The Most Unpredictable Arrangement

Rooz Online

Barack Obama’s administration has announced an extensive plan to confront ISIL and attack and hunt its forces. Almost no spot in Iraq or Syria is beyond the reach of this new campaign and the US government sees it its right to attack the jihadi militants in Syria without informing Bashar Assad’s government. The most notable aspect of the plan is the absence of Iran and non-communication with it. By excluding Iran from the whole campaign of fighting ISIL, Obama’s administration has in fact negated the long standing view that the US needs Iran in its efforts to manage the crises of the Middle East. Many analysts and observers of the Iranian scene had come to believe that US strategic needs in Iraq and Afghanistan are two key areas for breaking the historic mistrust between Iran and the US. But now, one can safely say that Iran’s influence in Syria or in the power alignments in Iraq have lost their effectiveness for a “grand bargain.”

Efforts to Live Without the West

The recent 70 billion Euro agreement between Iran and Russia may take Iran in an irreversible direction. Should the Chinese pay their 18 billion Dollar debt through finance and investments in Iran, as provided by the recent agreement with Iran, Tehran will be turning onto an important side-road against the economic sanctions it is facing. Still, these arrangements do not change the reality that depending on Chinese and Russian technologies to rebuild the country’s broken oil and gas industries is more like an expensive and wasteful joke, and reminiscent of the proverb of jumping around the bush.

Iran’s nuclear talks with the West currently face a number of insurmountable issues.

1-Direct talks between Iran and the US to remove the historical mistrust have not produced the desired results;

2-The West, under the leadership of the US, is not willing to show flexibility over Iran’s nuclear activities;

3-Iran’s government too because of domestic constraints can neither retreat at the talks nor bear the sanctions forever. It appears that even if Iran did retreat against the West, this will not result in the end of UN, EU and US unilateral sanctions, restrictions that may continue for at least another twenty years.

The above three conclusions resulted in Iran’s decision to turn to Russia for a strategic alliance, rather than the West, or at least to try this option. But Iran’s alignment with Moscow at a time when the latter’s relations with the West are going through a period of heightened tension can create the grounds for sensitivities that would only deepen Iran’s crisis and be the crossing of the Rubicon.

Alliance with Russia is defensible only if it is used as a diplomatic tool in response to pressures from the West and expansion of sanctions as a way to go through the current uncertain period. But if Iran is seriously moving in the direction of creating a larger alliance with Russia then an embargo on its shipping or airspace, or even worse, an ultimatum, may come immediately after the failure of the next round of talks with the West, each of which is a point of no return. It would be prudent for Rouhani’s foreign ministry to ask the Russians to honor the sale of the S-300 missile system, as a test of their sincerity. This system, and nothing less, would create a new aerospace security for Iran. Still, it would have to be seen whether it would be effective against the possible swarm of US drones. These drones are the very aircraft that are planned to be used against the ISIL militants in Iraq and Syria and which have eliminated a near generation of jihadi leaders in Pakistan.