Europe should play hardball as Iran stalls for time over weapons and human rights

Date: 22/01/04

THREE weeks into 2004, there are already good reasons to speculate that Iran will be the litmus test for EU foreign policy this year.

While the EU's "big three" of Germany, France and the UK were split two-to-one on Iraq last year, they share a common view of how neighbouring Iran should be dealt with.

It was their foreign ministers, after all, who brokered a landmark accord in October, under which Tehran committed itself to allowing unfettered inspections of its nuclear sites.

But translating the accord into a situation in which Iran has genuinely repudiated its ambitions to build a nuclear bomb is another matter.

Reports indicating that the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) has evidence that Iran is still assembling centrifuges for enriching uranium appear to contradict assurances from the country's leaders that it is not developing nuclear weapons.

The IAEA is due to report on its inspections in March. An assessment that Iran is continuing with a clandestine nuclear weapons programme would more than likely prompt Washington to seek UN-mandated sanctions against a country which, according to George W. Bush, belongs to an "axis of evil".

Until now, the EU has opposed such a move, preferring to resolve its differences with Tehran through dialogue.

If the US decides to flex its muscles over the issue, three different scenarios could arise for the EU's foreign policy: the Union pushes for more dialogue; it backs a sanctions call; or, the big three's unity is ruptured (possibly with the UK siding with the US).

Commentators in Tehran continue to insist that Iran is interested only in acquiring nuclear technology for civilian uses. Both reformists and conservative forces there contend that allegations of a hidden agenda behind Iran's "energy" programmes amount to mischief-making on the part of its foes.

Alluding to the October agreement on inspections, an editorial in the Tehran Times last week read: "Iran took these steps to show the international community its good will about its civilian nuclear programme in response to the massive propaganda campaign orchestrated by Zionist circles that Iran was using its civilian nuclear energy programme as cover for a nuclear weapons programme."

A new paper from the London-based Centre for European Reform sounds a sceptical note.

"Iran has enormous oil and gas reserves and every year flares off more energy than its nuclear plants will produce. Why exactly is Iran building a heavy-water reactor in Arak and a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz? Iran only admitted their existence after a group of exiled Iranians, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, revealed them."

The paper's author, Steven Everts, says that EU policymakers have to prove that their policy of "conditional engagement" with the country is a serious one.

The conditional nature of the strategy was highlighted last year when the EU called off its talks on a trade and cooperation agreement (TCA), saying they would only be resumed once fears over Iran's nuclear intentions are allayed.

"At the moment, the Europeans have to make the nuclear agreement stick," Everts remarks.

"It is a very fragile agreement. The Iranians are playing for time and the Europeans have to make clear that is not acceptable.

"The bigger picture is that Iran is a real test case for the EU. If we want effective multilateralism after the reservations expressed about how the Iraq campaign was managed, it is incumbent on us to show that other policies and strategies can deliver results." Progress, he believes, can be made if the EU skilfully emphasizes the rewards which Iran can achieve in response to abandoning its weapons plans, and in improving its record on human rights and democracy.

"Both sides are condemned to succeed. Iran needs Europe because it has no relations with the US. It needs trade links and investment."

These needs have been recognized for some time by Mohammad Khatami, the country's reform-minded president. It is he who has been given much of the credit for convincing the European Union to enter into talks on developing closer economic and political links.

Yet the European Commission has repeatedly said that signing a TCA depends on Tehran proving that it will respect human rights and democracy.

Khatami, and his allies in the Majlis (national parliament), have made significant strides towards demonstrating that they are serious, approving laws against gender discrimination, torture and restrictions on free expression.

But these laws cannot be implemented as the Council of Guardians, the religious body which screens all legislation, has overruled the Majlis.

The latest power struggle between MPs and the more hardline council was unfolding last week at a time when Javier Solana, the EU's high representative for foreign affairs, was paying his fourth visit to Iran in 20 months.

This followed a council decree outlawing 83 current MPs from seeking re-election in the 20 February parliamentary poll.

Although the council has agreed to review this decision at the behest of Ayatollah Ali Khameini, the supreme Muslim leader, the move is seen as an attempt to ensure that the Majlis will be dominated by conservatives in its next term.

EU insiders say Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi appealed to Solana not to condemn the council but to instead describe it as an "internal matter" for Iran.

Solana agreed - but only partly. "He underlined it was an internal matter," says Cristina Gallach, Solana's spokeswoman. "But he also said "let me tell you, it would be very difficult for the EU and the European Parliament to understand why our interlocutors, people we have had relations with, are not able to stand [for election] again"."

Gallach pointed out that Solana held talks during his stay with one of the 83 on the blacklist, Mohsen Mirdamadi, head of the Majlis' foreign affairs committee.

Mirdamadi has also been in regular contact with the chairman of the European Parliament's foreign affairs committee, Elmar Brok.

Annette Heuser, Brussels director of German think-thank the Bertelsmann Foundation, says that, contrary to some impressions in Washington, the EU is as convinced about the need for democratization in Iran as the US.

"From time to time, the EU must be diplomatic but, from time to time, it must play hardball. With regard to the elections, the EU should articulate very clearly that they need to be open and transparent."

According to Heuser, the success of France, the UK and Germany in persuading Tehran to allow inspections of its nuclear sites earned the EU's "big three" some kudos in Washington by proving a strategy based on negotiations can be fruitful.

At the same time, however, the initiative met with a nervous reaction from smaller EU states who are worried about a precedent being set by the Union's most powerful countries undertaking a foreign policy exercise without the involvement of the other EU governments.

"Iran should be a common focal point for the EU in the next couple of months," adds Heuser.

"The problem for European foreign policy is that it must be sustainable. The success of the "big three" was in October but it is now the middle of January, so the Europeans must keep the momentum alive."

Major feature. The EU's big three won kudos by getting tough with Tehran over its nuclear sites, but now they have to keep the momentum going. The writer reports on the EU's options.

• Primary Source

http://www.eeas.europa.eu/iran/index_en.htm http://www.eeas.europa.eu/iran/index_en.htm

---