Questioning the Annual Threat Assessment: The Difficulties for Washington's Diplomatic Engagement with Tehran

Last week the US intelligence community released The Annual Threat Assessment 2009, presented by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

The report not only underlined Iran’s past attempts in acquiring nuclear weapons but also pointed to Iran’s ongoing uranium enrichment efforts. Blair stated that "Israel and Iran are liable to enter into a confrontation or crisis" some time this year because of the Iranian nuclear programme. Blair also expressed his specific concern regarding a possible Iran-Israel war with Iran-backed Hezbollah reinforcing its weapons in southern Lebanon.



It is difficult for Blair to assume that Iran may not restart its nuclear weapons program when the report Blair signed states:

We do not have sufficient intelligence reporting to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain indefinitely the halt of its previously enumerated nuclear weapons-related activities while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart those activities.

Moreover, how can Blair not foresee that Iran, which has been enriching uranium since 2006 and is capable of delivering nuclear weapons through medium-range balistic missiles, can use its potential possession of nuclear weapons as the key bargaining point during diplomatic engagement with the US?

When we look closer to the document, it is not that difficult to see how fragile any assertion that Iran is not pursuing nuclear capability is, given the raison d'etat of Tehran's regional and global position. The report states: “Iran’s longstanding foreign policy goals are to preserve the Islamic regime, safeguard Iran’s sovereignty, defend its nuclear ambitions, and expand its influence in the region and the Islamic world.” This is to be expected given that Iran, as a revisionist state, is supporting Hezbollah, Hamas, and other organizations in the region.

Dan Gillerman, Israel’s former envoy to the United Nations, stated his concerns over Iran’s capacity to restart its nuclear program on Fox News. Indeed, he equated the 2007 US Nuclear with the piece of paper Chamberlain waved on the eve of the Second World War in 1938. He implied that the US should watch Iran, sanction Iran, and make sure that the capability of the extreme fundamentalist regime of Iran is far away from destructing the region.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlNwT3CbtiI[/youtube]

The report states: "In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons..." Therefore, it suggests giving priority to diplomatic engagement to encourage such a decision.

However, this US-led diplomatic effort is also a thorny process which is expected to take much more time than some can tolerate. The most terrifying scenario is Iran's readiness to restart its nuclear weapons program during negotiations. According to the report:

We assess Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons....We judge Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame, [although State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research] judges Iran is unlikely to achieve this capability before 2013 because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.

Because of the obstacles faced by the Obama Administration to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons, a possible Israeli airstrike --- similar to the attack on Osirak in Iraq in 1981 --- could come to fruition in prior to 2013.

For now, Washington is focused on 2009, not 2013. The course of discussions with Iran should determine whether The Annual Threat Assessment 2010 highlights a crisis averted or a crisis which is impending.

Anticipating the New Israeli Government: Netanyahu or Livni?

According to the Associated Press, the Obama Administration has praised the Israeli elections and has called the voting by millions of Israelis the sign of a strong democracy. The White House spokesman Robert Gibbs stated that the President Obama was excited to work with the new Israeli government, and on Wednesday, Obama called Israeli President Shimon Peres to express his gratitude for American and Israeli model democracies and to emphasise his personal efforts for a two-state Israel-Palestine solution.

The question is how much room there is for such a solution. While relatively moderate Tzipi Livni, the leader of the Kadima Party is ready to pursue peace talks with the Abbas Government, Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of Likud, considers the US-backed negotiation process as a waste of time.

Meanwhile, Livni has demonstrated her "hawkish" reflexes in the name of "Israeli interests" during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. This was reminiscent of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's 2006 Lebanon War when there were serious questions in Israelis' minds whether the inexperienced Olmert was able to handle the weight of the Israeli politics after his predecessor Ariel Sharon's illness. The only difference is that Olmert had to prove himself after Sharon was no longer able to be the Prime Minister, while Livni had to sharpen her position against Hamas, "the common enemy" of all Israelis, to increase Kadima`s votes. Waging war against Hamas while giving priority to the peace process with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas --- including giving up land, dismantling settlements in West Bank, and sharing Jerusalem --- indicate the balance of her expected policies. Livni`s position is closer to peace when compared to that of Netanyahu, but the Iron Lady offers no concession on the most sensitive notion of the Israeli society: "security".

For Netanyahu, as we see in his election motto (“Likud: Because the state needs to be run”), Kadima has been incompetent in its rule, including its conduct of the Lebanon War and the most recent Gaza War. Netanyahu has criticized the government for being insufficiently strong against Hezbollah and Hamas in these two wars and insisted on the continuation of Operation Cast Lead. Netanyahu`s "security pack", which includes toppling Hamas in Gaza, keeping the Golan Heights, and expanding current settlements in the West Bank, is much more important than giving priority to the peace process.

