Stinging or Fragile?

Published in Kayhan News
(Iran) on 19 January 2012
by Hussam al-Din Boroumand (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by David Basom. Edited by Jessica Boesl .
The story of sanctions against Iran has been a repetitive and, of course, boring story spanning the past three decades. In the most recent decade, a new chapter in this story was presented, and that story was that the issue of sanctions being directly tied to Iran becoming nuclear. The main part of the story in this new chapter has a constant refrain in which the Islamic Republic [of Iran] is always accused of building an atomic weapon so that imposing sanctions has a so-called rational justification, and even a legal hue and shine.

But it’s interesting that when the Western media want to reflect on the story of sanctions, they admit the reality is something different and this story doesn’t have a concrete plot.

The reality, from the tongue of Jeremy Hammond, editor of Foreign Policy, is worth reading: “Iran is singled out because it defies America.”

Of course, the real story of the sanctions and Iran going nuclear does not end here. It has a bitter chapter for America and a few of the countries who follow them, which the Washington Post could not pass by with the analysis that Iran, despite pressure and sanctions, has achieved nuclear technology. They wrote: “For years it was imagined that economic and political sanctions could make Iran willing to compromise to one side of the negotiation, but this was an illusion. Iran’s resistance has undermined this notion, which once had advocates, and the West was dumbfounded … In the history of nuclear countries, Iran is an exception and has achieved this technology without foreign assistance.”*

Therefore, saying the sanctions were and are due to Iran becoming nuclear is wrong and costly; on the other hand, the sanctions project has been transformed and subjected to a process over time for the so-called containment of Iran only.

But this writing is trying to carefully analyze and asses the problem now that in recent days and weeks the issue of sanctioning Iranian oil has climaxed in the media and it has been alleged by the United States and two or three other European countries that these particular sanctions are stinging or crippling for Iran.

The pivotal point in the temporary circumstances and requirements is in the area of regional and global developments, which have caused the actual implementation of the Iranian oil sanctions, beyond just being a figurative or press platform, to be faced with numerous obstacles and their fulfillment to be put on hold. Why? Read on.

1. The first reason is that the circumstances for America and Europe to pursue the subject of sanctions on Iranian oil — which, if they did, could prove useful — are very tenuous. The widespread financial crisis in Europe over the past four years has been back-breaking. European countries have become extremely vulnerable and can’t afford to take risks, so much so that a few days ago, the credit rating agency, Standard and Poor’s, announced that the credit rating for the French economy and eight other European countries has been downgraded. Because oil is a strategic and vital commodity, decisions concerning it will be made cautiously. This is the very reason that members of the E.U. have intense disagreements concerning the Iranian oil embargo. Whenever discussion on the topic escalates, they postpone it. Recently, the Bloomberg News network reported that Europe had delayed sanctions of Iranian oil for a period of six months. Reuters clarified: Sanctioning Iranian oil has been deferred until July 1.

According to published reports, there are deep-rooted differences; some members are even pursuing a 12-month postponement of the Iranian oil sanctions.

America’s situation is, if not worse than Europe, certainly not better. In addition to this, today, America is the most indebted government in the world, and the debt of this country has exceeded $15 trillion and is increasing every day. It is engaged in a 99 percent protest movement whose economic and political consequences are strongly and intensely squeezing the throat of the of the capitalist system. Ironically, America, with these calculations, wants to help Europe’s condition through oil sanctions against Iran, to which it must be said, “The blind leading the blind!”

2. Another reason for this is that many European countries that buy Iranian oil are opposed to the issue of sanctioning Iranian oil because they have a quite clear and explicit argument: “increase in oil price.”

It was in following this line of reasoning that Agence France-Presse reported despairingly about the sanctions of Iranian oil by the European Union and explained: “The agreements are fragile”; and this fragility is so evident that reports indicate Italy, Spain and Greece have extended their own oil contracts with Iran in 2012.

3. In continuation, the reasons why America’s movements and efforts to sanction Iranian oil have failed so far are worth mentioning.

The Americans have tried very hard to persuade China to go along with them on the issue of sanctioning Iranian oil due to China’s economic and political standing, but it is interesting to listen to the results as told by Gary Locke, U.S. ambassador to Beijing, who clearly confesses that his country’s efforts to lobby for China’s cooperation in sanctioning Iranian oil have failed. Meanwhile, China, during an official statement protesting America, announced its cooperation with Iran will continue in the sectors of energy and commerce. This situation was repeated in Japan and the American officials’ trip to this country did not produce results. The answer of Japan’s foreign minister about sanctioning Iranian oil was that this sanction would have a negative impact not only on Japan, but also the global economy.

