Iran Nuke Deal Resets Eurasia’s ‘Great Game'
By Pepe Escobar
July 14, 2015 "Information
Clearing House"
-
"Asia
Times" -
This is it. It is indeed historic. And
diplomacy eventually wins. In terms of the New Great Game in
Eurasia, and the ongoing tectonic shifts reorganizing Eurasia, this
is huge: Iran — supported by Russia and China — has finally,
successfully, called the long, winding 12-year-long Atlanticist
bluff on its “nuclear weapons.”And this
only happened because the Obama administration needed 1) a lone
foreign policy success, and 2) a go at trying to influence at least
laterally the onset of the new Eurasia-centered geopolitical order.
So here it is – the 159-page, as detailed as
possible, Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA); the
actual P5+1/Iran nuclear deal. As Iranian diplomats have stressed,
the JCPOA will be presented to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC),
which will then adopt a resolution within 7 to 10 days making it an
official international document.
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has described
the deal — significantly — as a very Chinese “win-win” solution. But
not perfect; “I believe this is a historic moment. We are reaching
an agreement that is not perfect for anybody but is what we could
accomplish. Today could have been the end of hope, but now we are
starting a new chapter of hope.”
Zarif also had to stress — correctly — this was a
long-sought solution for an “unnecessary crisis”; the politicization
— essentially by the US — of a scientific, technical dossier.
Germany’s Foreign Minister Steinmeier, for his
part, was euphoric; “A historic day! We leave 35 years of
speechlessness + more than 12 years of a dangerous conflict behind
us.”
Looking ahead, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani
tweeted now there can be “a focus on shared challenges” – referring
to the real fight that NATO, and Iran, should pursue together;
against the fake Caliphate of ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, whose ideological
matrix is intolerant Wahhabism and whose attacks are directed
against both Shi’ites and westerners.
Right on cue, Russian President Vladimir Putin
stressed the deal will contribute to fighting terrorism in the
Middle East, not to mention “assisting in strengthening global and
regional security, global nuclear non-proliferation” and — perhaps
wishful thinking? — “the creation in the Middle East of a zone free
from weapons of mass destruction.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed
the deal “fully corresponds” with Russia’s negotiating points. The
fact is no deal would have been possible without extensive Russian
involvement — and the Obama administration knows it (but cannot
admit it publicly).
The real problem started when Lavrov added that
Moscow expects the cancellation of Washington’s missile defense
plans, after the Iran deal proves that Tehran is not, and won’t be,
a nuclear “threat.”
There’s the rub. The Pentagon simply won’t cancel
an essential part of its Full Spectrum Dominance military doctrine
simply because of mere “diplomacy.” Every security analyst not
blinded by ideology knows that missile defense was never about Iran,
but about Russia. The Pentagon’s new military review still states —
not by accident — major Eurasian players Iran, China and Russia as
“threats” to U.S. national security.
Now from the brighter side on Iran-Russia
relations. Trade is bound to increase, especially in nanotechnology,
machinery parts and agriculture. And on the all-pervasive energy
front, Iran will indeed compete with Russia in major markets such as
Turkey and soon Western Europe, but there’s plenty of leeway for
Gazprom and the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) to coordinate
their market share. NIOC executive Mohsen Qamsari advances that Iran
will prioritize exporting to Asia, and will try to regain the at
least 42% of the European market share that it had before sanctions.
Compared to so many uplifting perspectives,
Washington’s reaction was quite pedestrian. US President Barack
Obama preferred to stress — correctly — that every pathway to an
Iranian nuclear weapon has been cut off. And he vowed to veto any
legislation in the US Congress that blocks the deal. When I was in
Vienna last week I had surefire confirmation — from a European
source — that the Obama administration feels confident it has the
votes it needs in Capitol Hill.
And what about all that oil?
Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and
Security Policy at the IAEA and currently Director of the
Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Program at the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), hailed the deal as
“the most significant multilateral nuclear agreement in two decades
– the last such agreement was the 1996 nuclear test ban treaty.”
Rauf even advanced that the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize should go to US
Secretary of State Jon Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Zarif.
