Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program have again hit a wall, but Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appears unconcerned. Indeed, Khamenei seems convinced that neither the US nor Israel will attack its nuclear facilities — at least not before the US presidential election in November.
Ironically, while Khamenei is no fan of democracy, he relies on the fact that his principal enemies are bound by democratic constraints. Khamenei controls Iran’s nuclear program and its foreign policy, but the US and Israel must work to reach consensus not only within their respective political systems, but also with each other.
Iran’s leaders, who closely follow Israeli political debates, believe that Israel would not launch an assault on their nuclear facilities without the US’ full cooperation, because unilateral action would jeopardize Israel’s relations with its most important strategic ally. Given that an Israeli offensive would need to be coordinated with the US, while a US assault would not require Israeli military support, Iran would consider both to be US attacks.
However, Iranian leaders remain skeptical of either scenario, despite the US’ official position that “all options are on the table” to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons capability. So far, they simply do not feel enough pressure to consider a compromise. In fact, Iran’s leaders continue to deride Israel from afar, calling the country an “insult to humanity,” or a “tumor” in the region that must be eradicated.
Meanwhile, Iranian citizens — including clergy in the holy city of Qom, near the Fordow nuclear facility — are deeply concerned about the consequences of an attack. Ayatollah Yousef Sanei, a former attorney general and a religious authority, has asked Tehran to refrain from provoking Israel.
Indeed, critics of the Iranian government believe that its incendiary rhetoric might lead to a devastating war. However, from the perspective of Iran’s leadership, the taunting has tactical value to the extent that it reinforces the view among the Israeli public that Iran is a dangerous enemy, willing to retaliate fiercely.
Anti-Israel rhetoric reflects Iranian leaders’ confidence that Israel will not attack — a view that is bolstered by the situation in Syria. They are convinced that even if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime falls, Iran will be able to destabilize the country in such a way that it would pose a major security threat to Israel. According to this view, it is Israel that has an interest in refraining from further antagonizing Iran, not vice versa.
Recent editorials in Kayhan — the hardline Iranian newspaper that serves as a mouthpiece for the Supreme Leader — indicate that Khamenei is looking forward to the US presidential election. Regardless of the outcome, he foresees no threat of military action, at least through next year. A victory by US President Barack Obama would reinforce the US’ unwillingness to attack Iran and renewed efforts to rein in Israel. If Republican US presidential candidate Mitt Romney is elected, he will need months to form his national security team and assemble his Cabinet, leaving him unable to attack Iran immediately.
That said, since the Islamic Republic’s emergence in 1979, Iranian leaders have generally preferred Republican presidents to Democrats, because despite their harsh rhetoric, Republicans have been more willing to engage with Iran in practice. Given that Iran has so far survived severe international sanctions, its leaders believe that they could get an offer from the US after the election — particularly if Romney wins — that recognizes their right to enrich uranium.
It is far from certain that Iran will be able to withstand current sanctions related pressures indefinitely, but its leaders’ confidence that they can remains a crucial element of their strategy, and the West cannot afford to ignore their perceptions. The US, whether led by Obama or Romney, must understand that Iran will not negotiate seriously on its nuclear program until it perceives a clear, convincing and unified consensus in the US and Israel on an approach that addresses both Iran’s ambitions and Israel’s concerns.
Achieving such a consensus in the context of a US presidential election will be no small feat. Nor is it easy to create consensus in Israel, especially as its political parties prepare for elections next year. However, only with significantly greater cohesion within the US and Israel will Iran’s leaders even consider accepting a compromise on their nuclear program.
Mehdi Khalaji is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) published three of my articles on the US presidential election, which is to be held on Nov. 5. I would like to share my perspective on the intense and stalemated presidential election with the people of Taiwan, as well as Taiwanese and Chinese Americans in the US. The current consensus of both major US political parties is to counter China and protect Taiwan. However, I do not trust former US president Donald Trump. He has questioned the US’ commitment to defending Taiwan and explicitly stated the significant challenges involved in doing so. “Trump believes
The government is considering building a semiconductor cluster in Europe, specifically in the Czech Republic, to support Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) new fab in Dresden, Germany, and to help local companies explore new business opportunities there. Europe wants to ensure the security of its semiconductor sector, but a lack of comprehensive supply chains there could pose significant risks to semiconductor clusters. The Czech government is aggressively seeking to build its own semiconductor industry and showing strong interest in collaborating with Taiwanese companies. Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) on Friday said that Taiwan is optimistic about building a semiconductor cluster in
China has successfully held its Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, with 53 of 55 countries from the African Union (AU) participating. The two countries that did not participate were Eswatini and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which have no diplomatic relations with China. Twenty-four leaders were reported to have participated. Despite African countries complaining about summit fatigue, with recent summits held with Russia, Italy, South Korea, the US and Indonesia, as well as Japan next month, they still turned up in large numbers in Beijing. China’s ability to attract most of the African leaders to a summit demonstrates that it is still being
The Russian city of Vladivostok lies approximately 45km from the Sino-Russian border on the Sea of Japan. The area was not always Russian territory: It was once the site of a Chinese settlement. The settlement would later be known as Yongmingcheng (永明城), the “city of eternal light,” during the Yuan Dynasty. That light was extinguished in 1858 when a large area of land was ceded by the Qing Dynasty to the Russian Empire with the signing of the Treaty of Aigun. The People’s Republic of China founded by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never ruled Taiwan. Taiwan was governed by the
RSS