International Crisis Group

The Mideast Crack-Up | Tablet Magazine

By David Samuels

Q: Our current maps of the Middle East were drawn by British and French cartographers after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of World War I. Are the lines on those maps about to change? Or is this simply a moment of local bloodshed that will get cleaned up once governments—in Baghdad, Damascus, Washington, Ankara, Jerusalem, Moscow, Beirut, Beijing, Ramallah, etc.—draft a few well-worded accords?

Nathan Thrall: Long-lasting as many minority regimes proved to be, it hardly seems the case, as David Goldman suggests, that they were the “only possible stable government.” Egypt since the 1952 revolution lasted longer than minority regimes elsewhere in the region, yet it was not ruled by Copts. The Saudi regime has outlasted rivals, yet it is not made up of Saudi Shiites. Iran is not governed by Azeris. Turkey is not under Kurdish control, and Palestinian citizens of Israel have not taken over the Jewish state.

Without doubt we are witnessing the strongest challenge yet posed to the post-Ottoman order in the Levant. With every passing day, Syria comes to more closely resemble an earlier period in its history, when the French briefly divided the territory into statelets containing Druze, Alawite, Sunni, and Maronite majorities—the last of which survived to became modern-day Lebanon. The current Syrian civil war threatens to spill over into Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq, which teeters on the brink of a renewed civil war of its own.

Yet, as distant as a unified Syria may seem today, most of its people still want such a state, while Iraq has survived enormous bloodshed, reversals of regional alliances, calls for partition, increasing Kurdish autonomy, and the end of Sunni minority rule. What is finally remarkable about the Middle East’s poorly drawn borders is how durable they are. Altering them could occur under present conditions but would be far more likely in the aftermath of a wider regional war.

FULL ARTICLE (Tablet Magazine)

Photo: James Gordon/Flickr

Rafsanjani’s last-minute entry transforms Iranian race | Reuters

By Yeganeh Torbati and Marcus George

Former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani threw himself into Iran’s election race on Saturday as a flurry of heavyweight candidates rushed to beat the registration deadline in the most unpredictable contest for decades.

Iranian media reported that Rafsanjani - a relative moderate - had registered for the June 14 presidential election with just minutes to spare. His candidacy radically alters what was previously seen as a contest between rival conservative groups.

The former president could scupper the hopes of ‘Principlists’, loyal to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who are aiming to secure a quick and painless transition and paper over the deep fissures between the opposing camps.

Rafsanjani, 78, who was president from 1989 to 1997, is expected to draw some support from reformists because he backed the opposition movement whose protests were crushed after the last, disputed election in 2009.

The election comes at a critical moment, as Iran reels from international sanctions over its disputed atomic program and faces the threat of attack by Israel if it crosses what the Jewish state calls a ‘red line’ towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. Tehran strenuously denies it wants an atomic bomb.

FULL ARTICLE (Reuters)

Photo: Flickr/A.Davey

Crisis Group’s Senior Iran Adviser Ali Vaez’s recent piece for the Arms Control Association: “Iran’s Nuclear Program and the Sanctions Siege” (paywall)

Photo: Alex Jagendorf/Flickr

Fault Lines, Not Red Lines | Foreign Policy

By Ali Vaez, Crisis Group’s Senior Iran Analyst

A 6.3-magnitude earthquake shook Iran’s southern shores on Tuesday, April 9, on the afternoon that the country was celebrating its National Nuclear Technology Day. Nearly 800 homes were destroyed, killing 37 people and injuring more than 900. Iran’s sole nuclear reactor, located in Bushehr, almost 100 miles from the quake’s epicenter, was, according to Iranian and Russian officials, unaffected. But there’s no way of knowing until the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report comes out in May. Either way, they got lucky.

The Bushehr reactor, which was completed in 2011, sits at the intersection of three tectonic plates and is designed to endure earthquakes up to a magnitude of 6.7 on the Richter scale. So this was a very close call for the hybrid German-Russian reactor — a virtual petri dish of amalgamated equipment and antiquated technology. The sui generis nature of the reactor means that Iran cannot benefit from other countries’ safety experiences.

It also means regular mechanical breakdowns. During tests conducted in February 2011, all four of the reactor’s emergency cooling pumps (holdovers from the 1970s) were damaged, sending tiny metal shavings into the cooling water. The plant’s engineers were forced to thoroughly clean the reactor’s core, an operation that further delayed its long-overdue launch. Again, in October 2012, the reactor was shut down and fuel rods were unloaded after stray bolts were found beneath the fuel cells.

