Pakistan: Between Iran and a hard place

As Pakistan continues its unending exercise in navel-gazing, the threat of further turbulence in the region seems to be escaping us as we pick away at the "memogate" and NRO scabs.

Even in my remote bit of Sri Lanka, the drumbeat of an impending attack on Iran grows louder. As a new round of US and EU sanctions bite deep, and the Iranian economy reels from their impact, nobody in Pakistan seems to be focused on what the implications of events in our immediate neighbourhood can be for us.

From articles and leaked hints of war plans appearing in the international media, it seems clear that we are on a collision course. While the precise outcome of a possible conflict remains unclear, it is obvious that an attack on Iran will have disastrous consequences for the global economy.

Thus far, it is Israel that is beating the war drum the loudest. Israeli generals and politicians are painting lurid scenarios of the Armageddon a nuclear-armed Iran would unleash against the Jewish state. American and European leaders are more cautious. The fragile state of their economies dictates circumspection: an attack on Iran would cause an immediate doubling of the price of oil. Any prospect of economic recovery would be greatly hampered, with dire consequences for Obama's re-election chances.

But indications emerging from Israel suggest that its powerful military might launch an attack without American approval. In fact, there is talk of Israeli aircraft launching a series of strikes against Iranian nuclear installations. In this scenario, should Iran retaliate by closing the Hormuz Straits as it has threatened to, it would face the full force of an American riposte.

American leaders have repeatedly said they will not accept the closure of this international waterway.

As we struggle to work out the consequences of this confrontation, it would be useful to look at how we got to where we are.

Iran's covert nuclear programme had set alarm bells ringing in Western and Arab capitals long before President Ahmadinejad's threatening, anti-Semitic rhetoric gave Israel justification for its own belligerence.

As it is, Iran's long anti-West stance starting with its occupation of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979, and holding scores of diplomats hostage, has fed this conflict. Its support of anti-American groups in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as of Hamas and Hezbollah, has added to the tension.

For its part, Iran feels threatened by a hostile American presence in the Gulf and in Afghanistan. In addition, it has nuclear-armed Russia, Pakistan and India in its immediate neighbourhood. Finally, Israel, an implacable foe, has a large but undeclared nuclear arsenal, together with sophisticated delivery systems in place.

Given this background, the stage is set for a possible attack, should the ongoing sanctions and the policy of covert sabotage and assassinations not succeed in crippling Iran's nuclear programme. Despite Ayatollah Khamenei's repeated claims about the peaceful nature of his country's nuclear ambitions, the fact is that nobody really believes him. Iran is sitting on a sea of gas and oil, and the suggestion that it needs nuclear power plants is difficult to swallow.It is not only Washington and Tel Aviv that feel threatened by Tehran's attempt to develop nuclear weapons: its Arab neighbours fear an aggressive, nuclear-armed Iran on their doorstep. The Shi'a-Sunni rivalry for regional dominance is certainly a major factor in the ongoing confrontation, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE quietly urging-on their American patron to act.

Choices for Islamabad

All these mean painful choices for Pakistan. Already, it is under pressure from Washington to give up plans to build a gas pipeline from Iran. We have stopped importing crude oil from Iran as a result of sanctions imposed by the US on the country's central bank, making it difficult to open Letters of Credit. India and China have refused to succumb to pressure, but Iran's oil exports are bound to be severely hit.

Faced with the economic fallout of its nuclear policy, Iran will turn to its neighbours for help. Turkey is an important trading partner, and will be reluctant to fall into line with Western sanctions. Its large and booming economy will insulate it from American-led pressure. Pakistan, with its fragile economy, will be more vulnerable.

Given our isolation, we cannot afford to antagonise Iran by falling into line with Western efforts to bring our neighbour to its knees. Already, many Iranian goods are smuggled into Pakistan via Balochistan. As sanctions bite, we can expect sanctions-busting traders to import goods into Pakistan for onward shipment to Iran.

But it is the worst-case scenario of an attack by Israel with American connivance that will test our resolve. America might choose to use our airspace to hit Iranian targets. Iran might request our assistance in providing shelter to its aircraft. All kinds of scenarios could place us in the middle of the fight.

Navigating these dangerous waters will require a keen appreciation of the strategic situation, and a sound grasp of our self-interest. Neither our political nor our military leadership has displayed much of either thus far. We will find ourselves being forced to choose between alienating our friend and neighbour, or being subjected to Western sanctions. Between a rock and a hard place is not a good place to be.

In a recent article in the New York Times, Ronan Bergman, an Israeli journalist, cites several conversations he had with politicians, intelligence agency officials and military commanders. The consensus seems to be that if an attack on Iranian nuclear sites is deferred for another year, the window of opportunity will close as Iran will have achieved nuclear capability.

Hence the rush to war.

In an effort to rein in its Israeli ally, Washington has tightened sanctions in the hope that Iran will be pushed to halt its efforts at uranium enrichment. But in the midst of so much sabre-rattling, a miscalculation by either side could lead to catastrophe.