Mohamed Said Idris* argues that Iran's favourite tactic of procrastination has landed it in hot water Iran is perhaps facing the toughest challenge yet to its favoured policy for achieving its strategic goals regarding its nuclear programme, namely wasting time. It utilises this to deal with Western countries which oppose its possession of a military nuclear programme or an advanced nuclear programme, which could enable it to produce nuclear weapons any time it chooses. The West has demonstrated its resolve to punish Iran if it continues this policy of procrastination, and called on it to stop using excuses because time is not on its side. But Iran always has a response, which oscillates between appeasement and escalation. While an admirable diplomatic performance, this also demonstrates the immense internal conflict and pressure facing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who tentatively signed off on the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) offer to transfer 75 per cent of the less than 3.5 per cent enriched uranium to Russia for further enrichment to 19.75 per cent, and then on to France where it would be transformed into solid rods and returned to Iran for use in the medical field. Ahmadinejad's provisional consent has fuelled the clash between reformers and the president's rivals in the conservative bloc. Consequently, this sparring has restricted Tehran's ability to manoeuvre and resulted in it asking for revisions and better terms in the IAEA offer. It also called for renewed talks because of several technical and economic concerns, which means a new round of negotiations which may or may not result in a new proposal which may or may not be agreeable. With this strategy, Iran is not only dragging its feet but also bargaining for a better deal which would strengthen the president in facing off the competition. Among the ideas suggested by Tehran in a renewed dialogue is to only buy enriched uranium from abroad, but keep its stockpile of low-grade enriched uranium. During a meeting with Iranian university students on 3 November, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei promoted this idea. This has left the West with only two options: either amend the IAEA offer to suit Iran or else Tehran would reject it as an unacceptable form of pressure. On the 30th anniversary of the siege of the US embassy in Tehran, Khamenei criticised recent actions by the US by saying that "negotiations in which the US pre-emptively imposes the outcome are similar to the dynamic between a wolf and a lamb." He continued, "We don't want this relationship." The Supreme Guide further described the US as an "arrogant power" and asserted that his country will not surrender and make peace with its arch enemy. Khamenei criticised US President Barack Obama's policies, describing the latter's offer to hold a dialogue as laced with threats. "[Obama] has sent verbal and written messages suggesting to us to turn over a new leaf and cooperate to resolve the world's problems," revealed Khamanei. "But over the last eight months, what we have seen is the complete opposite of what they say. Publicly they say they are negotiating, but at the same time they issue threats by warning that if negotiations do not achieve the results they want, they will do this and that." This posturing caused the US to reject any suggestions by Iran to revise suggestions which were previously accepted by Tehran. The US administration also decided to renew the freeze on Iranian assets in the US for another year. At the same time, US public prosecutors filed an order to seize the assets of the Islamic non-profit charity Alavi Foundation, under suspicion that it is controlled by Tehran. Washington also continues to build an international bloc against Iran, with special focus on Tehran's superpower "friends" such as Russia and China. This aims to disband Iran's international alliances and pave the way for escalating pressure against Tehran in the UN Security Council. Obama has taken it upon himself to actively pursue this goal and convince Moscow and Beijing of his viewpoint, namely that Tehran is forging ahead with its plans irrespective of the world community. He argues that Iran wasted an opportunity to reach agreement through diplomatic channels, and the time has come to add more pressure to force Tehran to accept the IAEA offer. The result of these US efforts culminated in an IAEA resolution adopted on 27 November, supported by Russia and China, condemning Iran's nuclear programme and calling for a halt in constructing a new nuclear plant near the city of Qom. The resolution also urged Iran to inform the IAEA about the objectives of this new plant, the timeline of construction, and that Tehran must vouch not to build or license the construction of any nuclear facility of any kind without informing the IAEA. Washington continues to focus on sustaining a world consensus against Iran. "It is essential that the permanent members of the Security Council and Germany are united in this effort," asserted a top US official, discussing the firm measures taken against Iran as the year closes. He noted that it is vital to maintain a two-track strategy of diplomacy and sanctions when dealing with Iran. The IAEA resolution caught Iran off guard, especially the Russian and Chinese vote of support, which caused the Iranian representative to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh