Time for Iran to reciprocate

THE overtures by US President Barack Obama in reaching out to Iran, on a number of occasions since assuming power, have been especially noted and appreciated by Iran’s neighbouring states, principally the UAE. The UAE President, His Highness Shaikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, in an interview to Qatar newspaper, Al Watan, preceding the forthcoming Arab summit in Doha, appreciated the US initiative in establishing a dialogue with Tehran. Though the Obama administration is unequivocally opposed to Iran’s acquisition of an alleged military nuclear programme, it has adopted a more reconciliatory approach in dealing with Tehran than the previous Bush administration. Obama’s recent video message to Iran further affirms the seriousness of the US commitment to resolve tensions and end a decades old political standoff between the two countries. The biggest impediment to the US-Iran relations in recent years has been the Iranian activities in pursuing illicit means to acquire nuclear capability that Iran stresses is for civilian energy purposes. Despite opposing measures to deter Iran — which include both stringent economic sanctions and international offers to help Iran acquire a civilian nuclear capability through legal channels — the Iranian leadership continues its pursuit of nuclear capability through covert means. Apart from the big security concern of a nuclear powered Iran, the Gulf States are also duly concerned about Iran’s actions in the region. These include its interventionist policies in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, besides its sporadic attempts at inciting sectarian groups in Gulf States, as well as belligerent assertions in the form of provocative statements on the sovereignty of other states. The UAE’s long-standing dispute with Iran over its illegal occupation of the three islands of Abu Musa, Lower Tunb and Greater Tunb is yet to be resolved. Though the UAE leadership has made considerable efforts to maintain good relations with Iran despite the island dispute, and concentrated on dialogue and political solutions, Iran has refused to budge on the islands, or refer the case to the International Court of Justice.
Shaikh Khalifa displaying political wisdom and maturity has reiterated the necessity of dialogue with Iran to overcome regional tensions. He said, “Dialogue is required to overcome crisis. It is the sole channel to overcome problems in the region and usher in a new era of peace and stability.’ The UAE has also been urging Iran to pursue a similar programme as the UAE, of developing a civilian nuclear programme through legal international means. Iran has been offered an olive branch since the change in US administration. Apart from the key chance of reconciliation offered by Obama, the Iranian leadership should realise that the regional position of its neighbours is strongly opposed to a military nuclear programme. It is time Iran dropped its abrasive and rigid stance and showed flexibility in its relations and dealings with both the regional states and Washington. It would also be a wonderful opportunity to repair its relations with the UAE and refer the contentious issue of the islands to an international body — in case both parties fail to reach a resolution. Above all, Iran can attain both a civilian nuclear programme and gain major economic benefits if it abandons its current isolationist position. The ball now is in Tehran’s court.

No playing with Sudan’s stability

IN defiance of the International Criminal Court and the arrest warrant it has issued against him for war crimes in Darfur, Sudan’s President Omar Bashir has been to Eritrea and Egypt. It is clear that he will now travel to Doha for the two-day Arab Summit beginning on Monday and for the summit of Arab and South American leaders, which takes place immediately afterward. Indeed, it would not be surprising if he did not now embark on a whirlwind tour of Arab and African capitals to demonstrate his scorn for the ICC. He may even go further afield. For Arab countries and African ones, rejecting its warrant does not mean rejection of the ICC or contempt for it. It is not because President Bashir is the leader of an Arab or African country that the Arab League and the African Union (AU) have rallied to his side and refused to carry out requests to arrest him — and no Arab country is going to force down his plane as he flies overhead to Qatar, despite the fantasying of ICC officials. The reasons are far more pragmatic. There is a real fear that Bashir’s arrest could violently destabilize Sudan. The country has enough problems as it is: Darfur, an uneasy peace in eastern Sudan and a deal between north and south that could be blown wide apart by competing claims to oil-rich border territories. A power vacuum at the center would be enough to tip Sudan over the edge.
Arabs cannot afford another Iraq, Africans another Somalia. It was the power vacuums in both that allowed the poison of Al-Qaeda to spread within and beyond. For Africa too, there are other disastrous regional implications of a Sudan in flames. It would impact on all its neighbors, particularly Chad, where political divisions are closely linked to those in Sudan, and in Uganda and DR Congo. There, the Lord’s Resistance Army — the nearest “Christian” equivalent of Al-Qaeda; equally fanatical and equally murderous — is on the run. Instability in Sudan could give it a new lease of life. Lastly, there is the destructive rivalry between Ethiopia and Eritrea who will use anywhere as a proxy to continue the fight. That is the reason the Arab League, the AU, even the international aid agencies banned by Sudan are so opposed to the warrant. It is not an act of solidarity with President Bashir. It is an act of deep concern about the country itself. That is why both the Arab League and the AU want the warrant delayed at least a year, to give time for a compromise to be found. Saying No to the ICC is not lightly done. There are real risks for governments. Aid and trade could be threatened. Those who say that states which have not signed up to the ICC are not obliged to carry out its arrest warrants are wrong. The investigations were carried out at the UN’s request; the warrant has the force of UN law behind it. But the stability and unity of Sudan come first. It needs all the help it can get at the moment. This is not the time for an act that could threaten its existence.

—Arab News