of this program and continue to do so to this day. This is also stated in the latest report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published in early September. On September 13, commenting on the latest report of the agency, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi announced the presence of secret nuclear facilities in Iran. He expressed concern that the location of these objects was still unknown.

Immediately after Grossi’s statement, Iran's permanent representative to the UN and one of the participants in the Vienna negotiation process, Kazim Garib-Abadi, denied Grossi's words. He said that the reason for the allegations of secret locations of the Iranian nuclear facilities were satellite images made twenty years ago, which had nothing to do with current realities.

As expected, the IAEA report caused serious concern in the West as well as in Israel. A few days after the publication of the document, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said that Iran could acquire all the necessary materials to develop its own nuclear weapons in the next two to three months.

Gantz believes that the recent withdrawal of the US military from Afghanistan could allow Tehran and its supporters to act more confidently in the long term. Therefore, he urged not to let Iran come to the conclusion that its courage and determination can force the West to surrender. Minister warned that Iran’s achievement of its goals can trigger a nuclear arms race in the region.

Disagreements between long-time allies

In general, the Israeli minister’s brief statement clearly reflects the reasons behind the latest hype around the Iranian problem. This is Washington's policy towards Iran, as well as the risk of resuming negotiations on a nuclear deal and its impact on the region. Obviously, Israel is concerned not only with the situation in Iran, but also with the behaviour of its long-time ally, Washington.

Incidentally, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said in August that Israel would oppose the Biden administration's attempts to return to a nuclear deal with Iran. In parallel, Israel will continue to put pressure on Iran's nuclear program. Bennett added that his government would form a coalition with the allied Arab countries against the Islamic Republic.

In fact, there are serious disagreements between the Biden administration and the Israeli government over Iran. In other words, the incumbent administration in Washington does not particularly share Israel's concerns about Iran, such as the assessment of Tehran’s possible risks for Israel and other regional allies of the US, including those related to Washington's direct interests in the region. The Biden administration is not going to declare Tehran an enemy. Quite the contrary, it is preparing for an agreement with it. It is clear that the Washington administration is aware of and evaluates Tehran's threat to American interests in the Middle East. But in fact, Biden and his team believe that it will not be possible to solve this problem by labelling Tehran as an enemy. This is why Washington favours a ‘more rational’ approach.

Factors that prompted the US to change its policy towards Iran can be grouped as follows. First, American policy towards Iran over the past 42 years, even with the toughest sanctions adopted under the Trump administration, has proved virtually ineffective. On the contrary, Iran has increased its military and political influence in the region and became the leading state of the anti-Western coalition.

Secondly, tough US sanctions have pushed Iran towards those groups and countries that Washington considers more dangerous for itself. Amid the sharp confrontation in the Middle East, China and Russia have penetrated the traditional sphere of influence of the US. And Iran's admission to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in September clearly demonstrated the validity of Washington's fears.

Thirdly, the policy of confrontation leads to conflict. It is clear that the US military intervention in Iran will fail with bitter consequences for Washington, further reinforcing anti-Western sentiments in the Muslim world. Finally, given the state strategy of Israel primarily focused on strengthening its own borders, Tel Aviv's vision on the expected developments in the region do not match the priorities of the United States. In other words, what Israel considers a threat to itself is only an element of regional tensions for the US. Thus, in an attempt to neutralise and keep Iran in its sphere of influence in exchange for certain concessions, Washington will try to bring Tehran to the negotiating table.

However, the situation is of particular concern for Israel, and its traditional regional Arab allies. It is clear that Iran's nuclear program will be brought under control through a new nuclear deal or the renewal of the 2015 deal. It is also known that anti-Israeli circles will continue to support Tehran. And, as Gantz noted, after the well-known events in Afghanistan, a new nuclear deal with Iran will only strengthen Tehran, and the military-political groups it supports, increasing the risks for Israel and the Arab governments of the region. After the Democrats intervened in the hearings in the US Congress on funding the modernisation of the Israeli air defense system Iron Dome, it became clear that the fears of Israeli politicians were not unfounded.

Iranian fuel supplies to Lebanon after Venezuela were accompanied by harsh anti-Western slogans, which caused serious concern among Tehran's regional rivals. In fact, the operation was entirely administered by Hezbollah, which Israel and its allies have been trying to oust from Lebanese politics in recent years.

In addition, in February 2021, the Biden administration launched a dialogue with the Iranian-backed Houthis of Yemen, having further strengthened the latter's position. On the other hand, Washington suspended support for the anti-Yemeni coalition led by Saudi Arabia, as a result of which the coalition troops began to suffer heavy losses at the front, including the loss of control over the previously liberated territories.

Solutions

Figuratively speaking, the softening of Washington's anti-Iranian policy is becoming an increasingly serious headache for Israel and its Arab allies in the region. Certainly, Tel Aviv is seriously concerned about the Iranian nuclear issue, which is a key element in softening relations between Washington and Tehran. After all, in parallel with the creation of its own nuclear weapons, Tehran will acquire a clear psychological advantage over its rivals, which is more dangerous than a military threat.

On the other hand, the nuclear issue threaten the Arab governments of the region, especially the Gulf countries, no less than Israel. After losing the traditional US patronage, the Arab governments feel an urgent need to get closer to Israel, which ‘single-handedly’ opposes Iran’s nuclear program. Thus, with the withdrawal of Washington from the region, Tel Aviv takes on the role of the leader of the regional front against Tehran. Therefore, the hype around Iran's nuclear activities, among other things, has contributed to the development of a new Arab-Israeli alliance in the region. Over the past year, the Iranian factor has become one of the main reasons for the rapid rapprochement of the Gulf countries with Israel.

We cannot rule out that the Israeli government will try to interfere with the Biden-Raisi nuclear deal. It can use several options to do this. For example, Tel Aviv can use the support of pro-Israel circles in the US to exert internal pressure on the Biden administration. Israel may also try to suspend Iran's nuclear activities even without the United States. As it did earlier in June 1981 by bombing an Iraqi nuclear research facility, hence having prevented the Saddam Hossein government from obtaining nuclear weapons. Another operation like Babylon or Opera against Iran could seriously hit Iran's nuclear activities, as well as stop Washington's negotiations with Tehran to improve bilateral relations. Of course, this is an extreme but no less feasible measure, given the scale of the threat that the Iranian nuclear program can pose to Israel.

Apparently, the degree of tension around the Iranian nuclear program will increase in the coming months. It is possible that it can develop into a military confrontation. Therefore, the political decisions made in Washington will play an instrumental role in the direction this process will follow.