Nobody can fault the Iranians for lack of subtlety. Be it the delicate dance over its alleged nuclear program or gradually and inexorably building a position of power and strength in the region or maneuvering deftly through the maze of international politics, Iran has done it all with adroitness. It amplified and intensified its nuclear program soon after the George Bush administration labeled it as a component of the ‘ axis of evil’, resisted pressure by the international community over its alleged program, and maneuvered deftly and adroitly in the changing equations and changed balance of power in the Middle East, post Gulf War II.
More recently, it held elections and elected Hassan Rohani with a landslide margin as the president of Iran. What is remarkable about the election of Rohani is that neither the reformists nor the hardliners murmured a word of protest or mumbled against his elections. Iran apparently is unified over his election. What all this tell about Iran, regional politics and Iran’s status?
First and foremost, despite numbers and statistics, that indicate a worrying state of the economy for Iran-30% inflation and over 40% of Iranians living under the poverty line- sanctions have not had the intended effect of splitting Iranians and making them rebel against the regime. To the contrary, Iranians seem to have become more unified with no major differences or splits emerging. What explains this apparent contradiction and counterintuitive theme?
Nuclear nationalism and Iranian pride may be the answers. Both go together. Nuclear weapons not only are the only security guarantors but can potentially- especially in the volatile Middle East region- provide and accord hegemonic status to a state that has a nuclear arsenal. Acquisition of nuclear weapons accord Iran hegemonic status in the region- a status it could never have despite being an Islamic Republic. (Being Shi’ite coupled with the fact that the centre of gravity of Islam remained Saudi Arabia on account of its custodianship of Islam’s holiest places- Mecca and Medina, Iran could not sate this aspiration). Nukes potentially give Iran the much coveted regional hegemonic status albeit in a convoluted way and not at the same level as Saudi Arabia in terms of prestige and standing in the Islamic world.
This along with the squeeze induced by sanctions and the occasional rhetoric of a pre-emptive strike against Iran appears to have unified the Iranians. A new nationalism overlain by Islam appears to be developing in Iran. This is ominous. How can this nationalism approximating what may be called Islamo-nationalism be accommodated by the world and above all what can be done about Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons capability?
Instead of viewing Iran’s emerging combination of Islam and nationalism as a threat, the international community(read the United States) should view it as an opportunity albeit in a qualified manner. Why? A rigid confrontationalist approach would only harden and solidify angst against the west. Moreover, a qualified acceptance of Iran as one of the regional powers would sate the grandiosity complex that Iran collectively suffers from. This may mean accepting Iran’s nuclear quest. This counterintuitive option that will appear bizarre to many in the west may be most prudent. The reasons are manifold: a pre-emptive strike is a non starter, war is a mugs game and continued sanctions useless.
The question now is what would prevent Iran from being an aggressor and a dominating force in the Middle East? Nuclear proliferation in the region may be the answer. Again, this is counterintuitive but may be the most prudent answer. Extended deterrence provided by the US nuclear umbrella in the region would not suffice in this schema. What may be needed is allowing Saudis to go nuclear and deepening the alliance structure with the mini Gulf statelets. This makes the balance of power in the region more even and also leads to a balance of force(s) in the region. Nuclear parity- as the Indo Pak deterrence paradigm so eloquently demonstrates- can lead to over improvement and increase in security. The same may hold true for Iran. What needs to be guarded against is the lapse into proxy wars under the shield of nukes. This can potentially be cancelled out again by engendering a balance of power in the region(this means arms racing) and removing the props for conflict in the region. The reference here is to the Palestianian-Israeli dispute and its resolution. The moribund peace process needs to be revived and a satisfiscing solution arrived at.
In combination, a focus on these factors and elements may lead to a more peaceful Middle East and may keep Iran in check. The price to be paid is proliferation in the region which , on balance, may not be a bad option. The world or the region cannot afford recrudescence into irredentist conflict with nuclear overtones. It is about time a new Iran strategy is formulated and implemented.
No comments:
Post a Comment