I Still Support Iran
Jihad el Khazen Al-Hayat - 06/12/05//
The incitement against Iran and
its nuclear program goes beyond seeing the US launch a
military strike against nuclear facilities, or Israel carry
this out if the Israelis in the White House can't convince
the administration to do this on Israel's behalf. This
incitement includes the above and also involves an attempt
to pit Iran against its neighbors, and between it and the
rest of the world. There is the threat against oil supplies
through the Straight of Hormuz and an increase in terror in
the region and around the world.
Politicians and researchers try to avoid answering
hypothetical questions, but the fear campaign about Iran
rests on 2 hypotheses. One is that Iran will have nuclear
weapons, and the second is that if it possesses these
weapons, it will threaten everyone with them.
I've written about Iran's nuclear program more than once in
recent months, and I've always felt that the Middle East
should be declared a nuclear weapons-free zone. If Israel
remains the only nuclear state, then it's the duty of Iran
and every country in the region to possess nuclear weapons,
to balance the Israeli arsenal.
I haven't changed my mind, but today I'll add the opinion of
Abdel-Rahman Attieh, the Secretary General of the Gulf
Cooperation Council. At a parliamentary seminar in Qatar
that gathered 16 NATO countries and countries from the Gulf,
he strongly attacked Iran and its nuclear program. I
telephoned to ask about this, since he must have been
expressing the convictions of the GCC states.
In a telephone conversation, Attieh confirmed that the GCC
wanted a Middle East free of nuclear weapons; its position
on Israel and its arsenal had been settled and was
non-negotiable. In every statement and international forum
on the matter, the GCC states have asked for the region to
stay out of the nuclear race and for the end of Israel's
nuclear weapons capability - there's a whole stack of such
statements.
The GCC states don't want the Middle East to become an arena
for international conflict and tension, and don't want to
find themselves sandwiched between two nuclear powers. The
region is very sensitive and plays a key role in the
international economy, which means it shouldn't be left
alone if the great powers see that oil supplies are in
danger through the Straight of Hormuz, the bottleneck for
oil exports from the Gulf.
Attieh rejects comparing Iran to Israel. There are common
bonds in the form of religion, history, geography, heritage
and mixing between the Gulf and Iran, although that doesn't
mean the country should not be held accountable, especially
after some of its stated positions and behavior have been
worrying.
The countries of the Gulf are angry at Iran's refusal to
make progress, to not take a single step toward solving its
well-known disputes like the Tunb and Abu Musa Islands,
occupied by Iran and whose return is demanded by the UAE, or
like the continuing intervention in the affairs of other
Gulf states, and the stoking of unnecessary tension in the
region.
Increasing these worries of late was Iran's intervention
into Iraq's affairs, and its intensive presence in the south
of Iraq. With the beginning of talk about a partial US
withdrawal from Iraq, Iran is a candidate to fill the
vacuum. There is the beginning of US-Iranian coordination on
the Iraq issue.
Attieh says that the GCC states need to be reassured. There
are dangers and money should be spent on development, not
weapons. In any case, the GCC states reject double standards
and insist on ridding the Middle East of nuclear weapons,
which must apply to all countries and not involve an
exception for Israel.
I believe that Iran needs to show some flexibility, wisdom
and modesty in dealing with its Gulf neighbors. It should
reject all requests from its smaller neighbors, not because
they are right, but because it can. The GCC's position on
Iran's nuclear program would have been different if Iran had
sought a satisfactory solution to the islands issue and
stopped intervening in the affairs of this country or that.
Having said that, I still support Iran's attempt to possess
nuclear weapons, as long as Israel has them. The best
solution is a WMD-free Middle East, which is the position of
the Arab League ever since Amr Moussa was Egypt's ambassador
to the United Nations. It's also the position of the GCC and
the majority of the world's states. However, the US sees
Iran's possible weapons but doesn't see Israel's certain
ones, and the countries of the European Union go along with
this policy.
Of course, Iran insists that its nuclear program is for
peaceful purposes, but I don't believe this. Even so, I'm
with Iran against Israel and against the dual standards
policy of the US and EU, since no one will believe Iran.
It's difficult to believe that a country swimming on a sea
of oil and gas needs a nuclear program, so I hypothesize
that Iran wants a nuclear bomb in the end as an insurance
policy because it finds itself surrounded by nuclear states.
I advise it to improve its relations with its neighbors in
the Gulf and take the initiative to solve pending problems,
to guarantee the support of these states. Iran can't make
enemies of the countries of the region and the world, with
its insistence on a nuclear program whose end no one can
foresee.
Will we see Iran take a step soon, or steps, toward the
Gulf's other states? I hope so.
To Be Continued
http://j-khazen.blogspot.com
|