We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

There’s more to Iran’s release of the yachtsmen than goodwill to Britain

It would be wrong to take Iran’s release of the British yachtsmen yesterday as a goodwill gesture to Britain.

It came on the same day that President Ahmadinejad declared that Iran would enrich uranium beyond the grade needed for nuclear power plants, towards the grade needed for weapons.

He accused Britain of “tainting the tranquillity” of Iran’s talks with those who want it to halt its nuclear work, a phrase of high fancy and hypocrisy even by the standards of the President’s speeches.

It seems more plausible to read other motives into the release. For a start, Iran is clearly anxious to reassure Bahrain and Dubai that it is not picking a fight with Gulf states. However, the seizure of the yacht in the first place was a useful advertisement of Iran’s command of its waters. The release also displays the power of the Revolutionary Guards in key decisions.

Second, some Iranian leaders seem to want to lower the temperature of the nuclear dispute. Yet the contradictory messages from Tehran show how the issue is entangled with domestic politics. Analysts agree on one point: leaders do not want to provoke an airstrike by Israel on their nuclear facilities, but still want credit at home for defying the West.

Advertisement

Analysts now take as effectively dead the proposed deal of the past few months: that Iran ship out its low-enriched uranium to Russia, and receive back reactor fuel rods. Yet it is surprising that firm opposition to the deal has come from so-called moderates, including Mir Hossein Mousavi, Ahmadinejad’s main challenger in the disputed June elections. Their reasoning appears to be that if Ahmadinejad, who at first seemed receptive to the deal, actually pushed it through, he would gain from better relations with the West.

British analysts are now half expecting the letter that Iranian leaders issue in a stand-off. It will offer, they suggest, a limp version of the deal, leaving Iran with most of its enriched uranium — another attempt to buy time.

This time it won’t work. The pursuit of new United Nations sanctions has resumed. A resolution might go to the Security Council early in the new year.

Russian leaders, on whose support this rests, are clearly fed up with Iran’s rejection of the deal, but ministries have repeated promises to ship out S300 long-range missiles. But if Russia did ship the missiles, that would be huge provocation to Israel — as Iran must know.