Nassef M. Adiong The U.S.' and Israel's Securitization of Iran's Nuclear Energy Seminar paper Document Nr. V122706 http://www.grin.com/ ISBN 978-3-640-26619-7 9 783640 266197 The U.S.’ and Israel’s Securitization of Iran’s Nuclear Energy..............................2 The Origin of Iran’s Nuclear Energy and its Motivations.......................................4 Iran’s Nuclear Energy: An existential threat to the U.S.’ and Israel’s security?...11 Security...........................................................................................................13 Securitizing Actors or Agents..........................................................................14 Referent Objects.............................................................................................14 Specific Audiences..........................................................................................15 Speech Acts....................................................................................................15 Concluding Remarks...........................................................................................16 References .........................................................................................................18 1 The U.S.’ and Israel’s Securitization of Iran’s Nuclear Energy By Nassef M. Adiong Caveat: The title above is quite absurd to the fact that in the traditional sense of defining security, any country aspiring for weapons of mass destruction or WMD, which obviously nuclear used for developing weapons, is part and parcel of that nexus and is apparently a security issue; in other words it doesn’t need the securitization process. It absolutely manifests the core concepts of traditional security which is akin to military, war, or what we should say high politics of hard power prior to the Cold War era. However, my conception of the above statement is merely a Western thought, though majority in the academia that specializes in international security accept that premise. One would ask if we can actually securitize a security issue. The answer is definitely no, because in the first place, it has been securitized and an extraordinary response was made to normalize the matter. The nuclear energy issue of Iran is a different case because it was foreseen as an unprecedented security matter by Israel and the United States in which Iran hasn’t developed a culpable force of nuclear enrichment particularly uranium that would be used for military defence or political weapons as how the West reiterated this contention. The thin difference in securitizing Iran’s nuclear energy ambition is looking at a causational link that made Iran decided to produce its own nuclear energy enrichment, which scholars have been debating on the intent and purpose of Iran. The presented assumptions were political and an economic one. Political in a sense that the proponent contends that the West and its allies perceived Iran’s nuclear development as factor that will escalate regional instability and further will posed an unprecedented existential threat to them, while economical because, in an Iranian perspective, it will 2 only be utilize for energy and electricity consumption to provide an increasing demand for their population or business matters and trade as they put it. Now, these colluding perspectives and conflicting interests will only aggravate tensions and animosity among the concerned parties which may result to hostilities and probable unwanted war(s) will break out. The delimitations that I posit is neither will focus on debates or arguments whether this matter is a traditional or non-traditional security, or in other words, a military issue or energy security, nor dealings such as hypothetical inquiries regarding the “ifs or what ifs” of the intent, motivation and purpose of Iran, i.e., weapon or energy usage. Thus it will concentrate on Iran’s nuclear energy under the context of the redefined security which was presented in the Copenhagen school of thought or the so-called ‘securitization framework,’ deviating from the traditional to non-traditional security, the approach on securitizing Iran’s ambition of nuclear energy enrichment will be in accordance of trying to understand the Iranian perspective because most of the scholarly articles have unfairly subjugated Iran as a threat which are deemed subjective and bias. Furthermore, scarcity or lack of Iranian’s published works written in English have affected the framing of every region in the world particularly the allies and some non- allies of the United States. Considering their perceptions and understandings were also influenced by published Western academic works and especially when it comes from the sensationalized news from the international correspondents or programs of CNN, BBC, Fox et al. Media is really a powerful weapon in influencing the behavior of states and/or individuals. To deeply understand the identity of Iran’s aspiration for nuclear energy, the proponent will diagnostically presents two asserted propositions: (1) the historical background of how Iran acquired nuclear capability vis-à-vis with its motivations, and (2) the Copenhagen securitization framework of Iran’s nuclear energy to explain how Israel and the United States perceived it as an existential threat. 