After the Iran nuclear deal

After decades of animosity, Iran and the US, along with its international partners, concluded what has been described as a comprehensive, long-term verifiable agreement aimed at preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. It is a historic deal with its genesis in a brief conversation during his first term between President Barak Obama and Sultan Qaboos bin Said Al Said of Oman, where the later convinced the former that a deal can be reached on the nuclear crisis if the ‘Iranians are allowed to keep their honour’.
Under the deal, Iran will not be able to enrich uranium to weapon grade or produce weapon grade plutonium required for nuclear weapons. It will downgrade its stockpile of enriched uranium, currently estimated to be enough to produce up to ten nuclear weapons, by 98 percent and remove two thirds of its installed centrifuges and store them under the watchful eyes of international inspections. The nuclear reactor at Arak will be modified so that it cannot produce weapon-grade plutonium and all the spent fuel will be shipped out of country indefinitely.
The agreement has been endorsed by Security Council and will take effect after ninety days. The US Congress has begun its deliberations on the deal and has sixty days to do so. In return, Iran will receive gradual relief from a complex layer of sanctions imposed by the US, EU, Japan and Korea, beginning with the unfreezing of its assets in the banking sector, and moving on to the purchase of heavy weaponry after eight years and finally the lifting of the ban on nuclear related technologies after fifteen years.
In Iran - a society where poets and writers have revolved their work around death, sacrifice and martyrdom for centuries, - some might think that these terms hardly allow the ‘Iranians to keep their honor’, but then neither was the US able to impose its original demand of ‘not a (single) centrifuge will spin’. The truth is that what Iran is being deprived of will not matter much in the long run as its real nuclear assets lie in the bedrock of knowledge in the country which is there to stay and cannot be shipped away by any means.
President Obama has stated that the deal is not based on trust but is built on comprehensive, stringent and intrusive verifications. The international nuclear inspectors will have access to Iran’s nuclear programme where and when necessary. If Iran violates any aspect of the deal, the sanctions will get back into place.
This brings back memories of international inspectors digging up each and every palace of Saddam Hussain in search of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and finding none – except some non-serious evidence presented by Colin Powell in a speech to the UN for which he became the laughing stock of the world.
In Tehran a student is believed to have asked Ayatollah Khamenei about what will happen to the war on US arrogance that Iran has been waging since the 1979 Islamic revolution and suffered so much as a result thereof. The Ayatollah matched Obama’s clarity in stating that Iran still considers the US an arrogant power against whom it will continue to fight.
Lack of trust by the US in Iran’s intention to implement the nuclear deal honestly, and Iran’s continued determination to fight against what it perceives as US arrogance is a near-perfect recipe for explosive situations in the future.
For Pakistan, it is important that the deal holds with both sides abiding by the commitments made. Any turmoil on our western borders could make it more difficult to pacify the ongoing nationalistic and sectarian strife. Besides, there is a dire need to create enabling environments for speedy work on the western route of the CPEC and early completion of the Pak-Iran gas pipeline without any negative spill over of global politics.
According to Foreign Policy magazine, Pakistan needs to add as much electricity to its grid in the next ten years as it did during the last 60 years. That is a tall order for our present energy sector managers, who are great at ‘brawls over brains’ games in Pakistani politics but nowhere near focused for such challenging goals. Iran recently offered 3000MW of electricity to Pakistan in addition to the 1100MW that was signed by the previous government. Every trickle of energy is therefore important – and that will depend largely on whether or not the environment in the neighbourhood is conducive.
The real challenge for implementation of the nuclear deal will come after the ninety-day period after UNSC endoresement expires. While there are hopes that both sides will remain responsible, there are also serious apprehensions that any irresponsible conduct by international inspectors, like in the past, or shenanigans by the Iranians, could create serious problems.
Unfortunate as it would be but if the deal eventually run into problems, much will depend on how the deadlock takes place since that will determine who takes the hit in subsequent political positioning. If in the global perception Iran is less than honest in either vertical or horizontal scaling down of its nuclear infrastructure, it would be construed as intransigence – and international powers led by the US could close ranks to snap back sanctions or even ratchet it up to Iran’s disadvantage.
On the other hand, if there is a strong perception that the US is humiliating Iran by shifting the goal post in some ways or establishing a linkage between the nuclear deal and Iran’s evolving pattern of regional politics with respect to Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Yemen and Lebanon, which are mutually exclusive issues at present, then Russia and China (and even Germany), which have an interest in selling heavy weaponry to Iran, will be less than enthusiastic to play to the US tune indefinitely. Russia is already looking for ways to demonstrate its independence from the EU due to the Ukrainian crisis. France and Britain may also not want to be left behind in the commercial opportunities in Iran.
In the event of a crisis in implementation, it will also matter how the Iranian regime reacts to the situation. If it decides to show the world that it will not be bullied and reverts to its nuclear programme in haste, it will exacerbate the crisis with unpredictable consequences. If on the other hand it takes a cautious path and looks for signs of any division between the US and its international partners, it might want to calibrate its responses in a manner that is both advantageous and also helps melt the ice.
While the deal has generally been welcomed in the world, Israel’s prime minister has called it a ‘stunning historic mistake’ that has accepted Iran as threshold nuclear power and will further allow it to finance its aggressive policies abroad. Whether the deal is a historic achievement or a historic mistake will depend a lot on the sincerity of the two sides in its implementation.
As member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran had a strong argument to pursue a peaceful nuclear programme but it spoiled its case through irresponsible anti-Semitic rhetoric from its leaders in the past which helped the US cobble together a consensus that if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, it would be dangerous for the region.
For the time being the agreement is a cause for celebrations as it has helped the west avoid another needless military action in the region, and saved Iran from economic ruination and possible destruction. But regional politics in the Middle East are far from stable as the historical Shia-Sunni tussle in the Islamic world is at its worst.
With an abundance of unfrozen economic resources and nuclear fuel cycle expertise as its national batch of honour, Iran could accelerate efforts to enhance its influence in the region and keep the adrenaline level of its neighbour high. But let’s hope sanity prevails.
The writer is a retired vice admiral. Email: tajkhattak@ymail.com