It was on Monday of this week [January 16 ] that an American delegation under the leadership of Robert Einhorn entered South Korea for a period of three days; however, the response of Seoul’s officials again showed the disappointment of Americans because Korean officials announced that sanctions on buying Iranian oil will cause heavy losses to the economy of South Korea. Even after the trip to South Korea by Einhorn, special advisor to the U.S. secretary of state, the South Korean people held widespread protests and demonstrations against the Iranian oil embargo.

4. Likewise, in addition to the opposition of European and Asian countries to the Iranian oil embargo, Russia’s position is of critical importance.

Furthermore, Moscow officials have repeatedly announced their opposition to the Iranian oil embargo. What demands more reflection are the comments by Gennady Gatilov, one of the senior officials in Russia’s foreign ministry, who recently noted, “We will veto every resolution about sanctioning Iranian oil.”

5. Another reason showing that an Iranian oil embargo will find another fate when put into practice, and that claims and action are miles apart, is an indicator called the sanctions on the Central Bank.

Although Obama signed sanctions against our country’s Central Bank on the 11th of the month of Dey [January 1], the important part is that there is faint compatibility between the title of these sanctions and the text that leads to its becoming operational. The flexibility of this regulation goes so far that the Jewish World News Network by implication — nearly assertion — revealed that the possibility for Obama to circumvent the aforementioned sanctions is stated in the text of the sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank. Based on this point, there is not the slightest doubt that America lacks the conditions and ability to enact sanctions against Iran.

Two days ago [January 17], the New York Times addressed the issue from the same perspective and acknowledged that Obama’s sanctions against Iran impact the economy of the [U.S.] and make the election campaign more difficult for Obama.

6. Finally, it must be said that, after the powerful and meaningful exercises of Velayat-90, the Islamic Republic’s power to close the Strait of Hormuz was revealed to the world in practice — and not as a slogan. The enemy, who had earlier drawn the weapon of oil sanctions against Iran, can now better calculate the irreversible consequences of an Iranian oil embargo, and the fear of realizing those consequences has weakened the pursuit of oil sanctions.


گزنده يا شكننده ؟ (يادداشت روز)

داستان تحريم ها عليه ايران داستاني تكراري و البته كسل كننده در تمامي 3 دهه گذشته بوده است. در دهه اخير فصل جديدي از اين داستان رونمايي شد و آن اين بود كه بطور مستقيم موضوع تحريم ها با هسته اي شدن ايران گره بخورد.
بخش اصلي داستان در اين فصل جديد يك ترجيع بند ثابت داشت و همواره جمهوري اسلامي متهم به ساخت سلاح هسته اي و بمب اتم! شده تا به نوعي اعمال تحريم ها يك توجيه به اصطلاح منطقي و حتي با رنگ و لعاب حقوقي داشته باشد!

اما جالب است كه رسانه هاي غربي هم وقتي مي خواهند داستان تحريم ها را انعكاس دهند اذعان مي كنند واقعيت چيز ديگري است و اين داستان درونمايه واقعي ندارد.

واقعيت از زبان جرمي هاموند سردبير فارين پاليسي-Foreignpolicy خواندني است: «ايران چون از آمريكا سرپيچي مي كند متهم به ساخت سلاح هسته اي است.»

البته بخش واقعي داستان تحريم ها و هسته اي شدن ايران بدين جا ختم نمي شود و يك فصل تلخ براي آمريكا و چند كشور دنباله روي او دارد كه واشنگتن پست چندي پيش نتوانست از آن عبور كند و با اين تحليل كه ايران با وجود فشار و تحريم به فناوري هسته اي دست يافته است نوشت: «سالها تصور مي شد كه تحريم هاي اقتصادي و سياسي مي تواند ايران را به يك طرف مذاكره ساز ش پذير تبديل كند اما اين، يك تصور اشتباه بود. ايستادگي ايران اين نظريه را كه زماني طرفدار داشت، به وضوح تضعيف كرد و به جاي آن بهت و حيرت گريبانگير غرب شد... ايران در تاريخ كشورهاي هسته اي يك استثناست و بدون حمايت خارجي به اين فناوري دست يافته است.»

بنابراين اينكه تحريم ها بخاطر هسته اي شدن ايران بوده و هست سخني به گزاف و خلاف است و از سوي ديگر؛ پروژه تحريم ها براي به اصطلاح مهار ايران تنها به يك پروسه تبديل گرديده و مشمول مرور زمان شده است.

