Policy Alert #188 | May 13, 2019

On April 22, 2019, United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the US would cease granting exemptions to countries that import oil from Iran as part of its effort to unravel the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) from which it withdrew last year: “[W]e will no longer grant any exemptions. We’re going to zero – going to zero across the board. We will continue to enforce sanctions and monitor compliance. Any nation or entity interacting with Iran should do its diligence and err on the side of caution. The risks are simply not going to be worth the benefits.” Many prominent US allies and trade partners, such as India, Japan, South Korea, and member states of the European Union, continued their trade with Iran in the last year under the waiver program, as have rising powers China and Russia. In response to this action, Iran announced that it would restart part of its nuclear program. The US has since deployed an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf. While the two sides escalate tension, the Rising Powers are airing their frustrations with being caught in the middle.

 

CHINA
Answering questions at a regularly scheduled press conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang expressed China’s support of Iran: “China applauds Iran’s faithful implementation of the JCPOA so far. We will continue to work with all parties to uphold and implement the JCPOA, safeguard the international non-proliferation regime, peace and stability in the Middle East and the lawful and legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.”

• The state-owned China Daily urged the US to utilize diplomatic channels to remedy its frustrations with Iran rather than saber rattling: “Instead of submitting, as is its wont, to mindlessness born of arrogance, Washington should engage Teheran in dialogue, which is the only viable way to ease the spiraling tensions and usher in the right atmosphere for resolving the Iranian nuclear issue in a calm and rational manner.”
• The nationalist Global Times criticized the US’s actions as grandstanding by the Trump administration:  “Credit, morality and justice can be trodden underfoot in Washington’s partisan politics. […] The undisguised overbearing and capricious manner of the US has affected the world. Such behavior is targeted at Iran today, and it may be another country tomorrow.”
• The independent South China Morning Post acknowledged that while both the US and Iran are at fault for escalating the dispute, the US will bear more responsibility for disrupting the international economy: “When the world needs a more stable Middle East, the US approach is the surest way to destabilise Iran, rather than bring it back to the negotiating table. Tehran is not blameless, but Trump bears a lot of responsibility for pushing its back to the wall. If destabilisation impacts on oil prices it could affect the global economy and increase manufacturing costs in China when credit-driven economic recovery is finely balanced.”

 

INDIA
In a press briefing on April 23, 2019, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs acknowledged it was preparing to abide by US policy: “Government has noted the announcement by the US Government to discontinue the Significant Reduction Exemption to all purchasers of crude oil from Iran. We are adequately prepared to deal with the impact of this decision. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has already issued a statement in this regard. Government will continue to work with partner nations, including with the US, to find all possible ways to protect India’s legitimate energy and economic security interests.”

• The left-leaning Hindu criticized the government for not resisting US pressure: “In the larger picture, India isn’t just testing its traditional ties with Iran, but also giving in to President Donald Trump’s blatant bullying after his administration withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal. Instead of engaging in what appear to have been fruitless negotiations with the U.S. over the past year, India, China, the EU and other affected entities could have spent their time more productively in building a counter with an alternative financial architecture, immune to the U.S.’s arbitrary moves.”
• The liberal Indian Express meanwhile took aim at Iran’s efforts to pressure the European Union into taking sides: “Iran’s hopes of exploiting the cracks among the great powers are looking increasingly unreal as the actions of Europe, China and Russia have not matched their words. Iran’s ‘strategic patience’, in the words of President Hassan Rouhani, is wearing thin. […] With neither side ready to step back, the conflict between the US and Iran might well be headed for a costly showdown.”
• The centrist Times of India focused on the economic impact of the increased price of crude oil due to the US’s sanctions, and suggested that India create a “buyers’ bloc” with China: “When they negotiate together, their combined influence in the oil market will help them get a good deal. It is important to keep in mind that even if other oil producers like the US raise their output to offset the loss of Iranian crude, India still loses out. This is because Iran offered favourable terms when it came to overall pricing. This disadvantage can be offset only if India joins hands with China in negotiating with oil suppliers.”
• The left-leaning Hindustan Times lamented that US foreign policy was provoking instability at India’s doorstep: “The US’ gamble is based on the assumption that its pressure would lead to a regime change. The risk is that a more hardline regime might come to power and double down on the nuclear weapons programme. […] Whatever happens, the action will happen too close to India for comfort.”

 

JAPAN
At press conference, Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasutoshi Nishimura emphasized Japan’s cooperative relationship with Iran: “We note that Iran denies it is withdrawing from the nuclear deal. We intend to contribute to regional peace and stability, utilizing our traditional friendly relations with Iran.”

• The centrist Japan Times called for both sides to back down: “All parties must step up efforts to de-escalate tensions as the prospects for conflict rise.”
• The conservative Yomiuri Shimbun echoed the demands for cooler heads to prevail for the benefit of regional stability and the security of the international economy: “Destabilization of the situation surrounding Iran will further intensify turmoil in the Middle East and have an adverse effect on the world economy. Self-restraint is called for on the part of both the United States and Iran.”

 

RUSSIA
The Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the US’s actions in the dispute: “[N]ot only did it withdraw from the JCPOA a year ago, not only did it blatantly and defiantly impose unilateral sanctions on Iran later on in violation of UN Security Council’s Resolution 2231, but it attempts to exert economic and political pressure in order to force other states not to implement the above-mentioned resolution and to impede their normal economic cooperation with Iran.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov urged the European signatories of the agreement to hold fast against US threats: “Let me stress once again that specific obligations were assumed there. Russia is committed to honoring them in full. We expect our counterparts, primarily Europeans, who expressed their willingness to find a solution to the problem created by the Americans, to keep their promises as well.”

• Nebojsa Malic, a contributor for government-funded RT took the opportunity to critique Trump’s political rivals for their apparent hypocrisy: “President Donald Trump seems to be making Americans hate the empire again, by embracing war – or maybe only pretending to do so – against Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea and who knows where else. One thing to keep in mind about Trump is that his critics tend to instinctively oppose anything he is for, regardless of what they may have thought in the past.”
• State-owned Sputnik News featured an interview with Alexander Azadgan, senior geopolitical analyst and Editor-at-Large of United World International in which Azadgan linked the dispute between Iran and the US to the current situation in Venezuela: “Washington is engaging in economic terrorism and it has taken a toll on the Iranians. And you know, that is how they are trying to foment regime change in Iran. There may not be a war, we are not forecasting a war, but they are going to economically crumble Iran and they are going to expect that. When that happens, the Iranian people will rise and have a regime change, very much similar to what is happening in Venezuela right now. This is why the Venezuelan case is absolutely crucial. They just pick somebody to become the next president; Washington picks somebody to be the next president.”

 

RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.