by Mark Silva

The United States, in annoucing new economic sanctions against Iran today because of Tehran’s unabated development of nuclear technology, is calling on allies to tighten their ring around a regime that threatens regional security with its amibtions.

“We have been working closely and intensely with our international partners to prevent one of the world's most dangerous regimes from developing the world's most dangerous weapons,’’ Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said today. “Part of that strategy involves denying supporters of Iran's illicit conduct access to the international financial system. These actors should find no safe haven in the reputable world of finance and commerce. ‘’

Yet some question the ability of the U.S. to rally support for sanctions in the midst of the view that many in the world now hold of the U.S. as a result of its own unilateral foreign policy acts.

“The U.S. does need to do more than talk,’’ says Anthony Cordesman, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It needs to show Iran that it can deter and contain hostile Iranian military action, whether nuclear, conventional, or asymmetric

“That said,’’ Cordesman writes today, “the U.S. also needs to understand that its credibility is limited and that the last thing its friends and allies need is unilateral action that is not tied to other U.S. negotiating efforts and fully justified to the world. The Bush Administration has already done immense damage to U.S. credibility throughout the region and much of the world.’’

The administration “is viewed as threatening to drag the Gulf into another war - this time with Iran, as failing to consult and explain, and as indifferent to the views of its friends and allies,’’ Cordesman argues. “In short, the Bush administration needs to stop acting as if it could simply announce measures and the world will follow. It needs to use its waning months to reestablish U.S. credibility in every sense of the term.’’

President Bush calls predictions of a U.S. attack against Iran “baseless gossip.’’ Yet Vice President Dick Cheney has reiterated the administration’s warning that: “We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon…. Our country and the entire international community cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its most aggressive ambitions.’’

The president, in an interview with Al Arabiya at the White House on Oct. 5, called talk in the Arab media about U.S. plans for an imminent attack against Iran “baseless gossip.’’ Is it true that he has ordered his senior generals to prepare for “a major and precise strike… during the end of January or February?’’ he was asked.

“I would call that empty propaganda,’’ Bush said. “Evidently there's a lot of gossip in parts of the country -- world that try to scare people about me, personally, or my country, or what we stand for. And that kind of gossip is just what it is -- it's gossip, it's baseless gossip.’’

While Bush and other members of the administration repeatedly have maintained that “all options are on the table’’ with regard to Iraq, the president told Al Arabiya: “I have made the commitment that I would continue to work with the world to speak with one voice to the Iranians, to the Iranian government, that we will work in ways that we can to make it clear to you that you should not have the know-how on how to make a weapon, because one of the great threats to peace and the world would be if Iranians showed up with a nuclear weapon.

“I, of course, said all options are on the table, but I made a pledge to the American people we will work diplomatically to solve the problem,’’ he said. “And that's why you see us at the United Nations working with the EU countries, and China and Russia, to send that clear message; and that we're going to continue to impose sanctions and make it harder for the Iranian government to operate in the world until they change their mind, until they come to a new way forward.

“I have said that if they suspend their nuclear program we will be at the table. But they have so far refused to do that.’’

Vice President Cheney, however, has continued to voice the sterner side of that balance between diplomacy and the ultimatum that the U.S. has presented to Iran:

“The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences,’’ Cheney said on Sunday in an address to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “The United States joins other nations in sending a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.’’

“Iran is pursuing technology that could be used to develop nuclear weapons,’’ he said. “The world knows this… Oour country and the entire international community cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its most aggressive ambitions.’’

Following the recent appearance of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the U.N., Cheney said: “” one can fail to understand the nature of the regime this man represents. He has called repeatedly for the destruction of Israel; has spoken of his yearning for a world without the United States…

“This same regime that approved of hostage-taking in 1979, that attacked Saudi and Kuwaiti shipping in the 1980s, that incited suicide bombings and jihadism in the 1990s and beyond, is now the world's most active state sponsor of terror. As to its next-door neighbor, Iraq, the Iranian government claims to be a friend that supports regional stability. In fact, it is a force for the opposite.

“As Gen.l Petraeus has noted, Iran's Quds Force is trying to set up a "Hezbollah-like force to serve its interests and to fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq."’’ He said. “At the same time, Iran is "responsible for providing the weapons, the training, the funding and, in some cases, the direction for operations that have indeed killed U.S. soldiers…."

“The Iranian regime's efforts to destabilize the Middle East and to gain hegemonic power is a matter of record,’’ Cheney said. “And now, of course, we have the inescapable reality of Iran's nuclear program; a program they claim is strictly for energy purposes, but which they have worked hard to conceal; a program carried out in complete defiance of the international community and resolutions of the U.N. Security Council.

“Iran is pursuing technology that could be used to develop nuclear weapons,’’ he said. “The world knows this… Oour country and the entire international community cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its most aggressive ambitions.’’

Treasury Secretary Paulson, in annoucing sanctions against Iranian banks today, said: "Iran exploits its global financial ties to pursue nuclear capabilities, develop ballistic missiles and fund terrorism… The Iranian regime's ability to pursue nuclear and ballistic missile programs in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolutions depends on its access to the international commercial and financial systems. Iran also funnels hundreds of millions of dollars each year through the international financial system to terrorists. Iran's banks aid this conduct, using a range of deceptive financial practices intended to evade even the most stringent risk-management controls.

