• Published 02:17 14.02.10
  • Latest update 09:09 14.02.10

Sanctions alone won't stop Iran's nuclear work

Without genuine U.S. determination, there is no chance of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

By Emily B. Landau Tags: Barack Obama Israel news Iran nuclear

Iran raised the extent of its defiance of the world when it began enriching uranium to a level approaching 20 percent. In the West, there is wide agreement that this step is bringing Iran closer to having a nuclear bomb. And as with every instance in which Iran takes such a step, or when information is revealed regarding the military nature of its nuclear program, the world is easily shocked and the call goes out for more decisive action. In practice, however, these are just hollow words.

U.S. President Barack Obama took office against the backdrop of intensified disclosure of military nuclear activities in Iran. At the end of September, when the enrichment facility that was built near the Iranian city of Qom was disclosed, Obama enlisted support from French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. He expressed his insistence that the situation was serious, and that if Iran did not alter its path there would be consequences. But there weren't.

And in October, when the deal to enrich uranium outside Iran was presented, Tehran was initially given a two-week extension and was then given until the end of the year. American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that the United States would not wait forever. In the meantime, however, the U.S. is waiting.

The end of the year, the deadline that Obama set for evaluating diplomatic progress on Iran, also came and went. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that nothing has been accomplished, and it has been clear that the essential next step will involve imposing sanctions. In January, however, with China in the rotating presidency of the United Nations Security Council, it was said that it was necessary to wait until February, when France would assume the post.

February has arrived, but the Chinese are still opposed to sanctions and the Iranians are enriching their uranium to a higher level. Obama's response is that he has had it and the time has come for sanctions and immediately - which means within a few weeks, perhaps by the end of March. In March, however, Gabon will assume the presidency of the Security Council, and it is not certain that Iran is at the top of its agenda. And there are still the problems with the Chinese.

And if we assume that ultimately there will be sanctions, so what? The involvement with sanctions, who's for and who's against, when, why and to what extent, deflects from the primary problem - the absence of an American strategy for tough negotiations with Iran. Even more serious, however, is that there are worrying signs that the Obama administration is beginning to resign itself not only to the fact that Iran will continue to enrich uranium, but also to recognition that the Islamic republic could ultimately build a nuclear bomb.

When you begin to reconcile with a specific reality, you stop trying to change it. And then we hear more about the need to deter and contain Iran than about stopping it, about a nuclear umbrella for America's allies in the Persian Gulf instead of a firm negotiating strategy against Iran. And sanctions alone won't stop Iran.

The role of sanctions and other pressure, such as credible military threats, is to convince Iran that time is not on its side and it would be better to seriously negotiate with the West. Only then will the diplomatic work of American-Iranian negotiations begin, with a goal of an arrangement that would eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat.

There is no sign that the Obama administration intends to mobilize the necessary political muscle to lead such a process. An additional decision on ineffective sanctions will apparently satisfy the U.S. So, we tried.

The weakness that Obama is showing toward Iran has implications for America's global leadership role. Israel must speak to the Americans about this, and instead of focusing on sanctions, should try to determine if and how the U.S. intends to lead a comprehensive process leading to a solution. Without genuine American determination, there is no prospect of preventing the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons.

The writer is a senior research associate at the Institute for National Security Studies, where she is also director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Project.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Photo by: (AP)
  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 36. 0 0
    To #32
    • wbramh
    • 17.02.10
    • 09:44

    Iran has a right to go nuclear in the same sense that a 4 year old child has a right to carry a loaded pistol. And if you honestly believe that Israel used "uranium" in Lebanon, you're delusional and should get back on your meds.

  • 35. 0 0
    Let iran have the Nukes! what is wrong here?
    • Tony Silver
    • 15.02.10
    • 17:16

    Israel has them. Iran wants them. So let them. I am not a support of Iran or Ahmdj, but if we want a nuclear free Middle - East, then Israel?s weapons will have to go.

  • 34. 0 0
    is israel above all International Laws?
    • Tony Silver
    • 15.02.10
    • 17:14

    No one is permitted to make nuclear weapons. Not being an NPT member does not mean certain attack. Look at Israel, North Korea, India, and Pakistan; no one attacks their nuke sites. No war is ever justified. People create wars to satisfy their own agenda.

