Iran's nuclear activities are expected to be the focus of a periodical review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) at the UN this week. That should indeed be the case, given the hue and cry the West and Israel are raising, suggesting that the Iranian nuclear programme is aimed at developing atomic weapons.
The contention might indeed be true, given the hard line pursued by Iran since the ouster of the shah in 1979 and assumption of power by a theocracy-driven regime in Tehran. The government of Iran headed by hard-talking President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has also been fuelling Western frustration over the issue and giving more than enough of a pretext for Israel to carry out a military strike against Iran, as it did against Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.
On the other hand, in the absence of concrete evidence that Iran is indeed engaged in a nuclear programme to develop atomic weapons, there is little in international law that provides for punitive measures against the country.
Assumptions are not enough. That puts the dispute over Iran's nuclear programme at a level where everyone is convinced that it will eventually go for atomic weapons but nothing can be done to check the process before the country reaches weaponisation stage.
The measures against Iran include international sanctions, which are already in place, but the world has seen that they are not really working. Further tougher measures, even in the unlikely event that they are endorsed by the UN Security Council, are not going to have the desired effect.
The bottom line is clear: Iran will not desist on its own from pursuing the nuclear programme and Israel will not rest until it wrecks Iranian nuclear activities.The confrontation will have to play out on its own, with unpredictable consequences. In the meantime, the focus on Iran at this week's NPT review is bound to distract attention from the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons and refuses to abide by international law.
Egypt has been spearheading efforts to bring Israel under NPT purview for many years. At this week's NPT review, Egypt is expected to present the argument that establishing a Middle East nuclear-free zone is the key to resolving the nuclear standoff with Iran.
"Success in dealing with Iran will depend to a large extent on how successfully we deal with the establishment of a nuclear-free zone" in the Middle East, said Egypt's UN Ambassador Maged Abdel Aziz.
The international community could not agree with him more when he says that the existence of any nuclear weapons in the Middle East cannot be accepted, be it in Iran or in Israel. That is indeed the essence ofaresolution calling for the establishment of a nuclear-free Middle East. However, Israel remains deaf to all calls to abide by the resolution (not that Israel has a record of implementing any UN resolution that goes against its interest).
The NPT review is an excellent forum for all those who want Iran to suspend its nuclear programme to pressure Tehran by seeking the implementation of the 1995 resolution. However, no action can be expected unless Israel joins the effort by declaring willingness to sign the NPT and allow inspection of its nuclear facilities as the initial steps to turning the Middle East into a nuclear weapons-free region.
Israel is the last country that can be expected to comply. It will continue to maintain its "nuclear ambiguity" and stonewall all efforts to hold itself internationally accountable. So the question remains, where do we go from here and how do we work on making the Middle East a region free of nuclear weapons?
In simple terms, it is an impossible mission in the presence of the actual geopolitical features. Israel, which only says that it will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the event of an armed conflict in the region, will never give up its nuclear arsenal even if Iran abandons its atomic pursuit. Israel considers its atomic weapons key to maintaining its military superiority in the Middle East, which helps it get away with gross violations of international agreements, conventions and codes of conduct, and pursue its expansionist ambitions.
That determination is not directly linked to the Iranian nuclear programme, except that Israel fears that its military domination of the region would be a set back if the Iranians were to possess an atomic weapon. And the Iranians are equally determined in their nuclear pursuit. Hence, all diplomatic jargon aside, the logical conclusion is that this week's NPT review will only produce a lot of verbal fireworks and the delegates will return to their countries with little to show for from the UN conference.
Of course, the ideal approach will be to start a determined effort to bring pressure to bear upon Iran and Israel in equal measure, with no ambiguity over the goal of making the Middle East a nuclear-free region. However, idealism exists only on paper. One knows that Iran will find itself under immense heat at the NPT conference - not that one would be upset over that. But one would not like to see Israel get away with its nuclear weapons again and again. So why waste the time and effort?
By Musa Keilani
© Jordan Times 2010
