The sanction plan proposed by US President Barak Obama is suffering from many weak points. This is not the first time that the White House is embarking on using Iran's gas imports as a key element to pressure Iran; however, the continuation of such a trend would inevitably land President Obama in a stalemate position.
In April 2009, US Senate members decided to introduce a replacement for the law on sanctions on Iran, which had been ratified in 1996, with an aim of preventing Obama policies on conducting direct talks with Iran from failure.
It was with these concepts in mind that the plan to "ban gasoline exports to Iran" was offered to the Senate and then approved with a strong vote on July 30. The plan proposed that "further sanctions could offer the US president significant tools in his plans to enter interactions with Iran.
Amount to fill up Honda Civic in 2007 source: Market Oracle
Since the implementation of such a law - after it is ratified by the Congress - requires the US president's enforcement, it seems necessary to review the obstacles faced by the US administration in practicing such sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran:
1. The US could never exercise its desired sanctions against Iran through the United Nations without prior consent and cooperation of such countries as Russia and China. It should be noted that these two countries are heavily relying on Iranian gas and oil resources and their officials, referring the IAEA reports, have repeatedly stressed the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programs.
2. The US should also be aware of the fact that when a sanction is exercised against a certain country, it is quite common that the countries imposing the sanctions suffer in much larger scales than the country which receives them. Thus, the American administration should prepare itself for the consequences of such an act against Iran. The losses the US might suffer from imposing sanctions against Iran may come as the result of losing such a big market as Iran for its products. Furthermore, politicizing the trade and commercial activities may in turn inflict big blows to the US oil industries. If this happens, the US oil industry will develop a bad reputation as an "unreliable" partner thus losing chances to act as a trusted player in the scene of international oil and gas industries and markets.
3. Iran's demand for imported fuel is currently met by four European and an Indian company. Let's suppose that the US manages to get its desired sanctions against Iran become practical, then that would exactly mean more hostilities against America on the part of the companies which are working with Iran. Ironically enough, the US sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran have so far had quite opposite outcomes with the US allies suffering a much bigger share of losses.
4. Another important obstacle the US is facing in implementing further sanctions against Iran is a much deeper sense of distrust already created in its allies. Many Russian experts believe the US pressures on their country to stop selling nuclear reactors to Iran is just an attempt to deprive Moscow from offering its potentials in a harshly competitive market of nuclear technology.
Considering all points mentioned above, now the question arises that if America's first colored-skin president, despite all those financial supports and programming, fails to gain his goal of stopping Iran's nuclear programs - which he is sure to fail - then what will happen to America and what situation the US will be facing? The answer is:
When his plan fails, then a Mr. Obama who had been claiming changes in the US policies will be facing paralyzing humiliations himself rather than exercising paralyzing sanctions against Iran, as he has been boasting of. The US had already exhausted all means and manners to prevent Iran from successfully developing its nuclear program and failed to get its desired results.
Now that the post-election incidents in Iran are over and the West is in despair over failure of its greedy plans for Iran, the US is working out plans on which to base its future policies based on the reactions of Iran to the proposed sanctions. Or it might be that the American administration is thinking of ways to intimidate Iran with an aim of reducing its lobbying power. However, the US is advised to act quite cautiously even in doing this. This game is a very dangerous one to play because in case Iran decides to play the same game against the US, then America will undoubtedly be missing the power required to maintain the power balance.
Given the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran has so far declined from implementing all its resources and might to inflict serious damage to Washington's vital interests, like closing the Hormuz Strait and stopping any kind of marine transporation activity there, the US should never rest in peace neglecting threats potentially existing against it. The inefficiency of the weapon of "sanctions" against Iran will become more apparent when the US realizes that it would never - by any means - manage to use it as an effective threat against Iran or get incentives from it by deciding to remove the gasoline import sanctions.
This chain of activities will certainly land the US president in a state of stalemate - as it is called pat in the chess game. The best thing Mr. Obama could wisely do to maintain his power of movement in the game field - and escape a situation where he is likely to be labeled as "the second George Bush"- is to use the very limited time left to the UN 64th General Assembly to make overall revisions in his strategies. He should plan the next stages of his Iran policies with more wisdom and caution while endeavoring to target the right and correct goals.
... Payvand News - 09/02/09 ... --