  • 33. 0 0
    Double Standards!
    • Tony Silver
    • 15.02.10
    • 17:12

    Do as you would have others Sanctions and boycotts are needed on a cruel & racist repressive israel that cowardly drops bombs on UN buildings, schools, playhouses & hospitals. Israel defies all international calls on halt of settlements & rejects the calls for a Palestinian state from the hand that feeds it. Israel is cruel & racist repressive regime that rejects International calls for standing trial on war crimes and rejects to sign the NPT. It will be interesting to see how long Israel can last without stupid America?s support - before it yields and begins to act like a civilized nation

  • 32. 0 0
    iran has the right to have its nuclear facilities
    • Tony Silver
    • 15.02.10
    • 17:11

    When is ISRAEL going to acknowledge it HAS NUCLEAR WEAPON? And that it used URANIUM in south Lebanon attack?. Finally when this TERRORIST STATE will open its plants to INTERNATIONAL INSEPECTION?. ISRAEL CAN NOT continue to act as a vandals defying the international legality. ISRAEL HAS HAD A NUCLEAR MONOPOLY in the region for several decades. You cannot hide or ignore the truth, the double standards, of Israel's nuclear capability forever.

  • 31. 0 0
    Sanctions re Nuclear weapons
    • Denis C. Gray
    • 15.02.10
    • 16:34

    I've been reading articles and responses to them in Haaretz for some time. There is no topic so intriguing as the fact that Israel has nuclear capabilities but that no sanctions nor threat of sanctions has been made ever. Why not?

  • 30. 0 0
    Sanctions alone won't stop Iran's nuclear work
    • Lawrence M. Yates
    • 15.02.10
    • 12:03

    I do agree that sanctions alone will not stop Iran; they should be complemented with precision military strikes at all its nuclear sites. Time is running out. The longer the powers wait the more defiant Iran will become and in the end, we shall see the dawn of the Third World War.

  • 29. 0 0
    Iran does not answer to threats. Live with it.
    • gus
    • 15.02.10
    • 09:46

    The world must understand that Iran's nuclear ambition is here to stay. Iran cannot survive without Nuclear technology. The world lived with israeli Nuclear facts and Israel and the world must start getting used to Iran with Neclear technology. If you are thinking of attacking Iran, think again. it will be the best favor you do for their regime and then Iran will build a Nuclear plant in every city. Shia Muslim do not buckle under threat, they rather die like our Imam Hussien before we surrender. You should have learned this in South Lebanon and you will learn this when you attack Iran.

  • 28. 0 0
    No US war in Iran just like no Israeli west bank withdrawal
    • US Jew
    • 15.02.10
    • 08:16

    The growing and deeply felt need for international withdrawal by very, very angry US voters is clear to Obama - its jobs, jobs, jobs & reduce the deficit, period. How long did it take after the Great Depression for the US to enter WWII? Watch-- too many US deaths this Spring in the Afghanistan surge & Obama will start making pull-back noises. So, its fine to arm the Gulf States & try for international sanctions on the Republican Guards, but it will be many years before the US voters will stand for another war in the middle east. It is seen as past time for Israel, the EU, and Arab states to protect themselves. Obama is seen in the US as having failed in 2009 to get Israel to reverse its west bank policies & most in the US see that as the last straw; Israel is increasingly seen as an unreliable ally whose antagonistic behavior must not be allowed to push the US into another quagmire the US can't afford. This is part of the slow tectonic shift in world leadership that is occurring

  • 27. 0 0
    Israel Must accept nuclear Iran..!
    • Proud American
    • 15.02.10
    • 05:33

    I have few advise to Israeilies... Since Israel is the Nuclear threat to Middle East and the whole world, we need some sort of alternative to balance the power in Middle East , so Israelis will give up the Idea of dominating the region and the whole world. Therefor there is no better candidate then Iran in the whole region,to be that alternative, since Arab countries are not even capable of defending themselves , let alone defending the region.Israel should accept Iran as a Nuclear Power of the region and there is no way around that..!Now if you think you've got the bulls to attack Iran, Go ahead and try it..! But remember IRAN is not anything like Arab countries like Iraq. So make No mistake, because attacking Iran equals the disappearance of Israeli from face of the Earth, and I am sure you don't want that..!

