The Iranian nuclear issue appears to have taken a turn for the better since the US Central Information Agency proclaimed earlier this month that Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons program back in 2003. However, the superpowers' dispute over this issue looms large, and they are adapting their strategies to the new circumstances. In the coming year, the Iranian nuclear issue will become more complex; and consequently, struggles will turn white-hot.
For the time being, US and Israeli hard-line policies against Iran remain unchanged, and by no means ease the tension of the region's nuclear crisis. From the US perspective, owning nuclear weapons will make Iran a regional power, and pose a severe threat to US oil interests and Israel's national security. Moreover, Iraq, the fruit of a military victory for which the US has paid a heavy price, will probably fall into the scope of Iran's attainments. Even worse, should nuclear proliferation occur throughout Iran, the US would suffer another wave of terrorist attacks – possibly a fatal one. This would be a nightmare for the entire country. Looking back on 2007, it is evident that the Bush Administration was ready to resort to other means once peaceful means proved futile.
Although the information assessments report stripped the US of a pretext to attack Iran; it pointed out, all the same, that Iran was suspected of developing a uranium enrichment program. Logically speaking, the report stated that Iran faces no shortage of energies; therefore, its intention to develop nuclear energy is open to suspicion. Under such circumstances, the US will have to ferment new plans and work out new strategies over the Iranian nuclear issue both during and after the Bush Administration.
The US has shown its cards; and Israel and other allies have followed suit. Israel, for example, stated that it would not accept the current situation, assuming that Iran could own nuclear arms and because Iran had previously claimed to "erase it [Isreal] from the world map." Even if Western superpowers were to express tolerance, Israel proclaimed it would not concede. Immediately after the US information assessment report's release, Israel strongly considered launching a military attack on Iran. Great Britain also expressed doubt around Iran's use for a uranium enrichment program. France resolves not to lift its sanctions against the Iranian government. The EU has long been acting as mediator on Iranian issues; but is truly reluctant to have a strong nuclear opponent. It is evident than more than a few countries would follow in step with the US to alienate Iran once something goes wrong.
On the other hand, there are countries such as Russia which are not eager to side with the US. The UN decided that the issue be postponed for some time – to leave enough room for multiparty communication and negotiations. Iran, nevertheless, might benefit from the disparity among world powers: it could strive for a more favorable international environment and strategic standing.
In conclusion, concerned parties on the Iran issue are presently considering their own interests in relation to actual conditions in preparation for a new round of strategic contests. For a look on the brighter side of Iran's nuclear legacy, the US and Iran might as well peacefully talk face-to-face.
By People's Daily Online
|
Comment
Tell A Friend
Print Format
Save Article