By Michael Norris

‘When can we expect a pro-Western, pro-business government in Iran?’ asks a US government official in the film Syriana.  Today, that same question is being asked by anxious diplomats the world over.  Iran’s nuclear aspirations, domestic repression, and vast oil reserves pose problems for both Western powers and Iran’s Arab neighbours.  The stigma which surrounds Iran – that it is a backward nation, run by basket-case ideologues – has perpetuated a string of diplomatic failures.  The Western powers’ approach to Iran needs an overhaul, and fast.  Misinformation about Iran is rife and, consequently, the West needs to go “back to school.”

Complexity and confusion: the nature of the Iranian state

Iran’s internal workings are amongst the most complex in the international system.  Contemporary Iran was born of the Islamic Revolution of 1979, which acted as the precursor for the formation of the Islamic Republic of Iran via referendum.  Following the June 2009 presidential election, which many feel was illegitimate, Iran has enacted a series of harsh, repressive measures   Moreover, the true keepers of power in the Iranian state are not the fragmented clergy, nor President Ahmadinejad, but the Revolutionary Guard.  Formed as a vigilante organisation to cement Ayatollah Khomeini’s hold over Iran, the Revolutionary Guard were later integrated with the military following the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988.  The Revolutionary Guard is a multifaceted and extremely influential organisation, with roughly $12 billion in assets and a majority stake in over a hundred companies. It also has a strong presence in government; President Ahmadinejad is a former Revolutionary Guardsman, as is a majority of the Iranian parliament.  Following the June elections, the Revolutionary Guard and its plain-clothes sub-unit (baseej) have gained further influence, including powers of arrest.

Of rigged elections and protestors

Due to the Revolutionary Guard’s tight grip on Iran’s political structure, the struggle for regime change in Iran is more challenging than most Western commentators acknowledge. The nationwide protest movement (known as the Green Movement) which emerged from the disputed outcome of the June 2009 election has rocked the regime, but has   has yet to effect any changes to Iran’s political structure.  This is not to say the Green Movement is failing, but with no independent intelligence emerging from Iran, it is difficult to gauge how effective the Movement has been. As such, Western hopes for a swift toppling of the regime, echoing the implosion of the Soviet Union, may not match the reality of the situation.  Nonetheless, the continuing protests are a constant reminder of the crisis of legitimacy the Iranian leadership faces.

Black gold, Silkworm missiles, and an unstable neighbourhood

Iran is a major player in global energy security.  Today, 66 per cent of the world’s known oil reserves lie in the Middle East.  By 2020, that proportion will have grown to 83 per cent.  Iran is blessed with roughly 10 per cent of the world’s known oil reserves and produces around 2.7 million barrels per day.  Moreover, Iran controls the island of Abu Masa, through which some 17 million barrels of oil, travel each day. Abu Masa is equipped with Silkworm anti-ship missiles, easily capable of scuttling commercial tankers.  As such, Iran has the potential to control almost 20 million barrels of oil per day; or 23 per cent of daily global demand.  Iran, therefore, holds a salient stake in global energy markets.  Rob Diamond, head of Securing America’s Future Energy (SAFE) notes that if Iran was to suspend its sovereign oil production of 2.7 million barrels, it would “result in tremendous national security and economic problems” for America.  Consider the calamity of stopping 17 million barrels from reaching global energy markets.  Tehran stares down Washington because it can afford to.

The nuclear question

Iran’s nuclear ambitions have caused headaches for its neighbours and Western nations since the 1980s. With no existing commercial nuclear reactors in Iran, analysts’ best guess is that Iranian seeks a nuclear weapon in order to deter either direct invasion by the United States or an Israeli bombing campaign.  Although the intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program is murky, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suspects that Iran has enriched uranium to 5 per cent, the most difficult step in progressing toward weapons-grade enrichment.  Iran’s nuclear program has, however, run into technical obstacles, including a deficiency in uranium ore.  For the moment at least, these technical hiccups keep a nuclear-armed Iran at bay.

Nightmare scenario: a nuclear stalemate?

Suppose that Iran acquires a nuclear weapon.  Its nearest nuclear-armed neighbour is Israel, with between 100 to 200 warheads, the majority in submarines.  Although negative stereotypes of Iran permeate Western media, the Iranian leadership is not foolish enough to launch a strike against Israel because to do so would mean Iran being obliterated in an Israeli second strike.  Moreover, some 1.5 million Muslims live within Israel’s borders.  To assume that an Iranian nuclear weapon would be used as anything other than a deterrent is tantamount to claiming that the Iranian leadership is insane enough to commit two simultaneous genocides. It is more likely that the situation in the Middle East would resemble the state of affairs between India and Pakistan: a nuclear stalemate.

Deft moves, not a strong arm

The Iranian question has the potential to be solved without conflict or calamity.  A former French ambassador to Iran, François Nicollaud, asserts that Iran will not ‘surrender’ if more pressure is applied to it.  Instead, the regime is more likely to grit its teeth and strengthen its resolve to defy the West.  It is for this reason that imposing crippling economic sanctions or launching a pre-emptive military strike will not bear fruit.  Instead, Western nations should explore innovative solutions which add to the obstacles Iran’s nuclear program faces.  For instance, by ending the sale of uranium ore and high-strength steel to Iran, in addition to rigorous inspections of Iranian ships at foreign ports, the international community could exacerbate Iran’s current technical difficulties in a non-confrontational manner.  Above all, patience is wise.  Iran’s economy is weak; high unemployment and double-digit inflation do more damage than Security Council resolutions.

Chess in the Middle East

Iran’s dubious intentions are rightly cause for concern to leaders in the region, and likewise a nuclear-armed Iran is not in the best interest of regional security. Nonetheless,  patience and accommodation are paramount.  Scary enough as it is, if we live in a world with a nuclear-armed North Korea and nuclear-armed Pakistan, we can accommodate a nuclear-armed Iran too.