  • 26. 0 0
    #4, Cipora
    • azbob
    • 15.02.10
    • 04:41

    Your supreme arrogance is showing. Who has armed whom? How much has the US armed Israel? Does Israel have nuclear weapons, nuclear subs, and the most modern military machine? Why don't you have Israel discard its nuclear bombs, disband the illegal settlements and end the illegal occupation, then we can talk. Until then please quit buying off the US Congress, recall AIPAC to Israel to where it belongs (part of your spy and propaganda machine) and then do whatever it is that you seem to want to do: have perpetual war. Oh, and by the way: please, please refuse any further aid from the US, as you seem not to need us anymore.

  • 25. 0 0
    Iran CANNOT be prevented
    • Oscar Lopez
    • 15.02.10
    • 02:06

    However much Western politicians like to pretend the contrary, Iran CANNOT be prevented from getting the bomb with any military action short of full-scale invasion, which would make the Iraq war look like a picnic by comparison and can only be contemplated by insane persons. But how about trying for a GRAND BARGAIN where Israel gave up its nukes and witdrew to its internationally recognised borders???

  • 24. 0 0
    Israeli nukes - no sanctions at all
    • ruiz
    • 15.02.10
    • 00:13

    Israel threats to attack Iran by military force nearly every single day. That sense of HAPPY KILLING is frightening the world. There never ever had been a communique that Israel would abandon its own nukes if Iran takes down its own nuclear projects. Why hadn t been there any sanctions against Israel while that nation developed its own nukes?? BTW: By focussing on the issue of Iranian nukes the jewish population is deflected from most important real problems of their own country.

  • 23. 0 0
    This current move by Iran is easily explained.
    • Johnboy
    • 14.02.10
    • 23:52

    The Gang of Six made an offer to Iran: ship us all your uranium, and we'll give you an I.O.U. Iran made the sensible observation that they are giving up something tangible in return for a promise. Iran then made a counter proposal (again, sensibly): we will give up *some* uranium in exchange for *some* fuel rods, and this can continue until *all* the swapping is complete. The Gang of Six told Iran that the original deal is take it or leave it. Iran: Then we'll leave it, because we can make our own, thanks very much. Gang of Six: [Splutter] [Bluster] [Bombast] Israel: [Squeek] [Squeal] [Jabber] Allow me an observation: don't try to bluff the Iranians, coz they ain't playing poker. It looks more like a chess game to me.

  • 22. 0 0
    IRAN Sanctions Ha! Ha! Ha!
    • The Teacher/Instruct
    • 14.02.10
    • 22:52

    IRAN & Sanctions. It simply won't work with that transient regime. They look at the world through another kind of prism. Other means will have to be applied.

  • 21. 0 0
    Dan Halutz
    • Sam
    • 14.02.10
    • 21:36

    gave a qualified and honest evaluation of the situation. What needed are smart power and MAD. The mullahs are not weary of life.

  • 20. 0 0
    Natallie
    • Renny
    • 14.02.10
    • 20:10

    Obama was elected to end the war but he is sent more troops to Afghanastan. He was elected to close Guatanamo, but that is not going to happen.

  • 19. 0 0
    N0.7-- Chris Linthwaite--US doesn't care!
    • a wandering Jew
    • 14.02.10
    • 18:24

    China's hold on the US is more imagined than real. Most of their Treasuries are shorter-dated issues which means that any decline in price brings in large buyers as Treasury bills pay virtually nothing at the moment. As the Euro declines due to Greece and other EU failures, funds flow into US Treasuries for safety. Additionally, the US would love to place tariffs or restrictions on Chinese goods sold into the US to create the opportunity for the US to re-build and to re-employ its manufacturing industries. Protectionism is still alive and well, it is good domestic politics.

  • 18. 0 0
    Vulnerable
    • Jan Elshout
    • 14.02.10
    • 15:53

    MPatel #10 is right. Only a nuclear free M.East can solve the problem. Iran is very vulnerable: surrounded by nuclear states (Russia, many surrounding countries with US troops, Israel, Pakistan) and thereby threatened, just as it was by chemical weapons of Sadam. It will see own nukes as only defense to prevent attacks on their country. Showing Iran as a threat to Israel is therefore turning things upside down. Besides, Iran has never theatened physical destruction of Israel, like many people say and has been maliciously translated. Ahmedinejad has said that this very Zionist regime (suppressing Arabs) should come to an end. That is just like the "regime change" that the US has threatened for several countries.

