An Iranian Standoff
The problem with punishing bad behaviour on the international stage is that the punishment needs to be unanimous and be kept water-tight. It is a demonstration of how poorly things are going with Iran that not even the United States can currently keep its message together.
The Iran team negotiating with the P5+1 have reportedly been boasting in private that the Americans are ‘begging’ them for a deal on the country’s nuclear project. And so it seems. Republicans in the Senate are currently insisting that they will vote in support of the Kirk-Menendez bill which would impose sanctions on Iran if – and some say ‘when’ – the current negotiations fail. But President Obama has said that he will veto any such move. It is not uncommon of course for there to be a stand-off between the President and the Senate but this is an uncommonly serious stand-off and one that is likely to have uncommonly serious repercussions.
The problem appears to come down to the reading of intentions. The Republicans, along with many Democrats in the Senate, realise that Iran is stringing its international negotiating partners along. They suspect, with a good deal of previous experience to back them up, that Iran is buying time – allowing its economy and nuclear project to recuperate and get back on track even as they pretend that they are coming to a solution on this very matter. The President, by contrast, is working on a fixed time-table. With less than two years left in office he appears to be in a great hurry to clear up this thirty-five year long problem on his watch. He is clearly persuaded by the notion that he is to Iran what Nixon was to China – the visionary who can mend relations by taking them out of the deep-freeze.
The problem is not only that Iran is no China and Obama no Nixon – the problem is that the Iranians are not working to the President’s personal electoral timetable. Even though they know he is. And here is where the bigger problem lies. It has been the international mantra throughout these talks that the only thing worse than no deal is a bad deal. But it seems that the President has this the other way around. For him the only thing worse than a bad deal is no deal. It is the only explanation for his consistent efforts to allow the Iranians to buy more time and threaten his own side when they raise the matter of punishing the Iranians with sanctions for their intransigence.
We are used to seeing China, Russia or some rogue state break the international consensus on sanctions. But seeing the US President willing to do so is another matter entirely and heralds a world which will be infinitely more dangerous by the time he leaves his office than it was when he walked into it.
FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK
Another week passes in the Ukraine conflict. And another supposed ceasefire has been agreed in Minsk with both government and rebel forces solemnly swearing their agreement to its terms, due to commence at 2200 GMT on Saturday night, with representatives of the great powers looking on. Yet already we are hearing reports that shelling of government positions has taken place in Donetsk and Luhansk – hardly the ideal way to prepare for a moratorium on conflict, as various Ukrainian politicians have sarcastically put it. Once again, doubts about Russia’s intentions towards its neighbour have resurfaced.
So why is this ceasefire different to all other ceasefires? The short answer is that it is likely not to be. Despite the detailed clauses worked out between the parties stretching out to the end of 2015, and the promise of monitoring by international observers, this ceasefire will stand or fall by one thing alone: Mr Putin’s mood. If the Russian President decides he has had enough of meddling in Ukraine’s affairs, then he will cease and desist from helping the so-called rebels. If he hasn’t…
Germany’s Chancellor Merkel has promised further EU sanctions will be imposed if Russia reneges on the deal, but it is clear the incremental pattern of punishments imposed thus far will do little to discourage Putin. It hasn’t to date after all.
So if we are serious about checking Russia’s ambitions, a much more radical departure needs to be considered. The EU and US should announce that a Russian failure to honour the ceasefire will lead to every single senior Kremlin official and Russian parliamentarian from Putin’s party being placed on the sanctions list. The howls of rage at this threat to their continued prosperity may well be the only thing that can divert Putin from the course he has placed Russia on. If so, it is a gambit worth trying.
Dr Alan Mendoza is Executive Director of The Henry Jackson Society
Follow Alan on Twitter: @AlanMendoza
