Monday, December 21, 2020

The Persian Gulf Crisis and the Security Dilemma

This article is by

Share this article

Article Contributor(s)

Anant Jani

Article Title

The Persian Gulf Crisis and the Security Dilemma

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

December 21, 2020

URL

American Assault Ship in the Persian Gulf

American Assault Ship in the Persian Gulf | Source: Cpl. David Gonzalez via Flickr

This article explains the recent tensions between Iran and the United States, and presents it as a case of the ‘Security Dilemma’ theory in practice.

The Persian Gulf Crisis 2019-20

To understand the current crisis in Persian Gulf, we must look at the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015, also called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The JCPOA was signed between The E3/EU+3 (France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Russian Federation, and the United States, China, with the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) and the Islamic Republic of Iran, to permit nuclear capabilities for Iran exclusively for peaceful purposes, in exchange for the lifting of crippling sanctions.

JCPOA terms:

International Atomic Energy Agency representative in Tehran, Iran for talks on JCPOA implementation | Source: Tasnim News Agency

Under this accord, Iran had to reduce its Uranium stockpile by 98% to 300kg, maintain its level of enrichment at 3.67%, reduce the number of centrifuges, and only keep one of its Uranium enrichment plants active. It also had to redesign its reactor at Arak, so it could not produce weapon’s grade Plutonium. Until 2031, Iran is not permitted to make heavy-water reactors.

Further, it was to permit itself to regular inspection of their nuclear site by the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In return, Iran gained over $100bn of frozen assets overseas, and was permitted to allow trading in oil in international markets and use the global financial system for trade.

Trump Administration’s Revoking of the JCPOA

In 2018, the Trump administration reimposed some of the sanctions in Iran, despite Trump's election promise to reduce involvement in the Middle East. Countering the re-impositions, Iran threatens to resume Uranium enrichment. In May 2019, Iran suspends nuclear deal commitments, and gives other signatories a 60-day deadline to protect it from US sanctions, before resuming Uranium enrichment. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran had already increased Uranium production, but is unclear by how much.

President Trump signing executive orders, imposing sanctions on Iran | Source: Shealah Craighead via White House

In May 2019, the US increased military deployment in the Persian Gulf, reportedly to prevent what the termed was a “campaign” between Iran and its proxies to threaten US oil shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Tanker Crisis

In June 2019, two tankers were set ablaze in the Gulf of Oman, using mines. The US blamed Iran for these blasts, but Iran denied the charges.

In the same month, Iran Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) shot down a US surveillance drone, escalating tensions and causing the US to name the IRGC as a terrorist organization.

In July 2019, the British Royal Marine Commandos seized an Iranian tanker off the coast of Gibraltar, as it was suspected to be en route to Syria, in violation of EU sanctions. The US declared that anyone assisting the ship would be considered an accomplice of terrorist groups, namely the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard.

In retaliation, Iran seized British-flagged tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Iranian tanker was released six weeks later, on the condition that they do not unload their cargo of 2.1million barrels of oil in Syria.

December Air Strikes

In December 2019, the K-1 Air Base in Iraq was attacked by an unconfirmed party, killing one American contractor. This base hosts Americans (amongst other nationalities) who are responsible for training Iraqi troops in counter-terrorism. The Americans alleged that the attack was carried out by Kataib Hezbollah, which denies it. Kataib Hezbollah is a rebel group (recognized as a terrorist group by the US) backed by Iran. The Iraqi’s alleged that ISIL was responsible.

In retaliation for the killing of the American Contractor, the US launched air strikes on the weapons depot and command centres of Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq and Syria in the same month, reportedly killing 25 militiamen.

Assassination of Iranian Major General

Late Iranian General, Qasem Suleimani | Source: Tasnim News Agency

Iraq and Iran condemned the attack, and on 31 December, 2019, Iraqi militia attacked the US Embassy in Baghdad. In response, the US conducted airstrikes at the Baghdad International Airport in January 2020, killing the Commander of Iranian Quds Force, General Qasem Suleimani, the second most powerful man in Iran.

These escalations, placed within the context of US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, provide a good example of the Security Dilemma theory and how it plays out in practice.

What is the Security Dilemma?

Before delving into the theoretical definitions it is worth reminding ourselves that States do not behave as they do because a theoretical model demands them to. Rather, most theoretical models are based on observations of real-world behaviour of states, and seek to explain said behaviour. The Classical Realist theory, of which the Security Dilemma is a part, is amongst one of these, and I endeavour to highlight some of the key points of this theory.

