US hostility towards Iran

The US policies of freezing of Iranian assets, encouragement and support to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran, imposing economic and commercial sanctions on Tehran, regime change in Iran, and its strong opposition to Iran’s nuclear programme need to be seen against this political background. In short, the divergent policies followed by these two former allies have brought them on a collision course so much so that President Bush and his administration are not willing to rule out the military option in dealing with the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme. There are also reports that Washington allocated an amount of US$400 million last year for a covert plan to destabilise the Islamic government in Iran.

The US has led the international campaign to persuade Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment and nuclear reprocessing activities which have caused suspicions that the Iranian programme may be designed ultimately to produce nuclear weapons. Iran has provided a lot of information to the IAEA to clarify the ambiguities about its past nuclear activities and to establish the peaceful character of its nuclear programme. But the international pressure on Iran has not abated. Meanwhile, the UN Security Council has adopted three resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran after they had been diluted through the efforts of Russia and China.

Iran, in its negotiations with the five permanent members of the UNSC plus Germany (P5+1), has taken the position that under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty it has the right to carry out uranium enrichment and nuclear reprocessing activities under the IAEA safeguards. Therefore, the international community’s demand for the suspension of these activities lacks legal basis.

The latest package of proposals was presented to Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki by the European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, on June 14 on behalf of P5+1. Under the offer, which was based on the freeze for freeze formula, Iran would not expand its uranium enrichment programme while the international community refrained from imposing further sanctions. This phase would last for six weeks, possibly paving the way for suspension of enrichment in return for more comprehensive talks and technological, economic and security incentives.

Iran responded to the proposals in a letter addressed to Javier Solana and the foreign ministers of P5+1 on July 4. Iran termed its response “constructive and creative”. However, there was no indication that it was ready to suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities. An inconclusive meeting between Saeed Jalili, Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, and Javier Solana to discuss the issue was held at Geneva on July 19 with the participation for the first time of William Burns, the US under-secretary of state for political affairs. Apparently, Iran at the meeting was given another two weeks to accept the interim deal which would freeze uranium enrichment and sanctions. Failing that Iran would face further UNSC and EU sanctions