اما اين نوشته تلاش مي كند اكنون كه موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران طي روزها و هفته هاي اخير در فضاي رسانه اي اوج گرفته و از سوي آمريكا و دو، سه كشور اروپايي ادعا شده اين تحريم خاص، خاصيت فلج كنندگي و گزندگي براي ايران دارد، مسئله
مورد اشاره را مورد واكاوي و سنجش قراردهد.

نكته محوري شرايط و اقتضائات زماني در پهنه تحولات منطقه اي و جهاني است كه باعث شده اجرايي شدن تحريم نفتي ايران در عمل و فراتر از صحنه مجازي و رسانه اي با موانع متعددي روبرو باشد و تحقق آن را در وضعيت تعليق قرار دهد چرا؟ در ادامه بخوانيد؛

1- اولين دليل اين است كه موقعيت آمريكا و اروپا در تعقيب موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران كه خروجي آن مثمر ثمر باشد بسيار متزلزل است. بحران گسترده مالي در اروپا طي4 سال گذشته كمرشكن بوده است و كشورهاي اروپايي به شدت آسيب پذير شده اند و قدرت ريسك ندارند تا جايي كه چند روز پيش مؤسسه اعتبارسنجي «استاندارد اندپورز» اعلام كرد رتبه اعتبار اقتصادي فرانسه و 8 كشور اروپايي ديگر تنزل يافته و چون «نفت» يك كالاي استراتژيك و حياتي است تصميم گيري ها پيرامون آن بسيار محتاطانه خواهد بود. به همين خاطر است كه اعضاي اتحاديه اروپا براي تصميم گيري درباره تحريم نفتي ايران اختلاف نظر شديدي دارند و هر بار كه بحث در اين خصوص بالا مي گيرد آن را به تعويق مي اندازند و اخيرا شبكه خبري بلومبرگ گزارش داد كه اروپا تحريم نفتي ايران را 6 ماه به عقب انداخت و رويترز تصريح كرد تحريم نفتي ايران به اول ژوئيه (11 تير 1391) حواله داده شده است.

بنابر گزارش هاي منتشره اختلافات به حدي ريشه دار و عميق است كه برخي از اعضا حتي تعويق 12 ماهه تحريم نفتي ايران را دنبال مي كنند.
موقعيت آمريكا هم اگر بدتر از اروپا نباشد بهتر نيست و علاوه بر اينكه امروز آمريكا بدهكارترين دولت جهان است و بدهي اين كشور از مرز 15 تريليون دلار گذشته و هر روز به آن اضافه مي شود درگير يك جنبش اعتراضي 99درصدي است كه پيامدهاي اقتصادي و سياسي آن گلوي نظام سرمايه داري را به شدت و با قوت مي فشارد و طرفه آنكه آمريكا با اين محاسبات مي خواهد در تحريم نفتي بر ضد ايران كمك حال اروپا باشد كه بايد گفت؛ كوري شود عصاكش كوري ديگر!

2- دليل ديگر اين است كه بسياري از كشورهاي اروپايي كه خريداران نفت ايران هستند با موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران مخالف هستند چون يك استدلال صريح و كاملا روشني دارند: «افزايش قيمت نفت».

در پي اين استدلال بود كه خبرگزاري فرانسه موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران از سوي اتحاديه اروپا را نااميدانه گزارش مي كند و تصريح مي نمايد: «توافق ها شكننده است» و اين شكنندگي آنچنان نمايان شده كه گزارش ها حاكي است ايتاليا، اسپانيا و يونان قراردادهاي نفتي خودشان با ايران را در سال 2012 تمديد كرده اند.

3- در ادامه دلايل اين نكته گفتني است كه تلاش ها و تحركات آمريكا براي اجرايي شدن تحريم نفتي ايران تاكنون به شكست انجاميده است.
آمريكايي ها خيلي سعي داشتند در موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران، چين را به خاطر موقعيت اقتصادي و سياسي اين كشور با خود همراه سازند اما جالب است كه نتيجه را از زبان گري لاك سفير آمريكا در پكن شنيد كه به وضوح اعتراف مي كند لابي كشورش جهت همراه كردن چين براي تحريم نفتي ايران شكست خورده است. ضمن آنكه چين طي بيانيه اي رسمي با اعتراض به آمريكا اعلام كرد به همكاري هاي خودش در بخش هاي انرژي و بازرگاني با ايران ادامه مي دهد. همين وضعيت در ژاپن نيز تكرار شد و سفر مقامات آمريكايي به اين كشور نتيجه اي در بر نداشت و پاسخ وزير خارجه ژاپن درباره تحريم نفتي ايران اين بود كه اين تحريم نه تنها ژاپن بلكه بر اقتصاد جهاني تاثير منفي مي گذارد.