It is clear that a peace agreement is unlikely to come under an Netanyahu administration, but his agenda is wide enough to keep peace proponents busy, at least in the mid-term. What is missing in this analysis, however, are the Obama Administration`s regional policies the application of these to Israel and its new Gvoernment, as it seeks a "secure" Israeli society and/or "strong" steps for peace.

Mr. Obama's World: Alerts in US Foreign Policy (12 February)

Related Post: Binyam Mohamed - Guantanamo Torture Evidence Hidden from Obama
Related Post: Iran’s Presidential Election - What Difference Does Khatami Make?
Related Post: Obama v. The Military (Part 39): The Latest on the Afghanistan “Surge”



9:30 p.m. A relatively quiet foreign policy day, as domestic politics --- notably Republican Judd Gregg's withdrawal from his nomination as Commerce Secretary because of "irreconcilable policy differences" with President Obama --- occupy Washington.

One emerging story is a lawsuit by three human rights organisations --- Amnesty International USA, New York University's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, and the Center for Constitutional Rights --- claiming that the Pentagon sought loopholes in the Geneva Conventions to hide "ghost deatinees" and that the Bush Administration delayed the release of Guantanamo Bay detainees to avoid negative publicity. We'll have more on this tomorrow.



4:30 p.m. We're off the clock for awhile on emergency business (dinner and a movie). Back with an Evening Update.

2:20 p.m. Eight Iraqi pilgrims have been killed and 18 wounded by a bomb less than 1/2 mile from the Imam Hussein Mosque in Karbala.

1:40 p.m. A couple of items of note from US envoy Richard Holbrooke's trip to Pakistan. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who met Holbrooke earlier today (see 6:45 a.m.), has issued a co-operative statement: ""There's a change in [US] approach towards Pakistan. They do give importance to the people of Pakistan and their emotions and that's the feeling that I got from today's meeting."

It is now being reported, as we projected in a separate entry, that Holbrooke and Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi will head a joint committee "improving intelligence sharing and strengthen security".

12 noon. Further violence in Iraq today. A car bomb in Mosul has killed four policemen and wounded five. Two senior Sunni politicians have been killed by gunmen in Mosul, and a former army officer has been killed in Khaldiya.

10:15 a.m.Of course, today's statement by Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik, admitting that "some part of the conspiracy" behind December's attacks in Mumbai was planned in Pakistan, has nothing to do whatsoever with the visit of US envoy Richard Holbrooke.

Morning Updates (6:45 a.m. GMT; 1:45 a.m. Washington): Quiet start this morning, after yesterday was dominated by news of bombings and violences in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will name Stephen Bosworth, the Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, as US envoy to North Korea. The move, accompanying yesterday's confirmation that a US delegation will attend the six-party talks in Moscow on North Korea next week, signals the Obama Administration's diplomatic engagement with Pyongyang. It is a far cry from the George W. Bush Administration, which shut down talks with North Korea soon after taking office in 2001.

In Pakistan, US envoy Richard Holbrooke has met former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. No details on the conversation, but it is a signal of a change in American strategy, reaching out to politicians that had not been favoured by the Bush Administration. Sharif was sent into exile by General Pervez Musharraf and only returned to Pakistan with the strong backing of Saudi Arabia. He had been seen by Washington as too sympathetic to "conservative" elements in Pakistan, both religious and political, to be an alternative to President Zardari.

Mr Obama's World: The Latest in US Foreign Policy (11 February)

Latest Post: US Engagement with Iran: Transcript of President Ahmadinejad’s Speech
Breaking News: Attacks in Afghanistan

Mr Obama's World Today: Uncertain

Evening Update (8:45 p.m.): The US Government will send a delegation next week to the six-party talks in Moscow on North Korean disarmament.

4:40 p.m. Marc Lynch of Foreign Policy notes the story that almost all media have missed today:  the visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao to Saudi Arabia

4:25 p.m. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry has said that President Obama and Pakistani President Asif Zardari have spoken by phone, ageeing to start addressing problems in the region with a "holistic strategy".

Afternoon Update (3:30 p.m.): A spike in violence from bombings and attacks today. In addition to the deaths in Afghanistan, a provincial minister has been killed by a roadside bomb in northwest Pakistan. Bombs in Iraq have killed at least eight people, while gunmen have slain several others, including a senior engineer and a prominent local football player.

US envoy Richard Holbrooke has visited northwest Pakistan to view a Pakistani military installation. As with his talks with political leaders on Tuesday, Holbrooke would say no more than that he was on a "listening" tour.



11:35 a.m. The Russians really are playing this hand well on Afghanistan. Offering co-operation but also ensuring control and thus oversight of Moscow's interest, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, amidst meetings with a senior US diplomat, that Russian military aircraft could assist with the supply effort.