The Classical Realist theory holds that States (or State-actors) are the basic unit of any international system. They are the most important actors, as there is no authority higher than them. The international system is fundamentally anarchic, with every actor left to their own devices with no supranational oversight. Each State finds it in their own self-interest to provide their own means for security. Security comes with the ability of the State to exercise its power, and thus Power Hegemony and Security are inextricably linked. In other words, since no State can rely on a supranational authority to provide security (an every-man-for-himself scenario), it is in each State’s best interest to understand the power distribution across all state-actors and maximize power for themselves, as the ultimate security. This results in a zero-sum game, with one actor’s loss being another’s gain. In providing absolute security for one’s own State, one leaves others insecure. The resulting power imbalance manifests in conflict, and for the Realist it follows, therefore, that Conflict is the natural state of affairs.

This, in essence, is the Security Dilemma: Striving for absolute security leaves others absolutely insecure, thus providing powerful incentives for an arms race, leading to further conflicts. It is little wonder that this is also called the Spiral Model, for in the very process of striving for security, one gives birth to escalating conflict.

How does this relate to the Persian Gulf Crisis?

The US has long followed the Realist model, believing that in a state of fundamental anarchy, it is justifiable to have nuclear capabilities and have intense militarization, as a means of gaining absolute security (justified by ‘offense is the best defence’). However, the US is also known for disallowing Weapons of Mass Destruction and nuclear capabilities in other countries, despite having such resources by itself. Here we see the Security Dilemma: to maintain absolute security, the US cannot allow others to be similarly armed. This is seen clearly in the signing of the JCPOA.

Consider the case from Iran’s point of view. As a result of the US war against Al Qaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan and overthrow of Saddam Hussain in Iraq, there has been constant American presence in both the countries bordering Iran since almost two decades. That this poses a threat to Iran is obvious: the US caused fundamental regime changes in Iraq after the war; with its manpower and firepower, alongside its strategic placement on both sides of the Iranian border, the US is at a vantage point to attack Iran – placements that are, paradoxically, intended to guarantee American security.

The American show of strength and the impending danger of conflict leave Iran with two choices: Forge alliances with US adversaries, such as China or Russia, to deter Iran-US conflict, or be nuclear-armed. Iran managed both, causing, in effect, a nuclear arms race that culminated in the JCPOA.  In retrospect, the JCPOA seems like the perfect solution to the Security Dilemma in US-Iran conflicts: not only does it allow Iran to benefit from its suspensions of nuclear capabilities, it also ceases the arms race and de-escalates the conflict. In short, it is the Diplomat’s way out of the Security Dilemma, guaranteeing security without arms.

The Trump administration’s call to reimpose sanctions on Iran only serves to re-ignite security concerns for both countries. With Iran having ousted its JCPOA commitments as of January 2020, we can only hope that de-escalations will soon follow to prevent the otherwise inevitable spiralling into arms race and false absolute security.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 5:16 PM

Catalonian Secessionist Movement in Spain: The Genesis and Present Status

Catalonia with its capital in Barcelona, is one of the wealthiest and historically significant regions of Spain. The region is home to around 7.5 million people and has its own official language, parliament, flag, and anthem.

The region was granted considerable autonomy by the 1978 constitution of Spain. The legislature of the autonomous Catalan region passed Statute of Autonomy which was approved by the national parliament and ratified by the Catalan electorates in a referendum in 2006.

What’s the latest buzz surrounding the region?

Pro-referendum rally in Montjuic, Barcelona | Source: Amadalvarez via Wikimedia

On 1st October, 2017, a referendum was organized in Catalonia for independence despite opposition from the central government of Spain. Owing to the resistance from Madrid, the voter turnout was just a lowly 43%. However, the Yes option won by a massive 90% margin.

Under a tense environment, the separatist majority in the Catalan parliament announced independence on 27th October, 2017. However, Madrid reacted strongly to the move by dissolving the Catalan parliament under Article 155 emergency powers and initiated a violent crackdown on the protesters and separatist leaders in the region. Nearly three years since the referendum, Catalan leaders remain in jail or in exile. The entire crisis has been termed as Spain’s biggest political-crisis since 1975, when democracy was restored post General Franco, the military dictator’s death.

