Monday, March 19th | 3 Nisan 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

April 16, 2015 8:36 am

US-Iranian Nuclear Deal in the Asian Pivot: It’s Complicated

avatar by Dinesh Sharma

Email a copy of "US-Iranian Nuclear Deal in the Asian Pivot: It’s Complicated" to a friend

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (right) shakes hands with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif as he arrives at a hotel in Vienna, Austria, on July 14, 2014, for a day of meetings about Iran's nuclear program. Photo: U.S. State Department.

At the onset of the atomic age, J. Robert Oppenheimer quoted the Bhagavad Gita, “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” As Iran and potentially the whole of the Middle East may enter the nuclear age, we are reminded of his ominous warning.

As former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told a Senate hearing recently, the Iranian deal will certainly lead to greater proliferation, making Iran the lynchpin in the Middle East and Central Asia, with its influence spreading into Afghanistan and Pakistan.

At this turning point in history, Iran must embrace a peaceful civil nuclear program and make peace with Israel if it plans to join the emerging global civilization. Iran could possibly become another North Korea, a dangerous outcome. Or, it could follow the South Asian model of détente and help advance America’s Asian pivot.

When President Obama was in India in January 2015, he was able to iron out the details of the civil nuclear deal with India, the so-called liability clause, opening up the possibilities of India’s energy independence. India is part and parcel of the Asian rebalancing that the US has been trying to achieve.

It took India several decades to arrive at this juncture through several US administrations – Clinton, Bush, and Obama — and a historical change of government in India from the Congress Party to the Modi government.

India has been trying to wean-off Iranian oil while sanctions have been in place, a sign of India’s alignment with P5+1 member states, especially the US. The Iranian nuclear deal to be hammered out by the end of June, however, will be a much tougher sell in the US Congress.

The disputes about what is in the US-Iranian deal arose as soon as the official statement was released by the White House. When, how, and under what conditions would the sanctions be lifted, immediately or through a phased release? How will the IAEA track Iran’s covert activities, through intrusive spot observations or controlled weekly and monthly access?

If the deal gets blocked, American diplomacy will take a hit, as President Obama said. Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts to break down the wall of distrust between DC and Tehran that has existed for more than three decades, as I have argued in my book, The Global Obama, would be stymied. It will be a huge loss for both Obama and Kerry’s legacy. If the Iranian regime stays closed to the outside world, it might also adversely impact the Asian pivot and the US will remain mired in the Middle East.

Unlike Iran, India has been a close ally of the state of Israel despite the history of non-alignment. India and Israel have been defense and technology partners. With Israel calling the framework agreement with Iran “a threat to its survival”, which way India will lean – towards Iran or Israel – remains to be seen?

While Iran and India share historical and civilizational ties, these old ties will be trumped by the new geopolitical realities. India’s growing relationship with the US and the thirst for nuclear energy mandates it follow the lead of P5+1, especially, if it aspires to join the Security Council.

Ironically, India and Israel both never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Although Iran did sign the NPT many years ago (1968), it has been in violation of the treaty several times. The realities of the Middle East and North Africa today are very different than those of South Asia twenty years ago when India and Pakistan secretly tested the bomb.

Iran may have to remain in a tight holding pattern vis-à-vis the West for many decades to come if we are to see a peaceful Middle East in our lifetimes. Thus, India, China and other nuclear states in Asia must continue to call for the ‘peaceful development’ of the Iranian nuclear program.

According to WPS Sidhu at the Brookings Institute in India, “India will welcome the resolution of the nuclear file on Iran and will try to walk the tightrope in trying to strengthen relations with both Iran and Israel.”

The other nuclear power in South Asia, namely Pakistan, whose scientist A. Q. Khan provided the original impetus for the nuclear technology to the Islamic Republic of Iran, is watching these events closely. Pakistan also never signed the NPT, and not surprisingly, has never recognized the State of Israel.

Pakistan’s Nawaz Sharif’s close ties with Saudi Arabia, where he was exiled during Musharraf’s reign, have not been well received by the Iranian regime. Yet, Pakistan relies on Iranian natural gas supplies and has not taken an openly hostile anti-Iranian position on the nuclear deal. If Pakistan were to take a pro-Saudi, anti-Iranian position, consistent with the Israeli position, Iran will lean towards India and Afghanistan in the region.

