08.06.2023
Dreadful notes of preparation
Yassamine Mather looks at the high-stakes diplomatic game being played out and the danger of cold war turning into a hot war
On June 4, Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu renewed his threats to attack Iranian nuclear facilities in Natanz and elsewhere, lambasting United Nations nuclear inspectors for failing to confront Tehran. All this was discussed in a security cabinet war meeting convened in an underground command centre, for a ‘mock assessment’ of what the current Israeli government calls a “multi-front war exercise”. The particular focus was on the northern frontier (Lebanon) and Iran.
A few days earlier, on May 29, the Israeli Defence Forces had launched a two-week military drill entitled ‘Firm Hand’ - conducting a simulation of an airforce strike against ‘strategic’ targets in enemy territory, as well as a navy mock offensive and defensive actions, in what are actually exercises preparing for a possible all-out war. Starting the meeting, Netanyahu referred to European and US attempts at reviving the Iran nuclear negotiations and reaching a diplomatic solution. He ominously said: “We are confident we can handle any threat on our own.”
Sanctions
Of course the military exercise and cabinet meeting were pre-planned, but they came during escalated tensions over Iran’s nuclear programme and Israeli warnings that a broad conflict could break out.
In April, the website Axios reported attempts by the US administration to discuss proposals for an interim agreement with Iran’s Islamic Republic, which would include lifting some sanctions in exchange for freezing parts of the country’s nuclear programme. By all accounts the Biden administration tried and failed to get Israeli support for this plan. Then on June 3 the Financial Times reported:
US and European powers have resumed discussions on how to engage with Iran over its nuclear activity, as fears mount that the Islamic republic’s aggressive expansion of its programme risks triggering a regional war … there has been contact with Iranian officials in recent months, including a meeting in Oslo in March between officials from the so-called E3 (European 3) - France, Germany and the UK - and Ali Bagheri Kani, Iran’s nuclear negotiator. Rob Malley, the US’s Iran envoy, has met several times with Iran’s UN ambassador, Amir Saeid Iravani, who was a senior official at the Supreme National Security Council before being posted to New York.1
These discussions are the first direct talks between the US and Iran since the US withdrawal from the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) during Donald Trump’s presidency. We should also remember the charade of last year, when, during nuclear talks in Vienna, Iran and the US refused to meet face to face and we had a bizarre set of meetings, where both sides only spoke to the European delegations in separate meeting rooms - one for Iran and the Europeans and the other for the US and the Europeans. As most people familiar with international relations know (but often fail to admit), global diplomacy remains a secret ‘art’, hidden from the public and media.
These ‘secret’ negotiations do not mean we will definitely see a resumption of the nuclear negotiations. The US administration is unlikely to embark on such an endeavour this side of the 2024 US presidential elections. In fact, as always, the ‘carrot’ of possible reduction in sanctions comes at the same time as the ‘stick’ - the threat of military attack, thanks to state department warnings. Addressing the pro-Israeli American Israel Public Affairs Committee on June 5, secretary of state Antony Blinken said: “If Iran rejects the path of diplomacy, then, as president Joe Biden has repeatedly made clear, all options are on the table to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.” All this at a time when the US military is publicising the launch of what The EurAsian Times calls a “massive ordnance penetrator bomb that can ‘wipe out’ Iran’s nuclear facilities”.
The paper reports:
On May 2, the US military released images of the GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker buster, or MOP, at the Whiteman US Air Force Base in Missouri’s Facebook page. The facility houses US B-2 bombers - the only aircraft capable of dropping the MOP bomb.
In a caption, the base stated that it had received two MOP bombs, so a munitions squadron could “test their performance”. However, the photos were deleted shortly after to prevent the leak of sensitive information about the composition and payload of the weapon.2
As always, there are conflicting reports about Iran’s nuclear capability. According to western security agencies, Iran has managed to enrich enough uranium to 60% fissile purity, although further purification would be needed to achieve weapon-grade uranium, which is supposed to allow Iran to construct two nuclear bombs in around two weeks. According to a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, compiled in January 2023, uranium particles enriched to 83.7% purity were found in Iranian plants (uranium enriched to 90% purity is considered weapon-grade). The Islamic Republic denies these accusations, but Israel is using such reports to threaten pre-emptive military strikes. On June 5 Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told a news conference that “Iran’s enriched uranium reserves have increased by more than a quarter in the last three months”, adding that his agency has installed monitoring equipment in some of Iran’s nuclear facilities and is investigating matters.
Agendas
If all this was not enough to raise the risk of confrontation in the Middle East, on June 7 Iran demonstrated its first hypersonic missile capable of outpacing missile defence systems. The Fattath (‘Conqueror’) missile was unveiled in a ceremony attended by Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi and leading officers of the Iran Revolutionary Guards Command. It is claimed by Iran that the missile can attain a speed of over 5,000 metres per second, with a range of 1,400 kilometres.
Of course, any major conflict involving Iran, the US and Israel would have different contenders - with contradictory agendas. For the Islamic Republic - which is facing continued unrest and a young population refusing to adhere to ‘correct’ Shia social behaviour - it would be beneficial to create a diversion via yet another international crisis. According to sections of the ruling clerics, the religious state can be saved by continuing a state of cold war with the ‘foreign enemy’ - Israel - and the US, the ‘great Satan’. This group considers the threat of a cold war (even escalating into a real war) to be a blessing, so it will continue taking risks in the shape of continuing nuclear development, rattling hypersonic missiles and selling drones to Russia.
The embattled Netanyahu government in Israel is also keen to continue a cold war, and some members of his rightwing government clearly believe an attack on Hezbollah and a possible ‘all-out war’ on Iran would have many benefits - not least allowing the current coalition to remain in office. The mass demonstrations of a few weeks ago are currently on hold, as the coalition has delayed its judicial overhaul. However, the delay cannot continue forever. A war with Hezbollah and subsequently Iran will be ‘god’s gift’.
The United States is keen to support Israel, its main ally in the region, but a war in the Middle East is the last thing it wants. US diplomats travelling to Jerusalem have a single message: the US is dealing with Iran, so Israel has to show patience and trust the US administration.
For the three European countries involved in the Iran nuclear talks - the UK, France and Germany - the main concern is guaranteeing access to cheaper fuel next winter. Given Saudi plans to cut oil exports by one million barrels a day from July, in line with recent Opec decisions to curb oil exports, a resumption of oil exports from Iran (currently halted because of US sanctions) would make a significant contribution to reducing fuel bills. However, the three European countries have divisions of their own. Although France and Germany do not seem too concerned by Iran’s endless supply of drones to Russia (used in the Ukraine war), the United Kingdom, with its current bellicose position regarding that war, is more likely to take a pro-Israeli position.
All this is contributing to more uncertainty, a continued cold war and the possibility of actual war in the Middle East.