Increasing the pressure on Iran

The decision of the United Nations Security Council to impose further sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme has put additional pressure on Tehran to live up to its international obligations.

The sanctions are a victory for the Obama administration which managed to convince the majority of states, including, crucially, Russia and China, that a fourth round of sanctions was necessary at this stage.

What is not clear, of course, is just how effective these sanctions will be in stopping Iran's nuclear ambitions, and most observers are somewhat sceptical that these new measures will bring about a change of heart in Tehran.

The restrictions approved are not the "crippling sanctions" that US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton once called for but are the best that could be achieved in the circumstances, taking into consideration that Moscow and Beijing would only go so far in punishing Iran. The measures will no doubt be inconvenient to Iran but significantly they do not target the country's oil revenues, the Islamic Republic's lifeblood.

"The sanctions aren't crippling by any means," said Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, "and are unlikely to change any minds in Tehran but they won't pass unnoticed either."

Iran has already made it clear that it is to go ahead with uranium enrichment. "Nothing will change. The Islamic Republic of Iran will continue uranium enrichment activities," Iran's Ambassador to the UN Ali Asghar Soltanieh said.

Not surprisingly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was even more defiant. "These resolutions have no value... it is like a used handkerchief that should be thrown in the waste bin," he said, adding that the sanctions were "the same as pesky flies".

The sanctions approved contain a fresh set of measures against the Iranian leadership. For the first time the UN resolution seeks to prevent international companies from trading with Iran's Revolutionary Guard and its affiliates. This military force controls the country's nuclear programme, has immense political and economic power, is the guardian of Islamic rule and is responsible for about 25 per cent of the country's GDP. About 15 Iranian companies linked to the Revolutionary Guard are now black-listed.

The UN resolution also expands on the existing arms embargo against Tehran and includes a ban on the export of heavy weapons to the country. Furthermore, the new sanctions set out rules for the inspection of all Iranian cargo ships, just like what happens to North Korean ships. Three companies controlled by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines have been blacklisted as these are thought to play a key role in importing parts for the country's nuclear programme.

As a result of the latest UN sanctions Iran is now forbidden from acquiring any interest in any entity that is involved in uranium mining, or in the production or use of nuclear materials, or in ballistic missile technology.

Significantly, the UN Security Council resolution was opposed by Turkey and Brazil which last month secured a nuclear fuel swap deal with Iran that they had hoped would prevent additional sanctions.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates blamed the European Union for Turkey's opposition to the sanctions suggesting the EU's reluctance to admit it to the bloc had alienated the country from the West.

I think Mr Gates' comment was only partially correct. While it is true that Turkey might be feeling unwanted by the EU it is also a fact that the country has been positioning itself as a regional power over the last few years, hence the recent deal it brokered, together with Brazil, which would have transferred part of Iran's nuclear stockpile to Turkish territory.

Washington's refusal to accept this deal must also have contributed to Turkey's alienation from the West, together with other issues such as the bleak situation in the Middle East.

I believe that the Turks and Brazilians were probably acting in good faith when they negotiated a deal with the Iranians but the agreement allows Iran to continue uranium enrichment and did nothing to dispel fears that Tehran is seeking the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons.

Steven Cook, an analyst from the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, said: "The central thrust of US diplomacy has been that Iran is not trustworthy and that Iranian intentions regarding weaponisation are clear."

In the circumstances I believe the international community had little choice but to go for more sanctions against Tehran. Of course, these sanctions will not solve everything; they will simply buy time for the West as it reviews its options.

A possible way forward could be an amended version of the Turkish-Brazilian proposal with additional guarantees and safeguards.

Iran, however, must feel it has no choice but to legitimise its nuclear programme and enter into meaningful negotiations with the West, which means it must be continuously pressured to do so.

This could mean the imposition of even more sanctions, which the US and EU are said to be considering on a unilateral basis.

Failing that, the world will simply have to prepare itself for a nuclear-armed Iran, which means relying on the doctrine of nuclear deterrence, which proved successful in the Cold War.