Replies

Iran's Paradoxical Statements: A Bargaining Chip

Summary

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Nov. 2 that Tehran might renege on its agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency if the country faces excessive external pressure over its nuclear program. The statement comes less than two weeks after a high-powered European delegation secured Tehran's compliance with IAEA demands. The announcement reflects government efforts to deal with domestic challenges and maximize external opportunities, especially vis-a-vis Iraq. With the United States increasingly looking to stabilize the situation in Iraq, and given continued debate inside Iran on how best to proceed on the IAEA deal, many more paradoxical statements will come out of Tehran in the days ahead.

Analysis

Supreme Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Nov. 2 that undue external pressure could force Tehran to renege on its commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The comments were part of a speech Khamenei delivered to a large gathering of civil and military officials of the Islamist regime at an iftaar (fast-breaking) function broadcast on state television.

Khamenei is not announcing a volte-face on Iran's decision to cooperate with the IAEA. Rather, he is seeking to create a domestic consensus on the issue and to capitalize to the fullest possible extent on Iran's negotiations with the United States over Iraq. The statement has two specific aims within the domestic sphere: It seeks to alleviate the concerns of Khamenei's traditionalist allies who have not taken kindly to the IAEA deal, and it is indicative of a debate among parties in Iran who have agreed to the deal but disagree on its modalities. The statement also serves as an indicator of the progress of U.S.-Iranian negotiations over Iraq.

Khamenei's statements were an effort to put down the concerns of his unhappy allies in the government and with their civilian supporters. This does not appear to be the only concern, however. Given that Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, head of the Guardians council -- Iran's constitutional oversight body, which traditionalists dominate -- blessed the deal, saying that Tehran had acted with wisdom. Since Hujjat al-Islam Hassan Rowhani -- cleric and secretary of the Supreme Council on National Security -- was instrumental in getting Tehran to ink the deal, the opposition to the agreement might not be as substantial as it appears. The more pressing issue on the domestic front is the debate over how the regime will proceed with its stated intention of cooperating with the IAEA -- and what it will receive in return for doing so.

The two rival factions in Tehran have been popularly dubbed reformists and hard-liners. These names are misleading, however, because they give the impression that the "reformists" are more Western-minded and secular while the latter are more religious. In reality, both camps are essentially Islamist in orientation; the only difference is in each side's understanding of Islam.

Khamenei leads the traditionalist camp; President Mohammad Khatami leads the other, which is modernist in its understanding of Islam. A significant number of traditionalists have advocated adopting the North Korean approach to the nuclear issue, and many of them say they feel that agreeing to IAEA demands after months of tough talk is as good as caving to the pressure. Moreover, from the hardliners' perspective, the deal represents a victory for the rival modernists because the regime adopted their point of view on the issue.

When Khamenei said, "So far, nothing has been done against our principles. Wherever I feel that a step has been taken against the directions and goals of the establishment, I will stop it," he was trying to drive home to his allies that his government had not buckled under external pressure and to reiterate that this did not translate into a victory for the reformists. More important, the leader was setting the parameters of the coming intergovernmental debate over the regime's future course regarding the nuclear issue. Khamenei is trying to make clear that the government has agreed to accept IAEA demands -- for now. He is also trying to clarify that once Iraq is stabilized to the regime's liking, Tehran will not necessarily have to continue cooperation.

Apart from generating a national consensus on the issue, Khamenei's comments were meant to signal Washington that it must release some pressure on Iran if it wants the regime's continued support in Iraq. He said, "If parties to the talks with us, or centers of global power, come up with excessive demands and we feel that our interests and values are harmed, we won't hesitate to end this trend (of cooperation)."

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi complimented this statement when he said Nov. 2 that Iran would not completely stop enriching uranium but would suspend the practice temporarily. He also said Tehran is willing to answer all IAEA queries regarding its nuclear activities. On the same day, Tehran summoned British envoy Richard Dalton to the Foreign Ministry and admonished him for remarks made by British Prime Minster Tony Blair, who said that Saddam Hussein's ouster led to the Iranian compliance with Western demands on the nuclear issue.

The statements from Khamenei and Asefi give the impression that Iran is backing away from pledges it made to the IAEA. They also lend credence to statements issued by U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who recently advised that the IAEA and others keep an eye on Iran to ensure it follows through on its commitments.

In reality, these statements are bargaining counters that Tehran is using to deal with the United States on Iraq. Iran wants to maximize its gains in return for cooperating with Washington to stabilize Iraq. Tehran hopes Washington will lift sanctions and restore some semblance of normal relations with the regime.

Khamenei's statements should be viewed in the context of other initiatives. Iran recently extradited 147 al Qaeda suspects to their home countries, meaning the United States has gained access to these individuals despite Iranian claims that it would not give the suspects up to the United States. In essence, Iran is offering something to the United States and realizes that Washington needs more cooperation, which will allow Tehran to withhold this cooperation in hopes of gaining further concessions.

The rebuke of the British ambassador to Tehran also is part of this process of negotiations. All of this is happening because Tehran has not yet sent its formal letter of agreement to the IAEA, which means that the window of opportunity for Tehran to maximize its gains is still open. This is allowing the Islamist state to continue to engage in this type of give-and-take posturing.

Iran's contradictory statements and posturing should not be taken as a signal that it intends to take back off its promised cooperation. Instead, by doing so, it hopes to extract geopolitical dividends and create a consensus at home about the nuclear issue and overall negotiations with the United States.

The government understands that while it is under pressure, it also can exert a certain amount of its own. Such a display of bargaining tactics by Iran also serves as an indicator that the Iraq deal with the United States is still in progress. We can expect to see much more back and forth in the days ahead.

Source: www.stratfor.com