اينجا بود كه از روز دوشنبه هفته جاري به مدت 3 روز هيئت نمايندگي آمريكا به رياست رابرت آينهورن وارد كره جنوبي شد اما پاسخ مقامات سئول باز ناكامي آمريكايي ها را نشان داد چرا كه مقامات كره اعلام كردند تحريم خريد نفت ايران زيان هاي سنگيني به اقتصاد كره جنوبي مي زند، و حتي در پي سفر آينهورن مشاور ويژه وزيرخارجه آمريكا به كره جنوبي، مردم اين كشور تظاهرات و تجمعات گسترده اي در مخالفت با تحريم نفتي ايران برگزار كردند.

4- همچنين علاوه بر مخالفت كشورهاي اروپايي و آسيايي با تحريم نفتي ايران، موضع گيري روسيه نيز حائز اهميت است.

افزون بر اينكه مقامات مسكو بارها و به كرات مخالفت خود را در موضوع تحريم نفتي ايران اعلام كرده اند آنچه تامل بيشتري را مي طلبد اظهارنظر گنادي گاتيلوف از مقامات ارشد وزارت خارجه اين كشور است كه اخيرا خاطرنشان كرد هر قطعنامه اي درباره تحريم نفتي ايران را وتو مي كنيم.

5- از ديگر دلايلي كه نشان مي دهد تحريم نفتي ايران در عمل سرنوشت ديگري پيدا مي كند و از ادعا تا عمل فرسنگ ها فاصله است شاخصي به نام تحريم بانك مركزي ايران است.

اوباما هرچند در 11 دي ماه تحريم بانك مركزي كشورمان را امضا كرد اما نكته مهم اين است كه ميان «عنوان» اين تحريم با «متن» تحريم كه به عملياتي شدن آن بينجامد سازگاري كمرنگي وجود دارد و انعطاف پذيري اين مقرره تا جايي است كه شبكه خبري يهوديان جهان در تلويحي نزديك به تصريح افشا كرد كه امكان دور زدن تحريم مزبور براي اوباما در متن تحريم بانك مركزي ايران لحاظ شده است.
بنابراين نكته اي كه كمترين ترديدي در آن نيست عدم توان و شرايط آمريكا در اعمال تحريم ها بر ضد ايران است.

دو روز پيش - 17 ژانويه - نيويورك تايمز از همين منظر به موضوع پرداخت و اذعان نمود تحريم هاي اوباما بر ضد ايران به اقتصاد اين كشور ضربه مي زند و مبارزه انتخاباتي براي اوباما سخت تر مي شود.

6- و بالاخره بايد گفت پس از رزمايش مقتدرانه و معنادار ولايت 90، كه قدرت بستن تنگه هرمز از سوي جمهوري اسلامي در صحنه عمل - و نه شعار - به چشم همگان آمد، دشمن كه پيش تر حربه تحريم نفتي بر ضد ايران را به پيش كشيده بود اكنون بهتر مي تواند پيامدهاي جبران ناپذير تحريم نفتي ايران را محاسبه كند و ترس از تحقق آن پيامدها، پيگيري تحريم نفتي را شكننده تر كرده است.
حسام الدين برومند
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Another Threat from Trump

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Israel: Epstein Conspiracy: When the Monster Has a Life of Its Own and Rises Up

Spain: The New American Realism

Taiwan: Tariff Showdown Doesn’t Shake Confidence

Topics

Spain: How To Burst the MAGA Bubble*

Russia: The Issue of Weapons Has Come to the Forefront*

Colombia: How Much Longer?

Germany: Tariffs? Terrific!

Spain: The New American Realism

Mexico: Trump vs. Cuba: More of the Same

Ireland: US Tariffs Take Shine Off Summer Economic Statement

Related Articles

India: Peace Nobel for Trump: It’s Too Long a Stretch

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

Canada: Can We Still Trust American Intelligence?

Mexico: Traditional Terrorism vs the New Variety

Israel: In Washington, Netanyahu Must Prioritize Bringing Home Hostages before Iran