Whatever the ultimate, nuanced details of the nuclear deal, it will have ripple effects throughout Central and South Asia. It will lead to increased trading of nuclear secrets overtly and covertly; South Asia, which became a nuclear zone several decades ago, will become even more dangerous. PM Netanyahu’s nightmarish dream of the Middle East and North Africa turning into a nuclear landmine, where state and non-state actors are tripping over each other, may not be far-fetched. Tensions between Shia and Sunni factions, and their terrorist outfits, will grow and spill over into South Asia through various proxy wars.

Iran must attempt to follow the South Asian model of détente and take India’s lead into the 21st century by developing a peaceful civil nuclear program as a deterrence to war. This might lead to the free flow of Iranian oil and push forward America’s Asian pivot. If the deal fails, the Israeli-Iranian dynamic will head into a bleak and uncertain existential future, driving the Iranian nuclear program further underground.

Dinesh Sharma is associate research professor at Binghamton University’s Institute for Global Cultural Studies in Binghamton, NY. He is the editor of “The Global Obama: Crossroads of Leadership in the 21st Century,” published by Routledge Press. His previous book, “Barack Obama in Hawaii and Indonesia: The Making of a Global President,” was rated as the Top Ten Black History Book for 2012.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Laura L. Enright

    This article seems a well reasoned piece to me and brings up many good points, especially when it comes to a changing world and the changing dynamic of power between East and West. An important point made in this article actually lays out the two paths set before an Iran intent on developing a nuclear program. An inconvenient truth for all the players involved. At the moment Iran itself is of a split nature: Ruled by the Mullahs who cling to the past, yet with a population increasingly interested in reaching out to the west and modernity (one could argue that the U.S. Congress has a bit of that problem with leaders clinging to the past if recent events by certain senators are any indication). This feud going on between Iran and the U.S. (with its continuation instigated by certain factions in both countries) ignores the geopolitical changes that have gone on in the decades following its cause. Rather than “treating Iranian nuclear program in a vacuum,” the author states, “Whatever the ultimate, nuanced details of the nuclear deal, it will have ripple effects throughout Central and South Asia.” How much clearer can the author state that? A nuclear program for Iran, whether sanctioned by the other countries or not, will have a great impact on not only the Mideast, but South Asian countries like India and Pakistan who are themselves emerging as first world powers. I read nothing in this article about India taking orders from the west. Rather the author suggests that India, to protect its own interests, might go along with P5+1 members states and even lead the way in brokering a peaceful negotiation that will lead to better Iranian/Israeli ties. Basically the “geopolitical realities” that the author writes of is that Iran may have to grow up and accept the fact that it has to deal with other countries in the region in its quest to begin a nuclear program of any sort. And yes that includes having to deal with Israel which, by the way, I don’t think has been officially classified as a “rogue state” (and no, debates on the subject of Israel as a rogue state don’t count).

  • Dr. Vayu Vyas Roye

    It is totally wrong to suggest India took orders from West when it never joined the NPT and developed a peaceful nuclear program on an independent and own timeline. History of the region is that AQ Khan (Pakistan) gave the technology to Iran, both Islamic states …. and both have never recognized the existence of Israel. May be this is really sophomoric, and certainly very silly, and in the end will be futile!!!

  • Ray Sandoval

    This is a extremely shallow article with no historical background about region’s history and nuclear proliferation. The author is completely ignoring the facts and treating Iranian nuclear program in a vacuum. In a nutshell, he is suggesting that Iran could take orders like India and join the West and deal with rouge states like Israel…or become another N. Korea. This article appears to have been written by a student at a primary school.

    • Dr. Vayu Vyas Roye

      See the response above also. …When India and then Pakistan tested nuclear capabilities, outside the NPT in the 1990s, there was lots of clamor about it in Western media; it was done as a protestation against the Western powers. India has changed its tune recently, so to suggest India is taking orders from US is a ‘bad joke’ and misses the point entirely. The point made by the article is valid, and really shows that Iran has to walk a tightrope as does India between Israel and Iran and other MENA powers. It will be a landmine of sorts. …if and when Iran moves ahead. We can already see the signs, take it from Dr. Seuss!!!