The row over Iran’s nuclear plans has taken another step toward the abyss. Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned that the country may quit the Non-Proliferation Treaty if forced to curtail its nuclear ambitions. This could of course be mere rhetoric designed for internal consumption but that cannot be guaranteed or counted on. Ahmadinejad has shown time and time again that when he says something, he means it. Last month he warned that Iran would suspend IAEA inspections if the IAEA referred it to the UN Security Council over the nuclear issue; last week, after the IAEA decided to report it, Iran responded immediately with a curb on inspections. Its warnings clearly have to be taken seriously.
This standoff has the potential to become a Middle Eastern Cuba crisis, or worse, unless it is resolved peacefully — and soon. There are warnings from Washington of possible airstrikes by the Israelis or the Americans on suspected Iranian nuclear sites. In the present political climate, that would have catastrophic consequences. Iran would respond and no one can predict where things will go from there.
A pullout from the NPT is not in Iran’s interests — nor in the Middle East’s. Not only would it raise the stakes in this dangerous game of brinkmanship, it would play straight into the hands of Iran’s opponents. They would use it as proof that its nuclear aims are military. The NPT is far but perfect but it is the best we have to contain nuclear proliferation. the fact that the Israelis flatly refused to sign it and went on to develop nuclear weapons is proof of its limitations. But that is the point here. Rejection of the NPT is seen to go hand in hand with weapons ambitions. Pulling out of it is therefore bound to accelerate international feeling and action against Iran.
It is not surprising that Iranians feel that they are being singled out. Thirty-one countries use nuclear technology to generate electricity, which is what Iran says it wants to do. Others plan to do so — among them Vietnam, Turkey, Indonesia and possibly Egypt — because nuclear power is seen as clean power and cheap power; no one questions the rights of these countries. Only Iran and North Korea are condemned, although the latter with justification since it has made things abundantly plain that it intends to develop weapons while on the other hand, Iran insists its aims are peaceful.
At the end of the day, we will all be losers if the row ends in violence. A more pragmatic stance is required by both the international community and Iran. Ideally, the Middle East should be clear of all nuclear weapons. Israel too should be forced to decommission although realistically that is not going to happen in the immediate future.
This is a row that needs to be calmed. Accusations, threats and resentment by either side will not resolve it. They achieve nothing but an increase in tensions. The situation, as should be obvious, needs to be handled with extreme care and intelligence.