  • 17. 0 0
    Americas Stooge, her Shaheed? 2
    • David Turner
    • 14.02.10
    • 15:23

    "We are taking upon ourselves a task that is bigger than us... the State of Israel should not ? be the flag-bearer of the entire Western world in the face of the Iranian threat." And, he reminds we with strong opinions on such matters, "I'm not some passer-by ... I've filled a few positions that give me a different level of information to the average person." Two successive American presidents have sought to set Israel up as the military bite to the feeble US sanctions bark. By invading Iraq the US set the stage for the Iranian threat. The cleanup job is not for Israel, but for the US. Yes, as the US constantly reminds the world, Iran is an *existential threat for Israel.* But an even greater threat is isolation by the entire world for causing the oil to stop flowing, for tipping the world from the Bush Great Recession into, if Israel agrees to the American script for her, the Israel Great Depression. Israel is not Americas stooge. Dont agree to be her shaheed!

  • 16. 0 0
    Americas Stooge, her Shaheed? 1
    • David Turner
    • 14.02.10
    • 15:23

    There has never been a doubt that the US position of dependence on sanctions would never work. According to a recent NY Times article, "the list of [Iranian] sanctions is [already] six pages long. But none have accomplished the central goal." Not surprising since, the article continues, "North Korea, Cuba and Myanmar have been economically isolated for decades, with little effect." No, the real reason is that the US has been squirming out of a new ME confrontation since the problem rose for Bush in Iraq. According to a senior White House official, "This [sanctions policy] is about driving them back to negotiations, "because the real goal here is to avoid war.? But if war is an extension of diplomacy, what is diplomacy without the threat of war? Dan Halutz, former IAF commander is not just an outsider to IDF decision-making. When asked about Israeli [political] leaders' vows to "take care" of the perceived [Iranian] threat, the former IDF Ramat Kal said,

  • 15. 0 0
    A diplomatic solution would be a disaster
    • Leo
    • 14.02.10
    • 15:15

    They will have moved so close that sooner or later the ability and the opportunity to complete what they had started will present itself. From Israel's point of view and probably from the US point of view as well, the mullahs have to be seriously taken down a peg. and they need to be seen to be taken down a peg. Iran sponsors most of the terrorism in the world. They need to be defanged.

  • 14. 0 0
    The West cannot afford to wait.
    • Jerusalem Jew
    • 14.02.10
    • 14:51

    It is wrong to suggest that the road to a solution re Iran's nuclear program has to involve the palestinian issue.It's exactly the other way round: Iran is fueling the anti-peace front led by Syria, hamas and hizbollah. There can be no peace in the ME, as long as Iran can go ahead with its nuclear program.Obama is a weak amateur who has no clue. He is the biggest stumbling block for peace in the ME.From the moment Iran gets the bomb, it doesn't even have to use it: it only has to threaten to use it, e.g. in case of a conventional war between Israel and its neighbors.The West cannot count on the Iranian opposition. It's simply too weak.Either Obama wakes up from his naive ineptitude, or ISrael - again - will have to do the job of saving the world from an irresponsible regime.The world shouted when Israel attacked the Iraqi nuclear reactor. They will do the same in ths case. Let them. Better the world shouting, than an Iranian nuclear missile hitting Israel.

  • 13. 0 0
    Sanctions Alone
    • MPatel
    • 14.02.10
    • 14:33

    The only way Iran can be pressurized is to make Middle East free of Nuclear wepons. Is the so called world community ready to do so? Do they have political and moral courage to do so? If yes the Middle East will be hevan on earth and if not be face the reality.

  • 12. 0 0
    Obama's options
    • Wally
    • 14.02.10
    • 14:17

    To add to my previous comment, beyond sanctions, what would you have Mr. Obama do? Tough talk is nice, until someone calls you on it. Then you better be prepared to back it up with something more than hot air. Let me remind you that the first Nuclear power to emerge out of Mr. Bush's "Axis of Evil" was North Korea, and they went nuclear under Bush's nose - not Obama's. So much for the power of hot air.

  • 11. 0 0
    Sanction
    • Wally
    • 14.02.10
    • 14:09

    IMO All of the sanctions on Earth will not deter Iran's regime. North Korea couldn't be much more isolated than it already is, yet, that isolation hasn't deterred Kim's regime from its nuclear ambitions. And in all probability, China (and others) will simply increase their business with Iran to offset any of Iran's losses from the West. Even if Russia agrees to sanctions, it won't matter.

