The International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) delivered two contrasting messages about Iran this week. It clearly stated that Iran has not adhered to the United Nations Security Council's decision on March 24th that it should stop nuclear enrichment within 60 days and agree transparency measures to facilitate international inspection. And IAEA secretary general Dr Mohamed ElBaradei proposed on his own initiative that international negotiators should accept Iran's current level of technical capacity as a realistic fact rather than demand that it be dismantled.
This two-handed response to Iran's complex gamesmanship is intended to keep options open in the negotiations aimed at ensuring its nuclear capacity does not develop to nuclear weapons. A belief that this is what its leaders want to do drives the most determined opposition to its programme from the United States. The dramatic show of US naval force this week in the Strait of Hormuz was explicitly intended to reassure its regional allies against any such possibility. The manoeuvre reveals what could be at stake in the confrontation if it escalates towards more severe UN sanctions or, as many informed observers believe will be the case, towards a unilateral US military attack on Iran over the next year.
Dr ElBaradei is certainly not alone in considering this would be a profound mistake. His courageous initiative has drawn criticism from the US, France and Britain, three of the major powers involved in talks with Tehran. It will complicate or upend them, they say, giving comfort to Iran's most radical leaders in their efforts to spin out negotiations until a nuclear weapons capacity has been attained. Dr ElBaradei argues that Iran is entitled to nuclear power under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which it remains a member, and that the crucial issue is whether its leaders have the political will to refrain from attaining nuclear weapons. If threatened militarily it will have every reason to get them as rapidly as possible. The better course is to intensify efforts to reach a political settlement.
This is a convincing case, notwithstanding Iran's continuing failure to comply with UN and IAEA demands for a halt to enrichment and transparent investigation. Iran is a major regional power, whose position has been strengthened by the Iraqi debacle. Acknowledging this, the US has agreed to join Iran in regional talks next week on how to stabilise Iraq.
Iranian leaders are well able to foresee a US withdrawal from Iraq under a new and probably Democratic president within 18 months, and the likely exit of British troops before that. They therefore have good reason to maintain their influence in Iraq as a threat to US forces there should President Bush authorise military action against them before he leaves office.
That would be a disaster for the Middle East as a whole. Dr ElBaradei should be commended for trying to head off the military option.