US and EU must work together on Iran

Iran has been in the news for quite some time now, mainly because of its alleged nuclear weapons programmes that have raised eyebrows in the West. In his annual State of the Union address US President George Bush accused Teheran of being the world's greatest sponsor of terrorism and in a recent interview Vice-President Dick Cheney said Iran was clearly in Washington's sights because of its nuclear programmes - unless, he said, Israel got there first.

Such comments cannot be ignored, although US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, during her very successful trip to Europe last week, made it clear that attacking Iran was not on the agenda.

Dealing with Iran is a complex issue that requires patience, intense diplomacy and the offer of an economic package in return for giving up any nuclear weapons programmes capability - with the threat of the use of force in the background.

The US has now said that it supports the diplomatic efforts of Britain, France and Germany, on behalf of the EU, in dealing with Iran, which is certainly welcome. It is important that Europe and the US speak with one voice when dealing with Iran - not just for the sake of it, but because at this point in time the most sensible option is diplomacy.

Iran is a country with immense resources that has the potential to be a force for stability in the region and a mini-superpower in the area. It has the potential for huge economic growth and to provide its citizens with a very high standard of living. It has a large educated middle class - many of whom have emigrated to the West - and it was a cradle of civilisation in the past with great achievements in culture, science, philosophy, architecture and poetry.

Although the 1979 revolution was a genuinely popular one there is no doubt that the mullahs today have overstayed their time in power, there has been gross economic mismanagement which has led to high levels of unemployment and economic decline, democracy was never really allowed to take root in the country, and, yes, some of the country's hard-line elements do have links to international terrorism and it looks as though the country is working on a nuclear weapons programme.

How can the West best influence events in Iran? A nuclear-armed non-democratic Iran that sponsors terrorism and is committed to the destruction of the state of Israel is not in the international community's interest. How long should diplomacy last and when will it be time for military force?

Last week Iran celebrated the 26th anniversary of the Islamic revolution that overthrew the pro-American Shah and his Pahlavi dynasty and the anti-Israeli and anti-American rhetoric was as fierce as usual. President Khatami warned that any invaders would encounter a burning hell in Iran.

Certainly, a US invasion, considering the situation in Iraq and America's past relationship with Iran would be nothing short of madness. A US or Israeli military strike against nuclear targets would be a huge gamble: if the strike fails and the country is left with a nuclear capability - don't forget that Iran's nuclear facilities are spread throughout the country, unlike Iraq's nuclear plant which was destroyed by Israeli jets in 1981 - then the US will have a huge challenge on its hands.

In such a scenario Iranians would rally around their government, Iran would become even more determined to produce nuclear weapons and even more hostile towards the West, and support for international terrorism would increase. Furthermore, any attack on Iran from the West would be used as an excuse by the mullahs to crack down further on the country's liberals who would be labelled "pro-Western".

There is also another reason why America and Europe cannot afford to antagonise Iran at this point in time: Iraq. After years of oppression at the hands of the minority Sunnis, the Shi'ites in Iraq - who make up 60 per cent of the population - are finally being given a taste of power after Iraq's parliamentary elections. Iran, a Shiite Muslim country, has a considerable amount of influence among the Iraqi Shi'ites and if provoked could became a major destabilising force in Iraq.

The Sunni insurgency in Iraq is bad enough; just imagine the problems with a Shi'ite insurgency. Furthermore, Iran has the potential to mobilise Hizbollah across Israel's border in Lebanon and just when there appears to be a ray of hope in the Middle East, this is the last thing that is needed.

The US administration - at least Condoleeza Rice - now seems to have toned down the rhetoric over Iran. Perhaps now it is time for Europe to increase its rhetoric with Teheran so as to move closer towards a common position with the US. However, any policy towards Iran must take into consideration Iran's security concerns.

The country was invaded many times last century, in 1953 the US and Britain overthrew the Nationalist government of Prime Minister Mossadegh when he nationalised the oil industry, and during the 1980-1988 war with Iraq Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against Iranian troops. So, yes, Iran does have legitimate security worries that must be addressed.

The US and the EU must work, together with their allies in the region, towards a security framework that includes both Iran and Iraq. The US should start thinking about ending its sanctions against Iran and forging a rapprochement with this country after a quarter of a century of hostilities, in return for Iran giving up its nuclear weapons-making capability.

If after intense diplomatic efforts, Iran refuses to make any concessions, ignores any goodwill measures from the West and continues to breach the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, then it should be reported to the United Nations Security Council and sanctions imposed on it. If the UN Security Council refuses to act then perhaps military action could be contemplated, but I hope it does not come to this because there are simply too many risks involved.

In the meantime, the EU and the US must continue to voice support for reformist elements in Iran - without giving the impression of interfering in the country's internal affairs.

Eventually the country's Ayatollahs and mullahs will lose their grip on power - the post-Khomeini generation is crying out for political and economic reform - but the international community must ensure that Iranians are not forced to rally around the clerics as a result of any outside interference.