3 The Origin of Iran’s Nuclear Energy and its Motivations Iran’s adversaries often told that she doesn’t need to build nuclear energy because of her large reserves of gas and oil, but in the course of its existence from pre-Islamic revolution to recent, empirical studies showed that Iran needs an inconceivable amount of energy resources to supply its increasing population and demand for electricity where she cannot rely exclusively alone on an aging oil and gas industry. To give you an example, according to Afrasiabi (p. 19, 2006) Iran has not been able to reach the production level of 5.5 million barrels per day because of American sanctions since the Islamic Republic was established. There are actually 57 out of 60 major oil fields that need major repairs and upgrading, which would require $40 billion over 15 years. In other words, the current production level of Iran is 3.5 million barrels a day, whereby if this trend continues it will be catastrophic to Iran’s economy because it relies on oil for 80 percent of its foreign currency and 45 percent of its annual budget. Consequently, Iran has the fundamental right for securing adequate energy resources just like any other countries who aspire for development and technological advancement. In addition, from the political point of view, Iran wanted to establish its place in the international community and assert its hegemonic position in the West Asian region or more so to the Islamic world. This view might irritate the Arab world particularly the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia though some country members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) support this postulated prism. The reason being here is to probably enforce a well-balanced leadership in the Islamic world, e.q., establishing the three Islamic holy places into an OIC control sites and publishing academic works of universal or cosmopolitan interpretation of pristine Islam worldwide, which is not based from any cultural preferences or any schools of thought (so that the Western connotation of extremism will fade away from their schemata). 4 And in to some extent, aspiring for a material and real ummah community by reestablishing the Caliphate system though this thinking might sound idiotic or absurd due to the ethnical and political divide in the Muslim world – Sunni v. Shia, Arab nationalism sans Khadafi’s Libya v. Persian pride and Asian’s distinct views on Islam, and among others. Another motivation is that Iran is also seeking for diversifying its sources of energy which is similar to the U.S. and Russia resorting to renewable nuclear energy. Broad’s article (2008) revealed that since 1985 Iran has copied a Pakistani design known as the P- 1, which uses centrifuges that can be use for several applications not only for uranium enrichment but for other energy sources. In general these centrifuges can spin fast to separate all kinds of objects impurities that are incompatible i.e., mass and density. Iran’s research interest to nuclear development began in the Shah’s administration back in 1960s when a C.I.A. sponsored coup d’etat overthrow the government of the nationalist Dr. Mossadeq’s regime and established a monarchical system under the Pahlavi dynasty of Shah Reza Muhammad Pahlavi. Several bilateral agreements were fostered by Iran and the United States. Detailed information of Iran’s nuclear history can be found in the Payvand’s news article of Sahimi (2003), according to his research the Tehran Nuclear Research Center of the Tehran University was the first significant nuclear facility founded in 1967, which was administered by a special agency dedicated to nuclear research - the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI). The facility contained a 5-megawatt reactor that can produce a ceiling point of 600 grams of plutonium annually which was actually supplied by the government of the United States of America. On 1 July 1968, Iran signed the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that was ratified by the Majles, their parliament or congress, and it went into effect on 5 March 1970. In the Article IV of the treaty stipulated that Iran has the inalienable right to develop research, 5 production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and acquire equipment, materials, and scientific and technological information. Iran has also special relationship with Israel during those times, because she is the only non-Arab country and has strong political, diplomatic and economic relations with the United States. To give you an example, during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, Iran have supplied the necessary oil assistance to Israel. Giving the Shah’s administration a subsequent huge increase in the price of oil, thus industrial development and nuclear research programs extensively improved. Sahimi also argued that there was an influential study made by the Stanford Research Institute stating that Iran must increase its nuclear enrichment into an electrical capacity of about 20,000-megawatt to sustain its energy demand from 1970 to 1990. The United States further encouraged Iran to expand her non-oil energy base by providing her several nuclear reactors. At present, according to Frenkel (2008), Iran has thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium at Natanz, 250 tons of gases are stores in the tunnels of Esfahan, and a heavy water reactor that produces plutonium is situated at Arak. There is also four small nuclear research reactors supplied by China. Thus the study shows that the U.S. and Iran have a symbiotic relationship with each other, while the Iranian government was buying weapons from the U.S., Iran was providing cheap oil to the U.S. to recover herself from the high cost of oil perpetrated by the Arab- Israeli war or the so-called ‘first oil shock.’ In 1975, another agreement was signed between the two governments. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) will provide educational and nuclear research trainings to Iranian engineers of the AEIO, whereby these trained engineers will work at Bushehr reactors and also Iran will buy eight nuclear reactors from the U.S. for generating electricity (Sahimi 2003). 