NATO SUMMIT AND IRAN'S THREAT

The NATO Summit in Bucharest agreed to back U.S. plans to site a missile defense system in the east of Europe, notably Poland and Czech Republic. President George Bush insisted at the summit that the system was not to be used against Russia, but it was needed to counter a potential threat from rogue states like Iran. Regardless of how Russia will react to this decision by NATO, the question is whether Iran’s threat against Europe is real. President Bush has repeatedly said that Iran is seeking nuclear “weapons” in order to “attack” other countries and start a “third world war.” But how much do these claims reflect the truth? As we know, there were no WMDs in Iraq to threaten world peace and security. All the same, and despite the propaganda in Western media, there is no imminent threat of an Iranian atomic bomb. The IAEA inspectors have, thus far, not found any evidence of deviation in Iran’s nuclear program towards military purposes. Even according to U.S. intelligence (as reflected in the recently published National Intelligence Estimate), Iran has no intention to acquire nuclear weapons. Therefore, Iran is by no means posing an “imminent” threat against the world's peace and security, and following this case at the level of the Security Council seems at least partly unreasonable. The U.S. and other Western powers also seem to have adopted double standards and discriminatory policies against Iran, as compared to the other nuclear states in the region, such as Israel, Pakistan, and India. While none of latter countries is a member to the Non Proliferation Treaty, Iran has joined the NPT as early as 1968 and even signed in 2003 the Additional Protocol, which allows the IAEA inspectors to investigate the country’s nuclear installations at any time and with no prior notice.
Iran’s security concerns should be recognized at the international level. Iran is now encircled by American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, while the United States has established various military bases throughout the Persian Gulf, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. Moreover, the region of the Middle East has experienced several bloody wars over the past decades, one of which was imposed on Iran by Western-supported Saddam Hussein for more than eight years. Even in this threatening environment, Iran is still denied basic conventional defensive weapons by the United States and the European Union. Although Iran has not invaded another country for almost two hundred years, it is still portrayed in the Western media as an aggressive “rogue” state and a threat to the region, and even Europe. Since 1979, Iran has been under severe unilateral sanctions from the United States. These sanctions have even prevented Iran from purchasing passenger airplanes or their spare parts, which directly jeopardizes the safety of civilians. This treatment has made the Iranian leaders highly wary about any possibility that the Western powers will ever be dependable partners. Iran has developed a missile system in the recent years under such a state of insecurity. Any other country under these same circumstances would also feel insecure and try to strengthen its defensive capacity before being attacked. But there is no reason for Iran whatsoever to use this capacity to start a war against Europe!
The development of a nuclear program has also become a matter of national pride for many Iranians. The United States, however, insists on the total and permanent suspension of Iran’s nuclear activities. After the NIE report was revealed, President Bush openly admitted that the challenge with Iran was no longer about the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb, but about the Iranians having acquired nuclear “knowledge.” This not only denies Iran’s legal rights, as provided for in the NPT, but it also further antagonizes the Iranian people against U.S. policies, uniting them behind the current hard-line government in Tehran. However, it has now become clear that the zero-enrichment objective is more or less unachievable, and Iran’s nuclear program continues to progress faster than the West can muster pressure on Tehran.
To put an end to the existing crisis over Iran’s nuclear program, there is no option but diplomacy. But the ultimate goal should not be to deprive Iran of the right to nuclear knowledge, but to ensure that the existing concerns about a military deviation in this program will be properly addressed, for example, through more regular inspections by IAEA. Simultaneously, the United States and other Western powers should try to persuade other nuclear countries in the region to put an end to their military nuclear arsenals, in order to create a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, with a basis in collective security. This will surely be more helpful for global peace than the installation of anti-missile systems in Europe!