In the nuclear standoff with Iran, over the years both Europe and the U.S. have consistently pursued a multilateral strategy. Despite considerable delays and watered-down accomplishments, in early 2006 the strategy yielded a first result: the IAEA Board of Governors referred Iran to the UN Security Council for its noncompliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Soon after, to Iran's great dismay, the council passed resolution 1696. In December 2006 and soon after in March 2007, Resolutions 1737 and 1747 were unanimously approved, introducing sanctions against Iran. But then it took an additional year to get more sanctions -- and the new resolution 1803 only added a few names to the already less-than-satisfactory list of entities and individuals targeted by the sanctions. Since then, nothing more than a reaffirmation of these sanctions has made it through the Security Council.
Much of the stalling is attributed to Russia -- with the Chinese conveniently hiding behind Russia's obstructionism. Much of President Obama's “reset” strategy was presented as an attempt to turn Russia away from obstructionism and ensure that Moscow cooperates.
Now, wouldn't it be great if this worked? Western diplomats have lost years trying to stick to a united international strategy. The results it yielded are meager -- and their effect is questionable. But there is no doubt that turning Russia around to support sanctions against Iran (and maybe more) would be a great achievement, one that would obviate at least some of the drawbacks of delays and watered-down sanctions.
Read Full Article »