6 An extensive bilateral partnership was fostered on 10 July 1078 through the agreed U.S.- Iran Nuclear Energy Treaty which would supposed to facilitate cooperation in the field of nuclear energy and to govern the export and transfer of equipment and material to Iran's nuclear energy program. Iran was also to receive American technology and help in searching for uranium deposits. Iran has had established various nuclear agreements with other allies of the United States, namely: ƒ West Germany’s Kraftwerk Union (a subsidiary organ of Siemens) contract on 1974, providing two nuclear reactors at Bushehr with each has a capacity of 1,200-megawatt. ƒ The Iranian-Indian nuclear cooperation treaty was also signed on that same year, which paradoxically speaking India is now a nuclear based power recognized by the United States. ƒ Another nuclear research center was established with the help of France providing the technical know-how and trainings for Iranian engineers that would be working at the Nuclear Technology Center of Esfahan. The French company Framatome proposed to build two nuclear reactors and a power plant at Darkhovin and in the city of Ahvaz with an electrical capacity of 950-megawatt. ƒ Even South Africa provided uranium materials to Iran in 1970s. However, a tuning point in their diplomatic relationship on 1979 occurred that triggered a change in their foreign policies. An Islamic Revolution happened inspired by a man in the name of Khomeini that the Iranians bestowed him with titles of the ‘Ayatollah’ and the ‘Ruhollah’ which means friend and sign of God, a highly venerated and admired person cognizant of becoming a saint which is in contrast with the Sunni traditional beliefs. And of course the infamous American hostages by Iranian militants that last almost a year. In which they (the militants) politically contend that the U.S. have also held Iran 7 hostage like puppets of their whimsical beliefs dictating the internal affairs of the country thus a forlorn and lost sovereignty existed for decades. Leaving the nuclear program and research works incomplete and was paralyzed for a long time. According to Sahimi, the Bushehr-1 (reactor 1) was 90% complete and 60% of its equipment had been installed, while Bushehr-2 was 50% complete. The event also resulted to cancellations of nuclear projects initiated by the U.S. pressures to the governments of Germany, France, India and South Africa. Moreover, the two reactors at Bushehr were bombed six times (in March 1984, February 1985, March 1985, July 1986, and twice in November 1987) during the Iran-Iraq war, which the U.S. assisted Iraq by providing them anti-ballistic missiles and other conventional weapons. According to Sahimi, the representatives from the Germany's National Reactor Inspectorate argued that before the bombings, Bushehr-1 could have been completed in about three years. However, at the time of the bombings, none of the main equipments had been installed, and in fact two steam generators (that use the heat from the reactors to produce steam to be used in power generators) were stored in Italy, while the pressure vessel for Bushehr-1 was stored in Germany. Due to a grave and chronic shortage of electricity and a looming population explosion, President Hashemi Rafsanjani’s government restarted the nuclear program. First, Iran went to Germany and approached the Kraftwerk Union to complete the Bushehr project. But the company refused due to the U.S. pressure. Iran then asked Germany to allow Kraftwerk to ship the reactor components and technical documentation that it had paid for, citing a 1982 International Commerce Commission (ICC) ruling under which Siemens was obligated to deliver all plant materials and components stored outside Iran, but the German government still refused to do so (Sahimi 2003). 8 Due to consistent rejections from the German government, Iran filed a lawsuit in August 1996 with the ICC, asking for $5.4 billion in compensation for Germany's failure to comply with the 1982 ruling. However, the issue is still unsettled. (Sahimi 2003) In the late 1980s, a consortium of companies from Argentina, Germany and Spain submitted a proposal to Iran to complete the Bushehr-1 reactor, but huge pressure by the US stopped the deal. The US pressure also stopped in 1990 Spain's National Institute of Industry and Nuclear Equipment to complete the Bushehr project. Iran also tried, unsuccessfully, to procure components for the Bushehr reactors, but her attempts were blunted by the US. (Sahimi 2003) For example, in 1993, Iran tried to acquire eight steam condensers, built by the Italian firm Ansaldo under the Kraftwerk Union contract, but they were seized by the Italian government. The Czech firm Skoda Plzen also discussed supplying reactor components to Iran, but, under the US pressure, negotiations were cancelled in 1994. Iran was also not successful in her attempt to buy nuclear power reactor components from an unfinished reactor of Polland. (Sahimi 2003) So after an unrelentless search for nuclear energy to the Western world, Iran shifted to the East by acquiring communiqués and signing treaties from Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) and China. Some of these agreements were the following based from the Sahimi’s article: ƒ In March 1990, her first protocol on the Bushehr project with the Soviet Union was signed. ƒ In 1991, China provided Iran with uranium hexafluoride (a uranium compound, which is gaseous state, and used for enriching uranium) which is under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA, a subsidiary organ of the United Nations) safeguard. ƒ In 1992, Iran signed an agreement with China for building the reactors in Darkhovin, but the terms of the agreement have not yet been carried out by China. 9