Catalonia- A brief history

Supporters of General Franco | Source: Wikimedia

Catalonia as a region enjoyed a high level of autonomy before General Francisco Franco led Nationalist forces overthrew the Spanish democratic republic in 1936. Overthrow of Spanish democratic republic resulted in a three year long Spanish Civil War which raged from 1936 to 1939. In 1938 when the country was going through a phase of overhyped nationalist sentiments during the civil war, General Franco abolished the region's autonomy. General Franco ruled Spain as a dictator from 1936 till he died in 1975. After his death, Spanish democracy and Catalonian autonomy were restored once again.

There were calls for independence of Catalonia from fringe elements from time to time, but it was not supported by the mainstream political or social organisations. However this changed when Spain’s Constitutional Court issued a landmark ruling In 2010 and declared some of the articles of the 2006 Statute of Autonomy as unconstitutional.

There were massive protests in Catalonia against the Supreme court ruling, specially against the provision which place the distinctive Catalan language above Spanish in the region and ruling that “The interpretation of the references to ‘Catalonia as a nation’ and to ‘the national reality of Catalonia’ in the preamble of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia have no legal effect.”

Why do Catalans insist on independence?

Concert for Catalonian Independence | Source: Núria via Flickr

A lot of Catalans believe that Catalonia has a moral, cultural and political right for self-existence and that it has long put Spain’s best economic interests in priority despite not getting enough in return. Many Catalans are also unhappy with the decision of Spanish SC to declare the 2006 Statute of Autonomy as unconstitutional. They argue that it would have given Catalonia greater independence and by annulling it Spain is interfering with the internal affairs of Catalonia.

A timeline of Catalonia’s modern independence movement

Carles Puigdemont, the regional President of Catalonia | Source: Wikimedia

On September 11, 2012, thousands of protesters gathered in Barcelona to show support for the independence movement. Later in November, signaling a major shift in the politics of the region, the majority of the seats were won by pro-independence parties in the Catalan regional parliament.

On November 9, 2014, Catalan authorities held a mock vote for an independence referendum despite a prohibition order from Madrid. The then regional president Artur Mas, along with three other Catalan cabinet members were later fined for disobedience and misuse of public funds.

On June 9, 2017, Carles Puigdemont, the then regional president of Catalonia announced plans for a ‘binding’ independence referendum. Madrid declared the referendum as illegal and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy vowed to stop the vote.

On October 1, 2017, the referendum was organized under a tense atmosphere which saw a lowly 43% voter turnout. Reportedly the Civil Guard and National Police forces raided a few polling stations and clashed with the voters even as the Catalan Police mostly stood down. Puigdemont claimed a landslide win for secession in the referendum.

On October 27, 2017, the Catalan parliament declared Catalonia as an independent republic even as no foreign nation recognized the declaration. Spain PM Rajoy immediately invoked constitutional powers to take over Catalonia and fired Puigdemont and his cabinet members.

On October 31, 2017, Puigdemont and a few of his deposed cabinet members fled from Catalonia to Belgium. Puigdemont successfully fought against his extradition to Spain and established his residence in Waterloo.

Aftermath of a failed independence attempt

Ever since Puigdemont fled to Belgium, Spain took control over the region and has sent all the major accomplices of Puigdemont and pro-independence leaders to jail. Most of them have been served with lengthy jail terms for being a part of the controversial independence referendum of October 2017.

Although direct rule was lifted after the formation of the new Catalan government in June 2018, the single biggest winning party was the center-right, pro-unionist Citizens party, which took 37 seats. Three pro-independence parties also secured around 70 seats combined in the 135-seat regional parliament election. Protests for independence have mostly faded away in the region.

What happens next?

The current Catalan regional president, Quim Torra has called for the Catalans to greet guilty verdicts with a ‘huge show of nonviolent civil disobedience’. Spain’s Prime Minister, Pedro Sanchez has been much less brutal compared to his predecessor Rajoy. However, he has maintained that any negotiations will have to be adhered to by the constitution while ruling out the possibility of a referendum.

The political tussle between Puigdemont and his allies who favor pressurizing Madrid with provocative moves, and the Catalan Republic Left which has sought to employ a less confrontational and more practical approach has made the situation quite volatile. However this apparent disunity among the political leadership of Catalonia has resulted in a gradual reduction of public support for the independence movement of Catalonia.

Read More