Next stop Teheran?

Contrary to the concerns expressed by Pervez Musharraf that his country would be the next US target after Iraq, Washington has instead rapidly ratcheted up its rhetoric against Iran. President George Bush identified Iran two years ago as one of the three constituents—the others being Iraq and North Korea—of the “axis of evil”. All three “reasons” for the war on Iraq are being invoked. There is talk in Washington of the need for a regime change in Teheran. Iran is being accused of pursuing a nuclear weapon programme. The International Atomic Energy Agency had given a clean chit to Iran after a series of inspections; but this has apparently not satisfied the US. Iran is also being accused of involvement in international terrorism, especially after the May 12 Al Qaeda suicide bombing in Riyadh.

The logical way for Washington to deal with its concerns on these issues would be to enter into a serious dialogue with Iran. It is ironic that Washington has persistently asked New Delhi to talk to Pakistan, which has actually been guilty of the actions that Washington accuses Iran of, but seems unwilling to adopt that same path when it comes to Teheran. Yet Iran has a moderate elected government in power and has consistently denied pursuing a nuclear weapon programme. It had supported the US war on the Taliban, and remained neutral in the Iraq war welcoming the removal of Saddam Hussein. In fact, Washington’s tactics would only lead to strengthening the hardliners in Iran. Washington had agreed to talk to North Korea, despite the fact that it has withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, reportedly claims to possess a few nuclear bombs—and could make more, according to the US secretary of defence.

Unfortunately, however, the US has discontinued even the back channel talks it had with Iran. The increasing rhetoric emanating from Washington threatens to snowball into a larger confrontation within the logic of pre-emption, counter-proliferation and counter-terrorism. Given its diplomatic setbacks in failing to get UN Security Council backing for the war in Iraq, the US is unlikely to present its case to the UN, although if Washington is to be believed, international peace and security would come increasingly under threat in future. Alternately, if the US does not wish to talk to Iran, it should rely on diplomacy through the good offices of friendly countries like India to find a satisfactory solution to its concerns instead of raising the temperature that, given the situation in Iraq with its 62 per cent Shia population, could rapidly spin out of control, with extremely unpredictable consequences.