Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on July 19, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Iran Nuclear deal could herald major change

Iran Nuclear deal could herald major change thumbnail

An unlikely group in the Middle East has found common ground in recent days: Saudi Arabia, Israel and hardliners within Iran have all made clear they consider the landmark nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers a very bad idea.

All of these players feel a direct threat to their power and influence as a result of last Tuesday’s agreement.

For the first time in more than three decades, Iran, a country with a highly educated population of some 80 million and huge oil and gas reserves, is poised to rejoin the international community and the result could be profound change both inside and outside the country.

“The geopolitical structure of the Middle East is changing,” said Saeed Leylaz, a prominent economist based in Tehran who worked as an advisor to former president Mohammad Khatami. “And Iran’s geopolitical importance is increasing.”

Many observers say the Islamic Republic is likely to use the influx of cash from the lifting of sanctions to stabilize its damaged economy, but Saudi Arabia and Israel are concerned it will further destabilize the region by shoring up proxy military forces with extra weapons and funds.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the highest authority in Iran, did little to alleviate these concerns in a fiery speech marking the end of the holy month of Ramadan on Saturday.

He said the nuclear deal would not change Iran’s policy in supporting allies in Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Yemen, Lebanon and among the Palestinians.

“The policies of America in the region are 180 degrees apart from the policies of the Islamic Republic,” Khamenei said.

Iran’s extensive involvement in conflicts across the region has left America’s long-standing allies questioning why a deal was struck at all.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the deal a “historic mistake” while Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who served as the ambassador to the U.S. for more than two decades, wrote that it would “wreak havoc in the Middle East”.

SHAKING HANDS WITH ‘SATAN’

While the U.S. is unlikely to abandon its traditional allies, engaging Iran for the first time in years could shift the balance of power in the region, observers say.

And despite Khamenei’s anti-U.S. rhetoric, Iranian officials will need to work with their American counterparts as the deal is implemented.

“The entire history of this region in the past four decades has been based on the assumption that Iran is outside the region. That there is a tight alliance between Arabs and the United States for managing the Middle East that doesn’t include Iran,” said Vali Nasr, the dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a former advisor to the U.S. State department.

“The nuclear deal does change that. Whether the Arabs should be worried about it is an open question but they’re definitely shocked by it and are reacting to it.”

But it is perhaps inside Iran where the impact of the deal will be felt most.

The taboo of talking to the “Great Satan”, the term Iranian officials have used to refer to the United States for years, has been broken. That presents a threat to hardliners who see Iran’s anti-American stance as a pillar of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

“The symbolic impact of making a deal is much bigger in Iran than in the United States,” said Nasr. “The idea of shaking hands with the so-called Great Satan, arriving at an agreement with them, the symbolism of the foreign minister huddling with the American secretary of state – these really change the entire political narrative in Iran.”

Reaction to the deal highlighted the splits between moderates and hardliners in Iran. Conservative politicians and news outlets expressed scepticism about both it and the intentions of the world powers, while moderate politicians and news outlets portrayed it as a big opportunity for the country.

Khamenei’s response has been ambiguous: he thanked the negotiating team but has not given the deal a ringing endorsement. Supporting the negotiators was a political risk and by avoiding overt approval of the final deal, he can avert criticism if it falls apart, observers say.

“He is giving himself a lot of plausible deniability,” said Abbas Milani, the director of the Iranian Studies program at Stanford University. “He’s hinting to the more radical elements not to attack the deal too aggressively but he’s also not telling them not to attack it. He’s keeping his options open.”

PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS

There is a lot at stake: President Hassan Rouhani and his moderate allies have received a huge boost from the deal.

In street celebrations after the announcement, many Iranians praised Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif with slogans and placards. The question now is whether moderates can use that political capital to deliver on Rouhani’s campaign promises to improve human rights in the country and reform the economy, observers say.

There are two key elections coming up next year: one is for the majles, or parliament, where dozens of moderate candidates have been prevented from running by the Guardian Council, a governmental vetting body, since 2008. If the Council tries that in next year’s vote, it could provoke strong reactions from Rouhani or the millions who voted for him, observers say.

Potentially even more significant is an election for the Assembly of Experts, a body that selects the Supreme Leader. This Assembly, which will serve for eight years, may select the next one, possibly altering Iran’s course for years to come.

“The moderates have now delivered a massive victory that had not been possible before,” said Nasr. “The question is – can they translate this into victory in upcoming polls in Iran?”