11:25 a.m. During a trip to Iraq on Wednesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said, ""We look positively on the slogan that Obama raised in the elections. The world has really changed. If the American administration wants to keep up with the changes, this will be happy news." (cross-posted from US Engagement with Iran thread)

9:30 a.m. A revealing bit of information that did not make it into the morning papers: "A senior American diplomat will hold talks with Russian officials on Tuesday about opening new supply routes across Russian territory to NATO forces in Afghanistan, the U.S. embassy said."

The news indicates how serious the supply situation for Afghanistan has become, with the closure of the Pakistan routes and the threatened shutdown of the US airbase in Kyrgyzstan. And it shows how dependent Washington has become on Moscow's goodwill for a solution, which in turn has shaped the encouragement of President Obama and Vice President Biden for closer co-operation with the Russians.

8:45 a.m. Meanwhile in Pakistan.... In another sign that the Obama Administration is reviewing its options carefully before making any strategic decisions, envoy Richard Holbrooke limited his comments after meetings with Pakistani officials to, "[I was here] to listen and learn the ground realities of this critically important country".

In contrast, the priority of President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani was clear: Give Us Money. Their recogition of "the importance of enhanced cooperation in defense and intelligence sharing" was followed by a request to Washington to "expedite" billions of dollars in aid.

7:55 a.m. The New York Times also has a shrewd reading of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's criticism of Vice President Joe Biden,  which we noted yesterday. Al-Maliki's response to Biden's complaints about the lack of Iraqi political and economic reform were offered during a visit to Baghdad by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

The French, as all 2003 critics of "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" will recall, have had extensive economic interests in Iraq. Al-Maliki's comments, however, are not just a reach-out for investment for Paris; they signal Iraq's wish to move away from perceived political dependence on, even subservience to, Washington.

7:35 a.m. On the eve of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's trip to Asia, an interesting insight into Administration strategy on China in The New York Times.

"Senior Administration officials", probably from the State Department, tell the Times, "The Obama administration plans to realign the United States’ relationship with China by putting more emphasis on climate change, energy and human rights, widening the focus beyond the economic concerns of the Bush years." By going for environmental issues rather than risking economic confrontation, the US can then seek leverage on political concerns: "A broader relationship with the Chinese could create opportunities for collaboration — not only on a response to the global economic crisis, but also on the environment and on security issues like the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs."

You may have noticed, however, the troublesome phrase in the spin. "Human rights"? Is Washington really going to press issues such as Chinese control of Tibet and jailing of dissidents?

The balancing act was demonstrated on Tuesday when State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told CNN, ""We are disturbed that prominent Chinese human rights activist Huang Qi remains in detention. We call on the Chinese government to release Mr. Huang as soon as possible."

7 a.m. Repeating the latest in the battle within the Obama Administration over Afghanistan strategy. Countering President Obama's attempt to take more time through an inter-agency review, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has declared, ""I think that there is a realization that some decisions have to be made ... before the strategic review is completed. [Obama] has several options in front of him."

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, joined in the pressure on Obama. US military commanders "had this request out for many months and those working through the request recognize that the sooner the better with respect to this. I'm hopeful that we can get them there as soon as absolutely possible, but, again, that's a decision for the president of the United States, not for me."

Meanwhile, the US and Canada kept up the pressure on Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Mullen said in Ottawa on Tuesday, "As we look at the challenges that we have in 2009-2010 ... I think the lack of governance tied to the corruption that exists (in Afghanistan), is going to be the number one challenge that we have."

Morning Update (6:45 a.m. GMT; 1:45 a.m. Washington): Another day focused on the economy. President Obama's economic stimulus package moves from the Senate, where it passed yesterday, to the House of Representatives.

"A senior US official" has told CNN that American satellite photography shows possible preparations for a North Korean missile launch. Telemetry equipment is being assembled at the launch site, although there is no sign yet of a missile being moved. The last launch from the location, in 2006, was of a long-range Taepodong-2 missile, which flew for 40 seconds before crashing.

The US Government's reaction has been measured, focusing on diplomatic engagement with Pyongyang. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said on Tuesday:

Well, since the first time that they launched the missile, it flew for a few minutes before crashing, the range of the Taepodong-2 remains to be seen. So far, it's very short. I'm not going to get into intelligence reports, but it would be nice if North Korea would focus on getting positive messages across to the -- to its negotiating partners about verification and moving forward with the denuclearization.

New Book from CASAR Beirut: "Liberty and Justice in the Middle East"

Our partners at the Center for American Studies and Research (CASAR), American University of Beirut, recently published the selected proceedings of their second international conference, “Liberty and Justice: America and the Middle East”, held in Beirut in January 2008. The volume contains 35 papers by scholars from Europe, North America, and the Middle East. Contributors include Scott Lucas of Libertas/Enduring America, Melanie McAlister, Djelal Kadir, Amy Kaplan, Timothy Marr, Norman Finkelstein, Mounira Soliman, and Seyed Mohammad Marandi.

The volume is available for $20, including shipping to North America and Europe. For information on how to order, please visit CASAR’s website or e-mail casar@aub.edu.lb.