to describe the decision as prohibitive to an atmosphere of negotiations and that Iran will "study other options" other than the IAEA proposal. In character, Iran went on to escalate tensions without proposing any other options. Leaning towards reconciliation before the IAEA's Board of Governors voted on the resolution, Iran proposed the "simultaneous exchange" of highly enriched uranium for low- grade uranium. But after the vote it reverted to its combative posture, with some Iranian parliamentarians threatening to withdraw their country from the IAEA. A more hazardous threat, however, is Iran's declaration that it will begin constructing ten uranium enrichment facilities which will work at unprecedented rates and raise enrichment from 3.5 per cent to 20 per cent. While some believe Iran is bluffing, its antagonism has put the West in a difficult position and triggered angry reaction in the US, France and the UK. A White House statement described it as more proof of Iran's isolation. "If true, this would be yet another serious violation of Iran's clear obligations under multiple UN security council resolutions, and another example of Iran choosing to isolate itself," asserted White House spokesman Robert Gibbs in a statement. US Permanent Representative to the UN Susan Rice said that Tehran's position was unacceptable and "paves the way for further sanctions against Iran." Rice noted that ultimately the decision will depend on Iran's final response to the 5+1 group's offer of enriching uranium outside Iran -- a response which has yet to be delivered officially. France's position was no less stern; French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner described Iran's response as "juvenile" and accused it of playing a dangerous game. Meanwhile, London stated that Tehran's response is "a source of concern". Iran may have realised the risks of such tenacity by the West. Foreign Minister Manochehr Mottaki announced his country's willingness to exchange 400kg of 3.5 per cent enriched uranium for 20 per cent enriched uranium on the Iranian island of Qeshm. "The exchange can take place immediately and with the participation of other countries in the region," announced Mottaki, while attending the Manama Dialogue conference. But this gambit was rejected by the West. "The Iranian proposal does not appear compatible with the balanced and fair offer made by the IAEA, in consultation with the US, Russia and France," responded one US official. Washington gave Tehran one month to change its mind on its nuclear programme. Chairman of Iran's Shura Council Ali Larijani retorted that his country was "watching the shameful American manoeuvres" against Iran's nuclear programme. "Iran is closely monitoring the scheming by these countries in international forums on the nuclear issue," Larijani stated. "They cannot hide their true intentions under the pretext of other issues. Rest assured, [these countries] can no longer propose more deceptive and conniving suggestions, such as exchanging uranium. The Iranian people know the truth about your dishonest words and proposals, and will not allow the manipulation of their national interests." Soon, Tehran dismissed the viability of its proposal to exchange uranium on the island of Qeshm. "The idea arose during bilateral talks with some parties as an initiative of goodwill to end this crisis," explained Mottaki. "We are not adamant about the idea, but felt it was an opportunity to open the door; but we do not insist on it." Tehran's rejection of the IAEA resolution and the US response came at a time when tensions were rising between Iran and Russia -- which has lately amended its policy of supporting Iran and its nuclear programme. Statements by Russia's president in Singapore endorsed the US position, and coincided with Moscow's delay in activating the Bushehr nuclear plant which was scheduled in 2009. Russia also postponed the delivery of a shipment of advanced anti-aircraft S-300 missile systems which was approved two years earlier. Moscow came under intense pressure from Tel Aviv not to complete the deal, under the pretext that the missiles represent a threat to Israel's security and the peace process in the region. Iran warned Russia against this deliberate delay in delivery and threatened to sue them if the missiles do not arrive. Tehran noted that this tardiness will overshadow bilateral relations, and may cause it to manufacture this system locally. These threats resonated in Moscow, which rushed to appease Iran and prove it will uphold its obligations. Russia's Minister of Energy Sergei Shmatko visited Tehran on 29 November and promised to complete the Bushehr reactor, but did not specify a start date. While it is obvious that Russia's position is closer to the West, Moscow is very likely going to use issue of Iran to accomplish its own interests and goals as a strategic player on the world map. It would certainly be rewarded if it agrees to any form of sanctions against Iran. This means Iran is forced into a race against the US to gather support and allies. More importantly, it will need to score points with the international community in order to deflect more pressure, and, after the recent escalation, move forward by renewing talks on its nuclear programme as part of an uncertain gamble to keep using its favourite policy of wasting time. * The writer is an expert at Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies.