  • 10. 0 0
    Paraphrasing Emily Landau
    • Petter Etter
    • 14.02.10
    • 13:41

    The weakness that Obama is showing toward Israel has implications for America's global leadership role. The World community must speak to the Americans about this, and instead of focusing on shadow diplomacy, should try to determine if and how the U.S. intends to lead a comprehensive process leading to a solution. Without genuine American determination, there is no prospect of preventing Israel from aggravating the standing of the U.S. among the nations of the World even more.

  • 9. 0 0
    #.4. Chris Linthwaite.
    • Stephen.
    • 14.02.10
    • 12:12

    C·mon Chris, You state, "Israel and Israelis pontificating from the sidelines are irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things". Actually, Chris you have made a point. For Iran will not attack you or Switzerland. However, they have this dangerous attitude, mainly due to religious fanaticism and belief that they will become a ME Superpower. Few, if any, actually understand the current regime. What we do know, is that the people suffer, hence the Green Revolution, that faces imprisonment,torture and death by hanging. If sanctions of any manner cannot be imposed, that is, against the Revolutionary Guards and their ilk. I am afraid that a nuclear armed Iran, in the hands of the above group would constitute a major threat to all those in the Gulf. Forget about Israel. Israel can take care of itself. As shown in the past...and present. Get my drift, dude.!

  • 8. 0 0
    #.2.Cipora. Well written.
    • Stephen.
    • 14.02.10
    • 12:00

    Cipora shalom, As usual to the point. The Persian Regime is not Arab. The Gulf States know that they are a target. For they cannot retaliate, unlike Israel. Which, in this case would release a devastating strike that would cause the final and definite downfall of Mr.Ahmadinejad and his jolly men. Maybe, the people of Iran are well aware of said situation. They seek a better life. Above all FREEDOM from this despotic regime. Shavua tov.

  • 7. 0 0
    The key to prevent Iran going nuclear
    • Chris Linthwaite
    • 14.02.10
    • 10:55

    is to address the concerns of Russia and China in the region. It is no longer possible to go to China and Russia and ask that sanctions be imposed on Iran just because the west wants them imposed. International diplomacy means a bit of give and take. The days post collapse of the iron curtain are over, and the days when the US could demand of China or ignored are also over. China literally owns the United States. Israel and Israelis pontificating from the sidelines are irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things.

  • 6. 0 0
    Nukes
    • JJ
    • 14.02.10
    • 10:45

    for Egypt and Saudi Arabia are needed urgently. This will provide balance against Iran, Israel and give a good chance for the Saudi peace plan. You see peace is done between equals. Not between strong and weak.

  • 5. 0 0
    1 There are many roads to Iran but none goes through Israel
    • Realist
    • 14.02.10
    • 10:18

    Your lack of map reading skills makes you a bad navigator. Iran borders Afghanistan and Iraq, not Israel. The Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf are another way of getting into Iran and so is the Caspian sea. Iran also borders Turkey and, if I remember rightly, Azerbaijan and Armenia. Free the people, death to the murderers! The blood of the martyrs will not be forgotten.

  • 4. 0 0
    #1, "American," no quid pro quo
    • Cipora Julianna Kohn
    • 14.02.10
    • 09:38

    "so you want arab support," says so-called american. the arabs are on the front line facing iran, or have you forgotten. the united states is arming the gulf states with anti-missile weapons systems and training their forces in their use. the arabs have bought huge quantities of weapons, including fighter planes. it is obvious that the road to teheran goes through the persian gulf.

  • 3. 0 0
    THe road to Teheran vis the West Bank and Palestine.
    • American
    • 14.02.10
    • 07:51

    Quid pro quo. So you want the Arab support. Why should they agree? When Israel was bombing Lebanese civilians, US planes were rearming ISrael. So we think the Arabs are stupid and forgetful. Think again.

  • 2. 0 0
    The US lacks the genuine will..
    • American
    • 14.02.10
    • 07:49

    .. first to pressure Israel to vacate Arab lands after 43 years of occupation and cannot raise the heat accordingly on Israel for that that same reason.

  • 1. 0 0
    What are the chances that Obama will start a war with Iran?
    • Natallie Durson
    • 14.02.10
    • 07:40

    Of course, there is no chance at all. Obama was elected to end the war, not to expand it. It would take far more than Israeli dramatics to change Obamas mind.