For ordinary Iranians, the most important issue is whether the lifting of sanctions, which have battered the economy, will improve their daily lives. The sanctions are only part of the problem, observers say. The Iranian economy is also hamstrung by aging infrastructure, poor management and widespread corruption.

“Removing the sanctions is going to take a big obstacle out of the way for the Iranian economy but it doesn’t mean that it’s going to be a motor to push the economy on its own,” said Leylaz, the economist. He added: “We are not going to have a noticeable quick change in the Iranian economy.”

That could be problematic for moderates and hardliners in the country alike as the deal has raised expectations greatly among Iranians that their lives will improve.

“The key is if they don’t see the dividends of this deal or engagement with the global community then exuberance and expectation can very quickly turn into frustration and anger,” said Nasr. “And that’s the challenge.”

 

reuters



10 Comments on "Iran Nuclear deal could herald major change"

  1. Makati1 on Sun, 19th Jul 2015 10:27 pm 

    This is all about Russia, not Iran. The ‘sanctions’ have not been lifted. Some will stay in place for 5 years or forever. It is about pushing China and Russia out of Iran and Western corporations in. All that oil and natural gas is making the Western elite crazy that they cannot profit from it. Just like those resources in Russia.

    You need to read the news from sources outside the US MSM Iron Curtain if you want the real picture. The US MSM is nothing but lies, supplied straight from the beltway.

  2. theedrich on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 3:11 am 

    I don’t see how this can be bad for the U.S., provided a close eye is kept on the Iranians.  We have been in bed with the Saudis, a contender for title of the most corrupt regime on the planet, since FDR embraced them in February 1945.  It is long past time for a change.  Israel, of course, is frantic about the deal, but the U.S. should not (again) let another nation’s paranoia determine its actions.  Instead of making an enemy of Iran (by overturning their government like we did in 1953), we should see whether we can come to some kind of modus vivendi with that country and hope to influence them (and yes, against the Russians) in peaceful ways.  Americans do not recognize how much chaos their government has inflicted on the world since our foundation.  In a time when we are facing geologically enforced decline, it is time to readjust our priorities.

  3. Davy on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 6:48 am 

    Mak said “You need to read the news from sources outside the US MSM Iron Curtain if you want the real picture. The US MSM is nothing but lies, supplied straight from the beltway.” Friends I have been talking about how corrupt and distorted Asia is especially China. Most of you have read what China has been doing recently. Mak is telling you to not listen to the US and get your news in Asia where the real no spin news is LMFAO OTF. I am not recommending you read mainstream news in the US unless you are going to distill it removing all the impurities. I am saying the same about the rest of the world to. All countries are at the game in fact China and Russia are on the bottom of the list of major powers with news restrictions and distortions.

  4. Davy on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 6:48 am 

    Well said Thee.

  5. kanon on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 8:52 am 

    It would be good to have some context here. The opening with Iran seems to be part of a larger strategy. Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen are in chaos, and Egypt is questionable. I suspect Iran has large looming problems with pollution and desertification and I also suspect Iran will serve as a balance to ISIS, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Perhaps the implication is the US is losing faith is Saudi oil production.

  6. penury on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 9:01 am 

    And just maybe the U.S. has thought that another war in the ME is not too bad of an idea. Lets wait six months and see which direction we really want this to go. After all supplying arms to both sides is so profitable.

  7. kanon on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 9:06 am 

    “After all supplying arms to both sides is so profitable.” A distinct possibility. Also, consider an axis of Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

  8. BobInget on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 7:23 pm 

    Walker and Bush vie for When, not if, we go WW/3 on Iran.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scott-walker-iran-deal_55acfd69e4b0d2ded39f57c2?cps=gravity_5059_5467143737306594042

    These dudes think this loose talk will get votes from their nut cake base. After nomination, they can always moderate their stand. The problem is
    folks in Iran and the Arab world are listening.

    Israel and Saudi Arabia would prefer the USA
    fight their battles. Note, where are Israeli or KSA aircraft in the fight alongside Iranian forces against Islamic State?

  9. beamofthewave on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 8:51 pm 

    I read Israel sells arms to Iran, does that count?

  10. Makati1 on Mon, 20th Jul 2015 9:53 pm 

    beamofthewave, the West would much prefer that to the Russians selling arms to Iran. Although, the Russian deal is already waiting for the sanctions to be lifted for delivery of a missile system contracted years ago. That is why I don’t see ALL of the sanctions lifted in reality. The West does NOT want Iran to have a missile system that can prevent their planes from bombing locations in Iran.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *