MOSCOW, June 23 (UPI) -- First of two parts
Washington seems to be teasing Iran with a carrot and a stick.
In a surprise move on May 31, it agreed to join the direct talks between Iran, Russia, China, and the European Trio, or EU3, of France, Britain and Germany if Tehran verifiably suspended its uranium enrichment program. U.S. administration moderates, led by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, had convinced Congress to make one more, last, attempt to solve the Iranian crisis diplomatically.
It was the biggest American step yet towards a more reasonable policy regarding Iran. Before that, Washington had been avoiding direct contacts with Tehran since 1979, when radical Iranian students took the staff of the U.S. embassy hostage.
But on June 19, U.S. President George Bush again showed Iran a stick. He said: "If Iran's leaders reject our offer, it will result in action before the [United Nations] Security Council, further isolation from the world, and progressively stronger political and economic sanctions."
He was obviously referring to the offer put forth by the six world powers negotiating with Iran -- the five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany -- which Javier Solana, the European Union's High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, took to Tehran on June 6.
Sources say the package is generous and substantial. Iran is promised light-water reactors, deliveries of enriched uranium, and U.S. spare parts for civilian aircraft, as well as support for Iran's membership in the World Trade Organization and access to American agricultural technology.
Moreover, as some sources claim, the package includes an almost unprecedented promise to let Iran continue independent uranium enrichment programs for research purposes under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Bush assessed Iran's initial reaction to the offer as promising. On June 19, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again said in the presence of top officials of his government that the package was "a step forward" and that Iran was considering its response.
Why then did the U.S. president publicly shake the stick on the same day, darkening the future of talks at a very delicate moment?
His harsh rhetoric was most likely directed at Europe, not at Tehran. Bush wants to strengthen U.S.-European unity on Iran and suspects that Tehran is searching for loopholes in trans-Atlantic solidarity. He insisted shortly before the U.S.-EU Vienna summit in June that the United States, the EU, Russia and China unanimously agreed that the latest package of offers was a historical chance for Iran.
Bush is right in that unity has been attained, but will it last?
The American president knows very well that Iran's rejection of the offer would again create a deep divide between the United States on one hand and Europe, Russia, and China on the other, forcing them to again discuss additional sanctions or, God forbid, the use of military force.
Bush's phrase about "progressively stronger political and economic sanctions" and Iran's "further isolation from the world" was designed to remind the 5+1 countries, especially the European ones, that they needed unity at the diplomatic stage and even more so if the crisis is aggravated.
The U.S. administration's vacillation between reasonable patience and fits of hostility against Iran largely depends on who has the White House's ear -- the neoconservatives from Vice President Dick Cheney's and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld's teams, or the "peacemakers" rallied around Condi Rice.
--
(Vladimir Simonov is a political commentator for the RIA Novosti news agency. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti.)
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
