Heavy snowfall on Wednesday, compounding the thick blanket of pollution that habitually engulfs Tehran in the dead of winter, seemed emblematic of the confusion many Iranians now have over their government’s decision to resume nuclear research activities in the face of fierce criticism from the West.
The White House on Wednesday stepped up diplomatic pressure by saying that Iran made a ”serious miscalculation” by clearing the way to resume uranium enrichment, and that intensive diplomacy with European allies and others is starting over what to do next. In London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said it is likely that the United States and Europe will agree to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council.
Conscious of the clamour from the West to refer Iran to the Security Council, some people voiced mistrust of their country’s nuclear ambitions and feared that the issue could escalate into military conflict. Others, more sympathetic to the Islamic regime, asserted Iran’s right to nuclear energy, and even nuclear weapons, saying the nation is being singled out by Islam’s enemies.
It is a sharp division of opinion unlikely to be mirrored within the regime itself, said analysts. While the power structure is riddled with disagreements between the ultra-Islamist government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and more traditional conservatives in Parliament, senior regime figures are at one in backing the hardball approach on the nuclear issue. The reason is that the most sensitive nuclear decisions are in the hands of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, rather than with Ahmadinejad.
Tactical
”There is no issue in which everybody in the regime is united, but in this special case there is more unity than on any other,” said Saeed Leylaz, a political analyst based in Tehran. That is because the decision to break the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) seals to restart work at the Natanz nuclear facility came from the supreme leader, he said.
”Nuclear issues are absolutely separate from the government and I don’t believe this is Mr Ahmadinejad’s decision.”
While Western governments cast Tuesday’s move as a serious step towards uranium enrichment and, ultimately, atomic weapons, analysts in Tehran argued that the regime’s intentions are purely tactical.
Leylaz said: ”This is not the beginning of enrichment. But diplomatically it’s very aggressive and intended to gain advantage for the Iranian side. We’ve had two plane crashes in the past month caused by American economic sanctions against Iran. Those accidents are forcing Iran to take a more aggressive stance towards the sanctions.
”The regime wants to start real negotiations with the US, because it doesn’t think the Europeans are authorised to negotiate properly. This move is aimed at breaking the circle and getting America’s attention.”
Another analyst said: ”This decision is about forcing the West to come up with something substantial and serious. Iran wants rewards for not turning its nuclear programme into a weapons programme. The Russians are saying, come and do uranium enrichment on our soil, but there’s no reward for that. The regime is saying, if you want us to work with the Russians, there’s a price — which is lifting the sanctions, security guarantees, economic incentives and recognition of Iran’s role in the region.”
‘They will regret causing problems’
The image of a regime united over driving a hard bargain was exemplified by Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the former president and occasional opponent of Khamenei, who accused the West of an ”arrogant and colonial” attitude.
”We will stand by our right to nuclear technology. They will regret creating any problems for us,” he said in a sermon at Tehran University.
But not all Iranians, on holiday for the Eid Ghorban festival, are so robust. Aidin (26), a businessman and political-science graduate, said: ”The west and the IAEA are right to be tough with Iran. If Iran had any opportunity to turn itself into an international oppressor, it would do so through atomic weapons.”
A mechanical-engineering student, Ali (25), said: ”I know the regime says it just wants to move to nuclear energy for electricity, but they don’t have the culture for that. Their first target would be to try to get weapons to destroy Israel. That’s the impression they give everybody and it’s not a good idea.”
Orkideh (35), a housewife, said: ”I’m not sure nuclear weapons are their objective, but I do worry about … military conflict. With … Iraq, where they said it had weapons of mass destruction when it didn’t, that could be our experience too. If we had a different type of government, one not Islamic, I don’t think there would be a problem.”
Others are more bullish. Alaeddin Amiri (43), a military employee, said: ”If America has the right to nuclear weapons after dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, why doesn’t Iran have that right? Where’s the evidence that Iran will use nuclear weapons? We are trying to protect ourselves. Iran is the heart of Islam and I believe it is Islam, and not just Iran, that is under attack.”
‘Discussions must continue’
Meanwhile, South African Minister of Foreign Affairs Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma said on Wednesday after a meeting with United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that she believes nuclear discussions with Iran should continue despite recent setbacks in the talks.
She said the Iran issue came up during her morning meeting with Rice, among other subjects.
While acknowledging that Iran has broken agreements with the European Union, Dlamini-Zuma said: ”Talking cannot stop. Discussions must continue.”
In response to an Iranian call for a stronger role for South Africa in the nuclear talks, the envoy said only that her government is in contact with Iran and the EU on the subject.
The IAEA board of governors is expected to take up the Iran issue at a meeting within the next two months. One possible outcome is an IAEA vote to refer the matter to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions against Iran.
”As a believer in multilateralism, South Africa will support the decision of the board of governors,” Dlamini-Zuma said, adding that it is premature to say how her government will vote.
She said that in addition to Iran, she and Rice also discussed UN Security Council reform and the situation in Sudan.
FAQ: Nuclear states
Has Iran the right to enrich uranium?
Yes, under international rules. Iran is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). However it can only enrich for power generation, not for a weapons programme.
What is the NPT?
The 1970 treaty aims at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons while establishing the right of all states to develop nuclear energy. Non-nuclear states say the nuclear powers dictate who gets atomic weapons yet fail to move towards nuclear disarmament.
Does the NPT apply to all?
No. Russia, China, the US, France and Britain have the nuclear bomb, are NPT signatories, and must, theoretically, disarm progressively. India, Pakistan, and Israel also have the bomb but did not sign the NPT. It is suspected North Korea has nuclear weapons but it abrogated the treaty three years ago. Iran could follow suit. — Guardian Unlimited Â