Geopolitics

Iran’s Nuclear Accord and its Implications
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
By VBN Ram
Issue Net Edition | Date : 22 Jan , 2016

Ironically , those very nations , which are now patting their backs (most notably the US; China and Russia) for making Iran sign the P5+1 –Iran nuclear accord-  are the ones, responsible for Tehran’s advanced military nuclear programme. There were other vested interests such as A.Q. Khan (the Pakistani nuclear scientist-widely responsible for illicit proliferation) who acted as catalysts.

The accord just signed by Iran, according to it, as well as according to the Obama administration, promises hope that it will promote non-proliferation and therefore universal peace and tranquility.

Chronological Landmarks

On Dec 8, 1953 President Eisenhower while addressing the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on “Atoms for Peace“ said “If a danger exists in the world, it is a danger shared by all and equally if hope exists in the mind of one nation, that hope must be shared by all.“

In other words the power of the atom must empower the entire comity of nations and by the same token, the misuse of nuclear technology is to the detriment of the entire mankind. The accord just signed by Iran, according to it, as well as according to the Obama administration, promises hope that it will promote non-proliferation and therefore universal peace and tranquility.

The roots of Iran’s nuclear programme go back to 1957 with the US providing research reactors, fuel and scientific training to it, as it did to some other developing countries, in turn the recipient nations committed themselves to use nuclear technology exclusively for peaceful civilian uses and subscribed to non-proliferation i.e. agreeing to totally refrain themselves from the duel use of technology.

The erstwhile Shah of Iran (Mohamed Reza Shah) pioneered Iran’s nuclear programme in 1957. In 1967 the US supplied Iran with a 5 megawat research reactor. The reactor under safeguards had the capacity to produce a certain quantity of plutonium   in spent fuel. Thereafter, in 1979 the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI) entered into an agreement with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology of the US, which provided further impetus.

The US provided satellite imagery of Iranian positions to Iraq and also advised Baghdad on military options, because the US didn’t want Iran to win. Ironically, later on, the US was the very nation which wanted Saddam Hussein captured and killed.

The Iranian revolution which overthrew the Shah –abruptly severed all US –Iran ties including those relating to nuclear technology. Subsequently, Iran’s nuclear programme grew from strength to strength thanks to technical gaps being filled up by China, Russia and in no small measure A.Q. Khan from Pakistan.

Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran

Saddam Hussein invaded Iraq in order to portray his nation as the strongest in the Persian Gulf. Iran put up a strong challenge to its enemy.  Despite the military help Baghdad was receiving from a host of nations such as the US, France, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq’s other long time arms suppliers and allies including Qatar and Saudi Arabia –the fate of the war did not put either adversary in a commanding position.

In 1998 Iraq put up the final big offensive- the Reagan administration spent months advising Iraq on how to recapture the Faw peninsula (a marshy region in the South-East of Iraq- where the Shaat al Arab waterway flows into the Persian Gulf.) The strategic importance of the Shatt was so valuable-that the party controlling this zone could be treated as the victor.

The US provided satellite imagery of Iranian positions to Iraq and also advised Baghdad on military options, because the US didn’t want Iran to win. Ironically, later on, the US was the very nation which wanted Saddam Hussein captured and killed.

However, such US help to Iraq was provided covertly, since it was putting on a pretense of neutrality. Iraq also used chemical weapons against the Iranians at FaW. UN weapons inspectors had also confirmed the use of mustard gas and other nerve agents by Iraq between 1983 and 1988. Iran’s nuclear technology for weapon making was first initiated at that juncture to meet the challenge from its belligerent and audacious rival threatening its sovereignty every now and then.

Iran lost more than $ 160 billion in oil revenue since 2012 alone.

There are two uranium enrichment facilities in Iran located at Natanz and Fordo where uranium hexafluoride gas is fed into centrifuges to separate out the most fissile isotope U- 235 this can be used to produce fuel for nuclear power plants, but it can be enriched to 90 percent needed to produce nuclear weapons..

In July 2015 Iran had almost 20,000 centrifuges-under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) Iran will have to reduce these to 5060 of the oldest and the least efficient centrifuges at Natanz for 10 years.

The international community and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)  have verified that Iran has shipped over 8.5 tons of enriched uranium to Russia-so the same can’t be used for bomb making, It has also disabled 12,000 centrifuges and made its reactor at Arak dysfunctional by pouring concrete.

This reactor was designed to produce plutonium. Says President Obama “Every single path Iran could have used to make a bomb has been cut off.  Iran will be subjected to continuous and intrusive monitoring by IAEA” Iran-US ties assumed an unprecedented superficial cordiality by the release of ten American sailors after their patrol boats had  recently drifted into Iranian waters. As a reciprocal token the US also released some American prisoners.

The Chabahar port provides direct access to Afghanistan and from there to Central Asia, hence it is of strategic importance to India and perhaps even the US, should the latter wish to use it for transit.

After making sure that the American prisoners were freed by Tehran, the US initiated new limited sanctions on eleven Iranian companies and individuals for their involvement in the recent ballistic missile tests.

Iran lost more than $ 160 billion in oil revenue since 2012 alone.

The lifting of Sanctions

The lifting of sanctions will unfreeze an estimated $ 150 billion in overseas banks. Iran will also be able to resume its oil exports and is likely to pump in an additional 500000 barrels per month. It will thus generate $ 4 billion to 8 billion each month.  India will be able to :

  • Further its development of the Chabahar port. This port provides direct access to Afghanistan and from there to Central Asia, hence it is of strategic importance to India and perhaps even the US, should the latter wish to use it for transit. 
  • Work out useful hydrocarbon contracts.
  • India should request Iran for rights relating to Farzad-B gas field discovered by ONGC of India . However, it should immediately pay off $ 6.5 billion to Iran –this payment was held up because of sanctions.

Earnestly work on the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.

The US has been a miserable failure in convincing Saudi influenced Sunni countries regarding the soundness and long term benefits of the Iran nuclear accord.

Conclusion 

With Pakistan unable to decide its level of proximity with Saudi Arabia especially in the light of the 34 nation alliance  led by Saudi Arabia supposedly to curb terrorism –even though it may be to curb Iran and its allied militias in reality  (which Prime-Minister Nawaz Sharif has given his consent to) Iran may not exactly be amused by Pakistan’s stance. Now, Pakistan has offered to play broker between Riyadh and Tehran to bring about peace and tranquility in the Persian Gulf-which offer is likely to please neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran.

The US should Re-evaluate its strategic affiliations in the light of the Iran nuclear accord and the likely leverage it could derive in Syria, Iraq and Yemen- in the larger interests of continued peace and tranquility in the region. The US has been a miserable failure in convincing Saudi influenced Sunni countries regarding the soundness and long term benefits of the Iran nuclear accord. The portends of US policy are ominous.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

VBN Ram

Postgraduate in business management from XLRI Jamshedpur, is widely travelled and immensely interested in and concerned about contemporary geostrategic developments. He has been a China watcher and has researched extensively on Asia-Pacific affairs. He has also written on developments in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Maldives.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left