 |
|
A strategy of engagement with Iran, pushed by the European troika of Britain, France and Germany, isn't working, declares the Economist.
The premise of the October deal was that, offered a face-saving way to come clean and find a better relationship with the West, Iran would quietly drop any weapons ambitions. Although the premise appears to have been wrong, the Europeans have, so far, merely held up negotiations on a new trade and co-operation agreement. They have other levers at their disposal: some 40% of Iran's imports come from the EU...
Iran and the Europeans seem now to be playing for time, awaiting the outcome of November's presidential election in America. But whoever wins, America is unlikely to tolerate a nuclear-arming Iran. Some Europeans hope that a new administration might try talking to Iran. But, with America tied up in Iraq, the Iranians may calculate that time is on their side and—so long as the IAEA finds nothing new—that the Europeans will never agree among themselves to a tougher line. If so, far from being a success for Europe's common foreign policy, Iran could become a big irritant in relations between America and Europe.
That the US will continue to play the bad cop to Europe's good cop with Iran seems inevitable, no matter who wins in November.
Matt Yglesias has some interesting thoughts about Iran as well, including about the seeming contradictions in the Iran hawks' approach to Iran. Go read. I remain a tad skeptical about the reports he points to of Italy's security services being any more hardline on Iran than those services informing the governments of Italy's European partners/rivals. What seems more likely is that Sismi provides to its friends little snippets of intelligence that confirms what its friends want to hear. And certainly, Iran provides no shortage of material. One reason for my skepticism? Italy is reportedly Iran's biggest trading partner in Europe. As this article points out:
Cordial Tehran-Rome relations are important to both countries. The volume of trade between Iran and Italy in 2003 stood at 3.85 billion euros, an increase of 5% over the previous year. Italian exports to Iran added up to almost 2 billion euros in 2003 and imports from Iran amounted to 1.9 billion euros. Oil makes up 90% of Italian imports from Iran but non-oil imports from Iran are on the rise, including agricultural products and stones.
Another reason for skepticism? Recently, I have been told about several alleged front companies for Iran to acquire certain technologies based in Italy -- and elsewhere in Europe, that apparently are no secret to Sismi or the Italian authorities. That Iran is seeking dual use technology wherever it can get it, but particularly in Europe, no one disputes. But what was remarkable is the allegation that the Italian authorities know full well what some of these companies are about; Sismi has a whole division focused just on this counterproliferation issue. Yet, for some reason, some of these companies anyhow are permitted to operate there unmolested. Business as usual? After all, Italy had no qualms apparently about maintaining especially close ties to Libya in the decades before Qaddafi just a few months back renounced his WMD program and agreed to pay damages for the terrorism it reportedly sponsored. Or does some other motive explain why the Italian authorities permit them to operate there? Perhaps, simple greed? Fear that if the business doesn't go to them, it will go to the Germans?