No Saddam-sized sanctions on Iran

• Greg Sheridan,

IF this column were just a little more orthodox, just a little more accepting of the soothing locutions of international relations as practised at our great universities, it would tell you now of the victory for multilateralism embodied in the new UN sanctions against Iran. It would enthuse, in a measured and mellow fashion. about the benefits of international co-operation.

But that would be to wander in the make-believe world in which much diplomacy has its strange half-life. Instead, I'll tell you the truth. These sanctions represent a final, dismaying demonstration of the frivolity of the international system, if you can characterise the ramshackle, dysfunctional and corrupt processes of the UN as a system at all.

The sanctions show that, for the moment at least, no one is serious about stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The only chance of a serious delay in that process is an Israeli attack from the air. This may seem politically unlikely in the wake of the Gaza flotilla episode, but an intriguing report in Britain's The Times contains detailed information about Saudi Arabia offering its airspace to Israel to do just that. I think chances of an Israeli attack are still less than 50-50, but don't rule it out.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith has rightly described Iran's nuclear program as "the most difficult peace and security issue the international community will be confronted with over the next 12 to 18 months". Canberra will enforce the sanctions and add a couple of extra Iranian individuals and organisations to the sanctions list. It is doing its part in the international effort, but the truth is the international effort is puny while the problem is enormous.

The UN sanctions are exceptionally weak and were passed at the Security Council by a vote of 12 to 2, with Turkey and Brazil opposing and Lebanon abstaining. The sanctions go a little further than previous resolutions. They expand the categories of weapons that are banned for Iran, increase the number of Iranian institutions subject to sanctions, especially targeting institutions connected with the Revolutionary Guards, increase the restrictions on nuclear technology transfers to Iran and enable the inspection of cargo.

Well, brother, that and a couple of dollars will just about buy you a cup of coffee in most parts of the world. For a regime perfectly happy to steal an election, beat, club, murder, imprison, rape and disappear its internal critics by the hundreds, all in the name of the Islamic revolution, this is not so much being thrashed with a feather as being tickled by one.

Under some circumstances, sanctions can work. They had an effect in ending apartheid in South Africa. The big example of where they worked is Iraq, although people on all sides of the political equation don't like to point it out. The sanctions against Iraq were fraying by the end, but they did prevent Saddam Hussein from constructing nuclear weapons. But the sanctions against Iraq were infinitely stronger than these. Sanctions have four purposes. They make a statement by the countries imposing them, apply political pressure on the subject of the sanctions to change its policy, apply financial pressure, and physically prevent it acquiring capabilities it shouldn't get. How will these sanctions stack up against those purposes?

They do make a political statement but it's a feeble one. Instead of demonstrating Iran's isolation, they demonstrate the breadth of its international support. Turkey and Brazil used to be two of Washington's closest friends. Now they side with Tehran. Within a few days of the sanctions being passed, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was an honoured guest in China. Beijing's trade with Iran is worth $US30 billion ($35bn) a year. China and Russia watered down the sanctions to the point of being meaningless. Both were insistent that the sanctions not affect the workings of Iran's economy. Yet US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton only a few months ago talked of imposing "crippling" sanctions.

Therefore the sanctions fail purposes two and three as well. They apply neither political nor financial pressure of any consequence. Will they stop stuff Iran needs for its nuclear program getting through physically? Maybe, a little. It's still unclear whether Russia feels the sanctions will stop it from selling advanced air defence missiles to Iran or commissioning the nuclear reactor it is building for the Iranians at Bushehr. I don't doubt the goodwill and earnest intent of the Obama administration in all this. Nor do I think another president necessarily would have done better. After all, the progress towards Iranian nuclear weapons took place mostly under George W. Bush. Barack Obama has a perfect storm of other problems to deal with. But for people who really look into Iran, it's rather like people who are convinced that climate change will lead the planet to ruin. If you accept the initial premise, you must act. And if you don't act it's clear you're not serious about the initial premise.

At this stage, anyway, the Obama administration is not acting as if it takes the Iranian nuclear threat seriously, even though it says it does. If the Americans were really serious, they would at the very least impose their own blanket economic sanctions, designed to cause as much disruption to the Iranian economy as possible, and ask all like-minded countries to follow. It would be an enormous and costly undertaking, but that is what global leadership sometimes requires.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has concluded that Iran is operating 4000 centrifuges enriching uranium. It has already enriched 2.5 tonnes of uranium, enough for two nuclear weapons. It's not yet enriched to weapons grade, but Iran keeps taking big leaps in that direction.

Politically, the regime of the ayatollahs looks to have all but snuffed out its domestic opposition, which rose heroically and received no serious international support. Ahmadinejad is a hit in many Muslim countries and in much of Latin America. He controls terror proxy armies in Hezbollah and Hamas, has a tight alliance with Syria and a deepening economic partnership with China. He and his allies have been smart in the campaign to delegitimise Israel. Iran too now plans to send "civilian" ships to bring aid to Gaza. Tehran has successfully changed its rhetoric on Israel, no longer depicting it as a powerful enemy but rather a besieged outpost with faltering US support. This is a very self-confident regime. These sanctions are almost completely useless.