FULL ARTICLE (Foreign Policy)

Photo: Shane Lin/Flickr

The clock is ticking on Iran | BBC

By Lyse Doucet

“I will be in touch soon” was how EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton described her next contact with Iran after talks in Almaty ended without even an agreement to meet again.

But can it be soon enough to ease growing anxiety over Iran’s nuclear programme and stave off more crippling sanctions?

“Another failed diplomatic foray is likely to prolong the standoff and increase the price each side has to pay for a compromise,” commented Ali Vaez, senior Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group (ICG), who was in Almaty.

FULL ARTICLE (BBC)

Photo: EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili in Almaty on April 5, 2013.

Credit: European External Action Service/Flickr

Deep rifts exposed in latest round of Iran nuclear talks | Christian Science Monitor

By Scott Peterson

That disconnect and “mutual misperceptions” now risk damaging the diplomatic process, says Ali Vaez, the senior Iran analyst for the International Crisis Group, who spoke to delegates on both sides at the talks in the Kazakh city of Almaty.

“The P5+1 expected instant gratification of its meaningful – but modest – offer of sanctions relief, while Iran saw an opportunity to devise a road map toward recognition of its rights to enrichment,” says Mr. Vaez.

Differences now remain “as wide as the distance between the first step and the end game,” says Vaez. “Still, there is a real cost in declaring failure and as prospects of a deal narrow, the temptation of more coercive alternatives grows. The ironic end result of years of mutual escalation is that both parties are now loathe to use the leverage they have sacrificed so much to acquire.”

FULL ARTICLE (Christian Science Monitor)

Photo: SS&SS/Flickr

Iran, big powers appear miles apart at nuclear talks | Reuters

By Yeganeh Torbati and Justyna Pawlak

Iran appeared to side-step responding to proposals by world powers to defuse tensions over its nuclear program at talks in Kazakhstan on Friday, diplomats said, and instead came up with its own plan - a measure of the gulf between the two sides.

The six powers - the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany - had sought a concrete response from Iran to their February offer of modest sanctions relief if Tehran stops its most contentious nuclear work.

But instead Iranian negotiators outlined their own “specific” plan to resolve the dispute, which has been plagued by mutual mistrust and on-off negotiations for a decade.

FULL ARTICLE (Reuters)

Photo: Marjolein Katsma/Flickr

Iran Signals Flexibility as World Powers Seek Progress | Bloomberg

By Jonathan Tirone & Indira A.R. Lakshmanan 

Iran countered a proposal intended to address concerns over the Persian Gulf country’s nuclear ambitions by urging world powers to outline their vision for bringing the decade-long dispute to an end.

Iran wants to define the “dimensions” of the negotiating process as well as its “final outcome,” Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran’s supreme national security council, said today in Almaty, Kazakhstan, where a new round of talks began. The Islamic republic’s counterparts said earlier they expected “concrete” progress from the meeting.

“Confidence-building measures are measures that both sides in an agreement need to take,” Bagheri said through a translator. “They are part of a comprehensive set of measures.”

While Iran seeks a lifting of sanctions saddling its economy, world powers have offered some easing of the restrictions in return for halting atomic work they say may enable weapons production. Iran’s nuclear costs, estimated at $100 billion and rising, may make compromise more difficult as diplomats seek a breakthrough in Kazakhstan.

FULL ARTICLE (Bloomberg)

Photo: Flickr/European External Action Service

Iran and world powers should focus on action steps for short-term agreement | The Christian Science Monitor

By Ali Vaez 

Something changed in the nuclear talks between Iran and world powers last month in Almaty, Kazakhstan. For the first time, the two sides negotiated in earnest.

Gone were the preconditions and meandering lectures of the past. Instead of maximalist upfront demands in return for nebulous future rewards, the envoys discussed explicit quid-pro-quo options. Both sides described the meetings with adjectives ranging from “useful” to “pivotal”.

Yet the follow-up 13.5-hour meeting in Istanbul between the parties’ arms control officials revealed that a great gulf remains in expectations. It was a sobering reminder that the diplomatic process is as fragile as the prospect of an agreement is elusive. Misperception and brinkmanship might yet make this opening another instance of what historian G.M. Tevelyan called “the turning point at which history fails to turn.”

FULL ARTICLE (The Christian Science Monitor)

Photo: Flickr/European External Action Service