Nuclear news

After the ceasefire in Lebanon, Iran's nuclear programme regained top billing, writes Rasha Saad

---

The Islamic Republic recaptured the headlines after offering Western powers a written response to their package of incentives presented in June in return for halting its uranium enrichment programme. Areeb Al-Rentawi hailed Iranian diplomacy "for once again it showed its excellence in buying time to escape imminent sanctions." In the Jordanian Ad-Dostour newspaper Al-Rentawi said Iran was able to achieve a diplomatic victory "as its reply would help in widening the divisions already existing among the Western powers."

However, Saud Meshaal in the Kuwaiti Al-Watan newspaper suspected the worst was coming. "The Middle East will face a major military confrontation between the US and Iran which will have an impact on the world, especially the Arab world," he wrote.

In the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat Amir Taheri wrote, "matters concerning the Iranian nuclear issue have become more complicated because Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has turned the issue of uranium enrichment into the ultimate red line of his administration." Taheri explained that having accused his predecessors of having committed something akin to treason by agreeing to an earlier suspension of uranium enrichment, Ahmadinejad is now in no mood to follow in their footsteps. By insisting on suspension as a precondition to talks, Taheri argues, the five permanent members of the Security Council, plus Germany, are asking Ahmadinejad to destroy his macho image and thus undermine his entire strategy for relenting on what he regards as Iran's second and most decisive phase.

"The 5+1 must understand that in Iran today the issue of uranium enrichment goes far beyond its diplomatic, military and security aspects. This issue has come to symbolise two visions of the Khomeinist revolution." The first, Taheri explains, is that of people like former presidents Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohamed Khatami who believe that the central task of the revolution is to consolidate its hold on Iran, leaving the idea of exporting the revolution to the rest of the world for future generations. In that sense, Taheri wrote, people like Rafsanjani and Khatami resemble the advocates of "Socialism in One Country" in the USSR of the 1920s. Ahmadinejad, however, resembles the advocates of "Permanent Revolution" in the same period.

The concerns of the Gulf countries as a result of the Iranian developments have not passed unnoticed. Shamlan Al-Eissa in the United Arab Emirates' Al-Ittihad explained that the Gulf's worry is that as a result of Western pressure, Iran would use the cards it has, which includes Hizbullah, to push its allies in Iraq to wage war against American troops as well as to ignite sectarian wars in the region.

"The real problem in the relationship between Gulf countries and Iran is mistrust. Gulf leaders do not hide their concern over the increasing Iranian role in domestic Arab and Gulf issues," Al-Eissa wrote.

Also in Al-Ittihad Tarek Saif blamed the US for much of the chaos in the Gulf including Iran's rising power. He said there was obvious confusion in the US strategy in the Gulf and that Washington was not paying enough attention to the interests of the Gulf countries and was instead dealing with them as would a dictator. "Relations between the Gulf countries and the US, being the only world superpower, is one-sided," Saif wrote.

To prove his point Saif wrote that the US military presence in the heart of the Gulf did not stop Iran from obtaining ballistic missiles of various ranges or securing nuclear technology. "This makes one wonder about the true motives of the US presence in the region and its claim that it is fighting the spread of weapons of mass destruction."

Pointing to fatal policy mistakes by the US in the region, Saif wrote, "The militarising of the US in regional and international conflicts without consulting other countries concerned will further increase the hostility the people of the Gulf have towards Washington."

He said the US had started new conflicts in the region and encouraged civil sectarian strife while the Bush administration did nothing to solve the deep-rooted problems and chronic conflicts in the region such as Palestine despite the fact that settling such an issue once and for all can help change popular anti-American sentiment, eradicate the popular support for Islamic radicals, and lessen Israeli security fears concerning its neighbours.

In the London-based Al-Hayat Jihad Al-Khazen wrote that the government of President Ahmadinejad is acting firmly (on the nuclear issue) but not with enough wisdom. "The neighbouring Gulf countries are worried about the Iranian stance and its impact on them. Despite this Ahmadinejad, who has visited countries from North America to the Middle East, has never visited Kuwait, Bahrain or the UAE, neither to better relations or allay their fears," Al-Khazen wrote.