View

Pursuing tougher, meaningless sanctions

By CHEN WEIHUA
Updated: 2010-04-12 00:00

Many people, including some who actively push for tougher resolutions endorsed by the UN Security Council, know too well that sanctions will not work — not in the past, not now and not in the future. While comprehensive sanctions have not worked, the so-called targeted or smart sanctions being pursued now are in doubt.

Neither the current nor the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Yukiya Amano or Mohamed ElBaradei, is optimistic about the effect of new sanctions.

Sanctions, which escalate tensions and increase hostilities, are simply not conducive to solving problems. Iran’s nuclear program advanced during times when several unilateral and multilateral sanctions were imposed to stop its enrichment activities.

Some hope that sanctions will trigger a strong domestic backlash against the government and thereby bring about a desirable regime change. In reality, outside pressures tend to unite a people around their leaders. It is a form of national pride that many who grew up in the developed world can never fully understand.

At the same time, it is the country’s citizens who actually suffer under international sanctions. The impact on the lives of government, state or military leaders will be minimal.

In the case of Iran, fresh sanctions are only likely to harden the will of its leaders to develop their nuclear program more aggressively rather than force them to make changes, as evidenced by the sanctions in past years.

This does not mean that I love the idea of Iran, or any other country, having nuclear bombs, although its government has repeatedly said its nuclear program is solely for peaceful energy purposes.

The security of nuclear material and weapons, a topic that world leaders and experts are discussing in Washington DC, is surely an important issue for every nation.

Diplomacy and more diplomacy is clearly a smarter way than “smart sanctions” to achieve that goal.

Unlike his predecessor George W. Bush who constantly vowed regime change for axis of evil and rogue nations, US President Barack Obama came to power a year ago promising more diplomacy and engagement. He did try, yet it is premature for him to claim that all diplomatic channels have been exhausted. He may not realize that diplomacy takes time and requires confidence building on both sides.

From what we have seen in the past year, trust between Teheran and Washington has not been established. That is simply the key to the problem.

The problem is that pursuing more diplomacy may make Obama look soft in front of American people. That is not something Obama wants after he turned tough on both the domestic and international fronts.

Claiming a quick win, such as passing a new UN Security Council resolution, will add to the political capital he badly needs to save his declining approval rating.

However, Obama does deserve credit for the nuclear-free speech he made in Prague a year ago, the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty or START treaty he signed with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev last week and the meeting he called this week in Washington, gathering more than 40 world leaders.

He can do better by trying to talk with Iran over a wide range of issues of mutual concerns, such as assuring Iran’s security concerns.

Diplomacy and engagement are clearly more effective ways to ensure the peaceful pursuit of Iran’s nuclear program.

If politicians are more interested in claiming quick victory than achieving tangible progress, they will pursue the easy path of meaningless sanctions, rather than a difficult but more effective path of diplomacy.

Sanction seems to be an easy option when powerful leaders are at their wit’s end.

chenweihua@chinadaily.com.cn