“In dealing with Iran, it is nearly impossible to know one's customer and be assured that one is not unwittingly facilitating the regime's reckless conduct. The recent warning by the Financial Action Task Force, the world's premier standard-setting body for countering terrorist financing and money laundering, confirms the extraordinary risks that accompany doing business with Iran.

"We have been working closely and intensely with our international partners to prevent one of the world's most dangerous regimes from developing the world's most dangerous weapons. Part of that strategy involves denying supporters of Iran's illicit conduct access to the international financial system; these actors should find no safe haven in the reputable world of finance and commerce.

“The UN Security Council has required member states to freeze the assets of, and prohibit persons from doing business with, a number of entities and individuals supporting Iran's nuclear or ballistic missile activities, including Iran's state-owned Bank Sepah.

"Today, we are designating Iran's Bank Melli, Bank Mellat, and Bank Saderat. These are three of Iran's largest banks, and they all have facilitated Iran's proliferation activities or its support for terrorism. We are also designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for proliferation activities and its Qods Force for providing material support to the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. The IRGC is so deeply entrenched in Iran's economy and commercial enterprises, it is increasingly likely that, if you are doing business with Iran, you are doing business with the IRGC. We call on responsible banks and companies around the world to terminate any business with Bank Melli, Bank Mellat, Bank Saderat, and all companies and entities of the IRGC.

"As awareness of Iran's deceptive behavior has grown, many banks around the world have decided as a matter of prudence and integrity that Iran's business is simply not worth the risk. It is plain and simple: reputable institutions do not want to be the bankers for this dangerous regime. We will continue to work with our international partners to prevent Iran from abusing the international financial system to advance its illicit conduct."

Cordesman, writing from the Washington-baseed Center for Strategic and International Studies today, says:

““There is a solid case for U.S. efforts to develop the capability to deter and contain Iran, and to deny it transfers of advanced conventional and nuclear weapons and technology. This does not mean the US should not push ahead with its diplomatic efforts and continue to seek meaningful dialogue with the Iranian regime…

“The U.S. does need to do more than talk. It needs to show Iran that it can deter and contain hostile Iranian military action, whether nuclear, conventional, or asymmetric. It needs to do everything possible to limit Iran's military development -- which is extremely dependent on the import of arms and technology. It needs to strengthen U.S. friends and allies in the region, and show them that the U.S. will continue to check Iran's ambitions and provide deterrence and defense if Iran moves from words to actions.

That said, the U.S. also needs to understand that its credibility is limited and that the last thing its friends and allies need is unilateral action that is not tied to other U.S. negotiating efforts and fully justified to the world. The Bush Administration has already done immense damage to US credibility throughout the region and much of the world. It is viewed as threatening to drag the Gulf into another war - this time with Iran, as failing to consult and explain, and as indifferent to the views of its friends and allies.
“In short, the Bush Administration needs to stop acting as if it could simply announce measures and the world will follow. It needs to use its waning months to reestablish US credibility in every sense of the term.

“So far, however, that Administration has presented only the broad outline of a justification for its actions - not the comprehensive details required to be convincing. It has not provided any analysis to show how the new sanctions are justified, how they would actually work, or what effect they should have.

“There has been no mention of how they relate to US efforts to work with Britain, France, and Germany, or in the context of the UN. There has been no explanation of why and how these sanctions would be enforced when so many precious cases have seen to US take no action or make empty threats. There is no explanation of US views towards military action at a time when Democratic presidential candidate are involved in bickering over the risk that the Bush Administration will attack Iran, and have turned the sanctions issue into a possible excuse for going to war.

“There may well be a good, practical case for the new sanctions, but so far, the Administration is acting as if there was no world beyond the Beltway. It also is not clear why many of Iran's suppliers will really care. How many such suppliers have enough ties to the US to really care about US sanctions or cannot find some convenient cover? How will such sanctions affect dual use technologies and the large volume of invisible imports of technology that are critical to Iran?

“Moreover, if the US suddenly applies these sanctions to all companies in Iran with some real or suspected ties to the IRGC and Iranian military, it risks creating a major crisis over third party sanctions enforcement. How will the US establish the credibility and scale of such ties? How can it target banks and companies providing services to largely civil groups without provoking a major international reaction? How broad is the sanctions package?

“How do foreign banks and companies even know if they are dealing with the IRGC if the transaction is through an Iranian company or front? How will the US show the world that any such actions have real justification?

“How will the new sanctions impact on Russian and Chinese arms and technology transfers, or those of states like North Korea? The Russian and Chinese issue is particularly critical because these two nations and North Korea provide most modern arms and military technology and the volume of such transfers has increased sharply in recent years.

“According to declassified U.S. intelligence published by the CRS, Russian new arms agreements rose in value from $100 million during 1999-2003 to $1.5 billion in 2003-2006; Chinese new arms agreements rose in value from $100 million during 1999-2003 to $400 million in 2003-2006. The two countries provided some 86% of all new arms agreements with Iran in 2003-2006, and virtually all advanced weapons systems and technology.

“In short, the Bush Administration needs to stop acting as if it could simply announce measures and the world will follow. It needs to use its waning months to reestablish US credibility in every sense of the term.’’