Stopping the EU from Leaning toward the US

24 November 2010 | 04:17 Code : 9430 Europe
By Shams-od-Din Khareghani.
Stopping the EU from Leaning toward the US
Since the ratification of Resolution 1929 by the UN Security Council, the EU has more than ever shifted its attitude toward Iran. Prior to the resolution, against the US’ security-political approach, EU followed an Iran policy that focused on interaction and human rights. For Washington, Israel’s security and Iran’s role in Lebanon are the gravest concerns, while the European Union has shared interests with Iran in the Middle East and aims to change Iran’s policies through interaction. ‘Critical’ and ‘constructive’ talks between Iran and the European Union were conducted in the 1990s based on this attitude. These talks focused on disarmament, terrorism, the Middle East process and human rights. Constructive talks started in President Khatami’s era and mainly concerned economic affairs. Europe had seen changes in Iran’s behavior and some of the bones of contention to that date were resolved permanently.

At the onset of the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program in 2003, the EU gradually moved toward the US’ political-security attitude. A review of the content of European diplomats’ remarks from 2003 onward reveals this trend. Iran’s nuclear and missile programs have overshadowed human right issues. Nevertheless, security concerns are not yet as serious for Europeans as they are for Americans. The EU is still trying to interact with Iran, knowing that Iran is the chief regional power and can serve as a powerful launch pad for the Europeans in the Middle East. The rivalry between the EU and the United States is also a factor that should not be overlooked.

Despite the US’ political-security attitude, Obama’s presidency has ushered in a new approach toward the Iran problem and a closer proximity between Washington and Brussels outlooks. The Americans revised their foreign policy in this era, moderated their security attitude to further engage in negotiations and for the first time, the US president mentioned talks between Iran and the US. Thus, we were witnessing a shift in US policy on Iran. However, ensuing obstacles blocked the way toward a rapprochement and the pro-negotiation stance has been undermined in US diplomatic circles. The Republicans’ victory in congressional elections can further weaken position of the advocates of negotiation.

Despite the EU’s post-2003 shift toward Iran’s nuclear and missile program, since the 2009 controversial presidential election in Iran human rights and political freedom have come to the fore once again, even prioritized over Middle East arrangements. Nevertheless, my conviction is that due to its specific problems, the EU still mulls over an interactive approach. The EU is in a covert competition with the United States and needs a foothold in the Middle East. It also shares the same problems as the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, though not as deep. Meanwhile, the European Union’s influence in the Persian Gulf Arab states is not as strong as the United States. Interaction with Iran can benefit Brussels at the regional and international level.

There are certain domains in which the EU’s interests are different from that of the US. The WTO, GATT, UN, Iraq and Afghanistan are some of these fields. So is Iran. Nonetheless, there are obstacles in the way of rapprochement, media and public opinion being some of the most important. Public opinion shaped by the European governments may in fact boomerang. Relying on my experience in negotiations with the Europeans, I think that they still view Iran as a Middle Eastern state different from its neighbors. This attitude is quite rare in the United States, especially in the current circumstances. Pro-Iran lobbies in Europe still exist, but not in the United States as the public opinion in these two political entities have different textures. Europeans still regard Iran as a regional power with which they can come to an agreement. However, any possible agreement hinges on the level of rationality in our behavior. With a level-headed policy, even with Obama in power in the White House, sealing a deal with the Europeans is easier.

At the moment, we should prevent the EU’s further move toward the United States and its political-security attitude. Nicolas Sarkozy’s recent remarks calling Iran a missile threat and defending the installation of the missile defense shield are examples of this. Sarkozy is meanwhile trying to overcome domestic problems and attract public opinion with an aggressive attitude toward countries like Iran.

A rational policy and halting the EU’s further disposition toward a political-security approach will revive our age-old cultural, commercial and political ties with Europe.

Shams-od-Din Khareghani is Iran’s former ambassador to Germany.