September 26, 2007

U.N. General Assembly: Like Last Year, Only Worse

The astute Brits at the Economist called it.

By granting so many interviews to curious American journalists and agreeing to take questions from college students at Columbia, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made sure that this year's meeting of the U.N. General Assembly would revolve around him. It helps that his BFF in these parts, Venezuelan firebrand Hugo Chavez, sat this one out, which means Ahmadinejad's "no gays in Iran" statement remains the craziest (and most sinister) thing said all week.

Ahmadinejad put on his "serious" face (no smiling) yesterday when he delivered his U.S.-centric speech before the General Assembly. The American delegation didn't bother to stick around for its entirety, such was its predictability. If this scenario reminds you of last year's meeting at the U.N., it should. The bottom line for the Security Council has been no nuclear material for Iran, period. Yesterday, Ahmadinejad ensured that the U.N. will act to shut him down, one way or another.

It's one year later and we are where we were, only Iran has more centrifuges and won't allow IAEA inspectors access to monitor its efforts to build a faster and more modern centrifuge. Yesterday, Ahmadinejad declared, "I officially announce that in our opinion the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed and has turned into an ordinary [IAEA] matter."

Actually, the IAEA referred the matter of Iran's nuclear program to the Security Council after getting nowhere with officials there. And a new round of sanctions appears likely, if not imminent. For one, Ahmadinejad appears to have forced Germany's Angela Merkel, who was waffling in recent weeks, off the fence. Germany will "press for further, tougher sanctions if Iran doesn't back down,'' Merkel said before the General Assembly yesterday. "For me as German chancellor, Israel's security is never negotiable.''

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said that she does not expect a new U.N. resolution by the end of this week, but already there are efforts here and abroad to choke off Iran's finances. If the Bush administration has indeed revved up war-gaming in Iran, it may be because of the realization sanctions won't have near the same effect there as they did on the nuclear club's black sheep, North Korea.

"We can't afford to let the international community and the world lose faith in the diplomatic track. And I do think that we are experiencing some loss of faith and even credibility in the diplomatic track if it starts to grind to a halt," Rice told Reuters earlier this week.

China and Russia reluctantly signed on to sanctions in previous rounds out of fear that the U.S. would act unilaterally against their ally. Along with Britain and Germany, Washington has a new ally on this matter from the unlikeliest of places: France. In a fiery inaugural address before the body, President Nicolas Sarkozy called for tougher measures on Iran. "Weakness and renunciation do not lead to peace. They lead to war," he said.

With the threats ratcheting up, Russia and China could well be persuaded to sign on to tougher sanctions. Neither wants Iran to be a nuclear power, though they seem to believe Tehran's claims that its uranium enrichment program is for energy only. (Russia built Iran's Bushehr reactor and helped train hundreds of Iranian nuclear scientists.) Both nations share Iran's scorn for American hegemony, and have swimmingly lucrative economic ties. They also share Western concerns about Iran -- Russia somewhat sloppily equates Chechnyan separatists to Islamic militants in the Middle East, and China worries about war in its backyard.

The sudden surge of war-speak when it comes to Iran appears to be more strategy than anything meant literally, for now. In her Reuters interview, Rice acknowledged that Tehran is probably exaggerating claims about its uranium enrichment prowess, which means there is time to let the sanctions process play out. For all the accusations about their lust for war, it's more likely Bush administration officials want badly to avoid a repeat of the Iraq invasion. Saddam Hussein allowed the world to believe he possessed WMD, some suspect, in order to bolster his bad-guy cred in the neighborhood.

"They want to hurt us," Ahmadinejad said of the U.S. yesterday, "but with the will of God, they won't be able to do it." From Ahmadinejad's point of view, certainly, there is a principle at stake -- freedom from Western interference. Maybe Iran really isn't anywhere close to possessing nukes, or maybe it really has no interest in getting there. But the longer it shrouds its nuclear program in secrecy, the more difficult it will be for the Security Council to buy its "peaceful purposes" claims. If sanctions prove ineffective at empowering the anti-mullahcracy populace, and a military strike is cleared, whose fault will it be?

The roadshow continues. Ahmadinejad is heading south to hook up with Chavez, where the bear hugs and anti-American rhetorical gymnastics will no doubt abound. NPR's Corey Flintoff wonders how Ahmadinejad's U.S. tour is playing at home, while the Politico reports on how it's playing on the Hill.

-JANE ROH

(Photo of Ahmadinejad and Chavez from the Iranian government's Web site.)

Posted at 1:15 PM
Posted to: Asia, Bush Administration, Chechnya, China, Condoleezza Rice, Hugo Chavez, IAEA, Iran, Iraq, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, President Bush, Russia, Terrorism, U.N.
Share via