Rebuilding trust between the US and Iran, though,
will be a long and winding road.
Tehran agreed to a 15-year moratorium on enriching
uranium beyond 3.67 percent; this means it has agreed to reduce its
enrichment capacity by two-thirds. Only Natanz will conduct
enrichment; and Fordo, additionally, won’t store fissile material.
Iran agreed to store no more than 300 kg of
low-enriched uranium — a 96% reduction compared to current levels.
The Arak reactor will be reconfigured, and won’t be used to produce
plutonium. The spent fuel will be handled by an international team.
The IAEA and Iran signed a roadmap in Tehran also
this Tuesday; that was already decided last week in Vienna. By
December 15, all past and present outstanding issues — that amount
to 12 items — should be clarified, and the IAEA will deliver a final
assessment. IAEA access to the Parchin military site — always a very
contentious issue — is part of a separate arrangement.
One of the major sticking points these last few
days in Vienna was solved — with Tehran allowing UN inspectors to
visit virtually any site. But it may object to a particular visit. A
Joint Commission — the P5+1 + Iran — will be able to override any
objections with a simple majority vote. After that Iran has three
days to comply — in case it loses the vote. There won’t be American
inspectors — shades of the run-up towards the war on Iraq; only from
countries with diplomatic relations with Iran.
So implementation of the deal will take at least
the next five months. Sanctions will be lifted only by early 2016.
What’s certain is that Iran will become a magnet
for foreign investment. Major western and Asian multinationals are
already positioned to start cracking this practically virgin market
with over 70 million people, including a very well educated middle
class. There will be a boom in sectors such as consumer electronics,
the auto industry and hospitality and leisure.
And then there’s, once again, oil. Iran has as
much as a whopping 50 million barrels of oil stored at sea — and
that’s about ready to hit the global market. The purchaser of choice
will be, inevitably, China — as the West remains mired in recession.
Iran’s first order of work is to regain lost market share to Persian
Gulf producers. Yet the trend is for oil prices to go down – so Iran
cannot count on much profit in the short to medium term.
Now for a real war on terror?
The conventional arms embargo on Iran essentially
stays, for five years. That’s absurd, compared to Israel and the
House of Saud arming themselves to their teeth.
Last May the US Congress approved a $1.9 billion
arms sale to Israel. That includes 50 BLU-113 bunker-buster bombs —
to do what? Bomb Natanz? — and 3,000 Hellfire missiles. As for Saudi
Arabia, according to SIPRI, the House of Saud spent a whopping $80
billion on weapons last year; more than nuclear powers France or
Britain. The House of Saud is waging an — illegal — war on Yemen.
Qatar is not far behind. It clinched an $11
billion deal to buy Apache helicopters and Javelin and Patriot air
defense systems, and is bound to buy loads of F-15 fighters.
Trita Parsi, president of the National
American-Iranian Council, went straight to the point; “Saudi Arabia
spends 13 times more money on its defense than Iran does. But
somehow Iran, and not Saudi Arabia, is seen by the US as the
potential aggressor.”
So, whatever happens, expect tough days ahead. Two
weeks ago, Foreign Minister Zarif told a small group of independent
journalists in Vienna, including this correspondent, that the
negotiations would be a success because the US and Iran had agreed
on “no humiliation of one another.” He stressed he paid “a high
domestic price for not blaming the Americans,” and he praised Kerry
as “a reasonable man.” But he was wary of the US establishment,
which to a great extent, according to his best information, was dead
set against the lifting of sanctions.
Zarif also praised the Russian idea that after a
deal, it will be time to form a real counter-terrorism coalition,
featuring Americans, Iranians, Russians, Chinese and Europeans —
even as Putin and Obama had agreed to work together on “regional
issues.” And Iranian diplomacy was giving signs that the Obama
administration had finally understood that the alternative to Assad
in Syria was ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, not the “Free” Syrian Army.
That degree of collaboration, post-Wall of
Mistrust, remains to be seen. Then it will be possible to clearly
evaluate whether the Obama administration has made a major strategic
decision, and whether “normalizing” its relation with Iran involves
much more than meets the eye.
Copyright 2015 Asia Times Holdings Limited