THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, May 5, 1995 TAG: 9505050032
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A18 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 54 lines
Iran is buying nuclear technology from Russia and opposes renewal of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. There is little doubt Iran has sponsored terrorism and is out to get the bomb. The question is what to do about it.
Sen. Alphonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., proposed a total trade ban on Iran, and the Clinton administration has adopted the tactic, in part to retain flexibility. A legislatively imposed ban would handcuff it.
Will the ban really hurt Iran or modify its behavior? Experts think not. It will do little to impede Iranian oil sales, and we are not a major trading partner of Iran in other commodities. Nor is seeking to isolate and punish Iran likely to turn it in the direction of moderation.
Pressure should be put on sellers as well as buyers. It's the Russians who are making deals (potentially worth up to $8 billion) to provide Iran with reactors capable of producing 35 bombs a year, with gas centrifuges and technical aid. If President Clinton wants to lean on anyone, it should be Boris Yeltsin when he visits Moscow to commemorate the end of World War II.
Russia wants to join the West, so it might be more amenable to carrots and sticks. But Russia isn't alone in supplying Iran. Pakistan has also been providing training and expertise to Iranian technicians. China has been implicated as a supplier of military technology.
Cutting off trade with Iran to send other powers a message looks more like symbolism than substance. It's reminiscent of the decision to boycott the Moscow Olympics over displeasure with the war in Afghanistan. That may have made a point, but it made no difference. In the same way, it's hard to see what positive effect a unilateral move like this will have on either Moscow or Tehran.
A multinational response is needed if proliferation is going to be halted. Yet our Western allies are conspicuous by their absence and seem disinterested. They can ill-afford such detachment. A nuclear Iran (or Iraq or Libya) could prove unpredictably dangerous. It is easy to see the risk to Israel or the United States, but there's no assurance Arab neighbors or Western arms suppliers would be safe.
Iran is stark evidence that nuclear arms are likely to proliferate in the years ahead. But it can't happen unless technically advanced countries lend a hand. Unfortunately, the international community has adopted no response capable of deterring have-nots from acquiring weapons or sellers from helping to arm them.
And incidentally, this development is one more reminder that dependence on Middle Eastern oil is a fool's game. The gas lines of the '70s failed to awaken us to the danger. Neither did the Gulf War of 1990. This latest ominous rumble from the region ought to be a wake-up call. by CNB