Saeed Ghaseminejad

PARIS — Despite press reports in the English-language media that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech at the United Nations this week was antagonist and hostile, the address was actually intended to be a sign of a new peaceful cooperation with Western governments.

After his speech Monday at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Conference, Ahmadinejad went further by reiterating Iran’s readiness to play a “constructive and positive” role in breaking the stalemate over a deal to swap its nuclear fuel, which would require Iran to ship most of its low-enriched uranium abroad for further processing and conversion into fuel rods for Tehran’s research reactor. Last fall, Iran accepted the swap proposal in principle, but disagreed with Western states over where the uranium would be shipped.

So why is Iran’s leadership now trying to appear to be extending an olive branch? The answer is complicated, but it has to do with the connection Iran makes between its nuclear program and pending UN sanctions.

Iran’s leadership knows that, after several rounds of talks on Iran’s nuclear program, the world, particularly Europe and the United States, is now familiar with the tactics of the Iranian government. The West has learned a lesson; it knows that diplomatic talks with Iran will not solve anything in the current climate. This is why the West is taking a tougher stance in trying to impose sanctions on Iran.

But will sanctions stop Iran’s nuclear activities? The short answer to this question is no.

We must understand Iran’s objectives. Few countries in the world believe Iran’s claim today that the sole purpose of its nuclear program is to produce cheap electricity. Rather, Iran’s goal to produce a potential nuclear weapon or have the technology to produce such weapons—what is often called the latent stage—stems from Iran’s security fears. The Islamic Republic believes it is facing two threats. The first threat is domestic. This threat is based upon a strong and growing opposition movement in Iran that challenges the ideological and despotic government.

The foreign threat is divided into two segments: military threats from the United States and Israel, and the fear of soft wars, such as the Obama administration’s focus on taking measures to free the Internet in Iran from regime manipulation. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s speech in January about Internet freedom placed the Iranian authorities on alert.

The Islamic Republic is trying to remove the possibility of any military or “softer” threats by producing nuclear weapons. Iran wants to use nuclear weapons as a bargaining chip to increase pressure on the West for what it calls “Western interference in Iran’s affairs.” Iran, for example, has demanded that the United States shut down the Voice of America, the U.S.-government-run television and radio station. Iran also wants the British government to close the BBC Persian Service, which has made a significant impact, not only by informing Iranians of the state’s atrocious human rights violations against Iranian society, but also by providing Iranians information about the world that they could not get from the state-controlled Iranian media.

There is another objective here, and that is to increase Iran’s sphere of influence in the region. In recent years, Iran has tried to improve its credentials in the region by doing three things:

• Providing support for Shiite Muslims in the region, through the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and Iran’s religious seminary schools, and creating loyal supporters there.
  

• Re-introducing itself as the leader of the anti-American and anti-Israeli movement in the region, appealing to Muslim radicals, including Sunni terrorist groups.
  

• Banging on anti-imperialist drums to find supporters among secularists in the region who are opposed to United States imperialism.

Iran believes that now is the best time to push ahead with its nuclear program, which is one of many reasons it wants to mislead the West by appearing to cooperate. In recent years, Iran repeatedly has tested the patience of the Coalition Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran believes that President Barack Obama does not have the ability to strike Iran because of his anti-war position, the economic crisis in the United States, and the troubles facing the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Moreover, Iranian officials are familiar with U.S. history and know that the current anti-interventionist mood in Washington might very well change. Because there is no prediction of who might come to power after the less-bellicose Obama, Iran is planning for permanent security guarantees by developing its nuclear program.

If the world seeks to stop Iran’s nuclear program, it must prove to Iran’s leaders that it is ready to take harsh measures that would destabilize the very foundations of the Islamic Republic. Even if the West attacks Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Islamic Republic will rebuild them as soon as it finds the chance. Therefore, another approach should be tried, such as aiding the opposition movement.

As for the Iranian people, many in the West often wonder what we want. From the taxi driver to the rich, and from the poor to the wealthy bazaari, Iranians like the idea of America coming in and removing the mullahs from power. But when you mention sanctions, Iranians frown. People have never supported sanctions, and they still don’t. But the difference now is that, over time, Iranians have begun pointing the blame for sanctions on the Iranian government, rather than on the shoulders of the international community.

A few years ago, no Iranian politician or Iranian activist would have in his wildest dreams defended sanctions against Iran. But in the last few years, and certainly in the past ten months, this has changed, thanks to the June 12 presidential election. The severe polarization in Iranian society under President Ahmadinejad has created plenty of hate and grudges among the oppositionists against the regime. In a way, in the eyes of some in the opposition movement, the regime has gone beyond repression, and is now an occupier.

Iran is trying to show cooperation—which Ahmadinejad tried to convey at the United Nations—while also developing its nuclear armed capability.

The best option for the world to counter Iran’s nuclear aims is to support the opposition movement in Iran. At the very least, this would force the government to refocus its efforts and spend its time and resources fighting this movement.

Saeed Ghaseminejad is a spokesman for the Organization of Liberal Students of Iran’s Universities. He left Iran in January 2010 and now lives in Paris