In My View

Iranian jigsaw and Indian confusion

Minister for External Affairs, Pranab Mukherjee’s ongoing visit to Teheran would as much be for extending bilateral relations, as for gauging the mood of the town. Though he would not be privy to the famous bazaar talk of the city, his aim would be to try and figure out what the Iranian leaders are planning for West Asia.

Because, indeed it is no longer a question of Iran’s supposed dereliction in the nuclear realm. Increasingly, the question being asked: is Iran ready to replace the USA as a predominant power in West Asia? Official Washington believes that the gainer of the Iraq bloodbath is neither the USA nor naturally, the Iraqis, but ironically, Iran. Not surprisingly, the USA has taken a twin track approach to deal with the problem. One, it has begun military operations against those they claim to be Iranian provocateurs operating in Iraq. And two, it has trumped up an intra-Shi’i feud in Iraq, that was conspicuously absent for the past three years in the lexicon of security punditry in the USA.

All this while one had been aware of a sectarian battle – many call it a civil war, including a recent National Intelligence Estimate of the American intelligence community – between the Shi’is and Sunnis. It had been triggered by the Al Qaeda, then led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to sabotage the nascent Iraqi nationalist movement. But now the apparent seed he had sown has been further embellished by the equally resourceful American strategic community and taken the form of intra-Shi’I bloodletting.

Clearly the attempt is to create an environment by which a Shi’i-run Iraq is not beholden to Iran for its sustenance, spiritually and materially. Yet, the USA is failing. In Lebanon the emboldened Hezbollah has moved front and centre after staving off an Israeli incursion. In Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr maintains 60 Parliamentarians in the country’s showpiece legislature, and a few ministers in the Nuri al-Maliki cabinet. In Palestine, Hamas has links to the same Iran, who had reportedly been bankrolling it for a long time.

Increasingly, it is appearing that West Asia is becoming a dangerous place for the Americans. In that light, Pranab Mukherjee’s visit is significant. For it gives India a peek into the Iranian leadership’s mind and keeps the conversation channels open. The message Mukherjee delivers in Teheran would be less relevant at this stage, than the manner in which it is delivered. For, in the mind of many, India is now a strategic ally of the USA even though the final pact for nuclear cooperation is still in the works. Which side does India choose? Or can India choose both?

Meanwhile, Iran’s pilot plant at Natanz, for industrial scale enrichment of Uranium, is set to go critical in the next few days. The US establishment seems unable to make up its mind whether that would push Teheran across the threshold the USA has demarcated, calling for it to act. According to a recent New York Times report, “After weeks of limited access inside Iran, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency have reported that Tehran has succeeded in manufacturing parts for about 3,000 centrifuges, the devices that can spin uranium into reactor fuel — or bomb fuel. In recent days, the Iranians have begun installing the machines and supporting gear in a cavernous plant at Natanz, which would be a potential target if the United States or one of its allies decided that diplomacy would never keep Iran from getting the bomb.”

Already last week, Robert Gates, the new US Defense Secretary, who has a bit of experience in handling nuclearised stand-offs, has ruled out an attack on Iran. The NYT’s report has signs of a rather touching oversimplification on nuclear technology. For the technological capability required for Uranium enrichment meant for power plants is a fraction of that is required for weapons. Weapons grade Uranium needs to be enriched to the extent of 98 per cent of purity, while nuclear power Uranium needs to be enriched to the extent of two per cent.

The same report also mentions how the Iranians have been woefully short of their self-imposed deadlines in terms of installing centrifuges that would enrich the Uranium, by separating its impurities. Apparently, it says the Iranians are still stuck with P-1 design variety, the ones Pakistan produced and then Abdul Qader Khan sold in the black market.

Mukherjee would do well to keep in mind these perspectives, if he hears the rhetoric that Iran is normally delivering to anyone who is listening. Though it remains to be seen whether New Delhi still retains its influences in Teheran; the same impact it had when it had helped the country break out of its isolation in the 1990s. If it does, at this stage, India could temper the Iranian intransigence about the concerns of the international community vis-à-vis its nuclear programme and its rising dominance in West Asia. Or, India could be another cog in the back channel wheel being spun by Washington. A public indication about which way the wind is blowing would be found in the way the two countries, India and Iran, play the tango on the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline issue. The world will be watching.

Pinaki Bhattacharya, currently located in Kolkata, is a Special Correspondent with the Mathrubhumi, Kerala. He writes on Strategic Security issues. He can be contacted at pinaki63@dataone.in.