President Obama and his advisers hope that last week's dramatic disclosure will finally create the diplomatic leverage over Iran the West has heretofore lacked. They are hoping that one more case of Iran's cheating will be enough to convince Russia and China to support tougher economic and financial sanctions against Iran, sanctions that will be stern enough to change Iranian behavior. This is very unlikely to happen.
Russia and China have established their policies on Iran and the disclosure of the Qom facility does not add any information to the calculations that led to those policies. Certain elements of the Russian and Chinese industrial bureaucracies see Iran as an important export market. China sees Iran as an important future energy supplier. The foreign policy establishments in Russia and China have always resisted the idea of using the UN Security Council as a tool to inflict punishment on a country. They especially don't want to support such an effort that is organized by the U.S. and western Europe. For these reasons (and more) the Qom revelation isn't likely to change Russian and Chinese policy toward Iran. And if Russia and China don't agree to tougher sanctions against Iran, Iran will not suffer from tougher sanctions. And this means that sanctions won't be a route to changing Iranian behavior.
Should Russia and China worry about a nuclear-armed Iran? And should Russia and China worry about what their non-cooperation on Iranian sanctions will do to their relations with the U.S. and Europe?
Russian and Chinese policymakers are likely counting on the following end-state for the Iranian nuclear program: they likely believe Iran will become an undeclared but assumed nuclear weapons state, similar to Israel's status. They also appear to be unconcerned about Iran becoming a future nuclear proliferator, either to terrorists or to other states. Russian and Chinese leaders likely assume that the U.S. will have to expend great energy providing protection to Israel and the GCC countries, establishing a balance of power in the region against Iran. They are counting on America's risk aversion to prevent a major war against Iran from breaking out. Meanwhile, if the U.S. ends up distracted by expanded Iranian-backed subversions, insurgencies, and proxy wars, so much the better for Russia and China.
As for Russian and Chinese relations with the West, Russian and Chinese leaders calculate that those relations will be governed by other permanent interests and not by a dispute over how to handle Iran.
This is my guess as to how the Russian and Chinese governments view the Iranian problem. Obama, Gordon Brown, and Nicholas Sarkozy will find out (if they haven't already) that international economic sanctions will not be a solution for the Iran situation.
The next question for Western policymakers is whether they can arrange without war a stable and geo-strategically acceptable end-state with a nuclear-armed Iran. And if not, what risks and costs should the West be —to take?
Comments
Iran should not arouse concern. Georgia is the most dangerous flashpoint. The Bible says: "At the appointed time [the king of the north = Russia] will return back [will regain the influence, which it lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union] and come into the south [many indicate that this might be Georgia], but it will not be as the former [1921] or as the latter [2008]. For the dwellers of coastlands of Kittim [the West] will come against him, and he will be humbled, and will return." (Daniel 11:29,30a) Then Iran will be humbled also. "But ships will come from the direction of Kittim, troubling Asshur [Russia] and troubling Eber [inhabiting on the other side the Euphrates]." (Numbers 24:24a, BBE)
At that time, peace will be taken from the earth and the "great sword" - nuclear sword - will be used. (Revelation 6:4) However, it will be neither the great tribulation nor "the end of the world" (Armageddon). As Jesus foretold, that will be "the beginning of birth pains". (Mathew 24:7,8)
If the Heavens planned a full return of Russia (and much suggests this) the present economic crisis will deepen. Then also the European Union and NATO will not stands.
In the same way the earlier prophecy had fulfilled: "And (he) [the king of the north = Russia] will go back (to) his land with great wealth [1945]; and his heart (will be) against the holy covenant [state atheism]; and will act effectively; and turned back to his own land [the break-up of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, the return of Russian troops to country]." (Daniel 11:28)
You're right, Mr. Haddick. Russia and China's diplomacy with the West over the Iran dispute is certainly open to positional advantage.
But did you notice how quickly the Iraqi government defended Iran over the Qom disclosure? That would have been absolutely unthinkable before 2003.
The more advanced the US drawdown, the more these two coalesce.
I guess there may be another question if either of those two don't work out, or if the answer is unpalatable, what can you do to live in a world with a nuclear armed Iran (or the rest of its neighborhood down the road)?
I suppose it would require a a number of deterrents that are not just aimed at Iran's nuclear missile forces, but an ability to counter its actions when it throws a tantrum and rattles its saber - which could take a number of forms, not just military. I'd say its a fair assumption that Iran will use its nuclear capabilities to advance it objectives on all fronts it can.
Best, Rob