Iran's political crisis is likely to prevent it from making any swift move to ratchet up its nuclear program, analysts and officials say, potentially giving President Barack Obama and Western allies more time to grapple with the issue.
Yet the ongoing chaos over the disputed re-election of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad further confuses the question of who calls the shots in Tehran, the Iranian capital, and what a deal with the Islamic republic might mean.
The Obama administration, concerned that Iran is seeking to amass the materials needed to manufacture nuclear weapons, set an informal deadline of September for the Iranian leadership to respond positively to an offer to discuss the matter rather than risk new economic sanctions.
“The infighting in Tehran has sent up a smoke screen that further confuses the picture from the outside, and the picture was plenty opaque to begin with,” said a US official in Washington who is involved in formulating nuclear policy and spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Tehran has long insisted its nuclear research program is meant solely to provide electricity for its growing population. But most Western arms-control experts believe Iran is at least trying to achieve the ability to quickly manufacture a nuclear bomb. And Iran continues to defy UN Security Council resolutions demanding it stop producing enriched uranium that could be turned into fissile material for a bomb.
The International Atomic Energy Agency is set to take up its latest quarterly status report on Iran’s nuclear program Wednesday.
In recent weeks, Iran granted IAEA inspectors access to a heavy-water reactor and parts of its enrichment facility. The move suggests an effort by Tehran to ease pressure on its most likely supporters at the Security Council, Russia and China, ahead of any new talks on sanctions.
While Iranian scientists have continued to enrich low-grade uranium during the nation’s political crisis, news agencies have reported that Tehran has not taken steps to increase its processing capacity during the last quarter — although experts say that may have more to do with technical quirks than political decisions.
For now, most Iran watchers say Tehran not only will be unable to respond to the Obama administration’s offer of talks, but also is in too much political disarray to make the major decisions necessary to build a nuclear weapon. Such steps would include further enriching its uranium supply to weapons-grade, or constructing controversial new facilities to speed up the process.
“The nuclear dossier has been stalled and is in a stagnant position, with no back or forth moves,” said Ahmad Shrizad, an Iranian nuclear scientist and political analyst. “The recent events in Iran put all important decision-making in limbo. The postelection events have not completely unfolded, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has not come to a conclusion what to do.”
Iran’s 20-year foray into nuclear technology has benefited from a broad consensus among the nation’s political elites, or at least acquiescence. Important institutions such as the Expediency Council, led by Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the Supreme National Security Council, Parliament and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have all played a role in its creation and sustenance.
Ahmadinejad likes to take credit for Iran’s recent nuclear progress. But Iran relaunched its dormant program under the 1980s premiership of his primary rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, and the first breakthroughs on enrichment came during the presidency of Ahmadinejad’s reformist predecessor, Mohammad Khatami.
“Nuclear policy has not changed regardless of the domestic problems, as the nuclear policy, like any other strategic policy, was predetermined more than two decades ago,” said Ali Khorram, a former Iranian diplomat based in Tehran.
Within Iran’s domestic political arena, any sign of weakness, or of bowing to the West, either by slowing its missile program or suspending the production of reactor-grade uranium, could be used by rivals to pounce, political analysts say.
Therefore, it is likely that the program will keep moving forward at its current pace.
“The nuclear program is a touchstone issue for the entire government,” the anonymous US official said. “No one on either side of the current controversy is going to risk his credibility by even suggesting a change in posture or a substantive pause.”
But because of the extent of the political feuding and the stakes involved, experts say, it is unlikely that Tehran will make a dramatic move toward constructing a nuclear weapon any time soon.
“It will be hard to get an approval by all concerned,” said Jalil Roshandel, an Iran expert at East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C.
Moreover, he said, continued public support of Ahmadinejad’s nuclear policies is no longer a given. “Public opinion is divided, dispersed or, at best, ... indifferent,” he said.
A “breakout” move on the nuclear issue risks not only public scorn but tighter sanctions, an embargo on sales of refined petroleum or even armed conflict. Iran’s rulers are not likely to want to risk testing the loyalty of an already volatile and angry populace.
“We must remember that the nuclear program is a means to an end,” said Meir Javedanfar, an Iran expert in Tel Aviv, Israel. “Khamenei would not sacrifice his regime over it.” Anger over Ahmadinejad’s domestic policies has emboldened figures close to the opposition to speak out more forcefully against his style on the nuclear issue.
“The Iranian authorities should know what they should expect if they do not enter the negotiations seriously and do not adhere to the repeated resolutions of the Security Council on the suspension of the uranium enrichment program,” warned a commentary in the reformist newspaper Mardom Salari.
Internal paralysis, international isolation and stagnant oil prices, analysts say, could work in the West’s favor, giving Tehran the incentive to make a quick deal so that it can concentrate on shoring up domestic stability and a faltering economy.
“So far, since the election Iran seems to be a bit more flexible than before,” said Anoush Ehteshami, a professor of international relations at Durham University in Britain. “Given the current political climate at home, it makes sense to try to contain nuclear crisis for as long as possible.”
