NATO Secretary General urges Iran to keep Strait of Hormuz open

Nuclear-sharing with Middle East allies suggested by NATO Defence College paper

Speaking at a joint news conference in Brussels on 18 January with Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged Iran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open for energy supplies. Turkey offered to host a new round of talks between Iran and the EU.

While stressing that NATO had no plans to intervene in the area – used for a third of the world's seaborne oil exports - the Secretary-General said it was of "utmost importance to make sure energy supplies continue to flow through the vital waterway". "I would like to stress that the Iranian authorities have a duty to act as responsible international actors and in accordance with international law," Mr Rasmussen added.

Mr Davutoglu said he had been in contact with the EU's Foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, and confirmed Turkey was ready to host a new round of talks between Western powers and Iran over Tehran's nuclear programme.

"During my visit in Tehran, Iran declared that they are ready to restart the talks. Before that I had consultations with Madame Ashton, she in fact asked me to consult this with the Iranian side as well, and after this I spoke with Madame Ashton again. Both sides declared the intention to meet and to restart the negotiations. Of course it is up to both sides to decide, but as Turkey we will be happy to host these new rounds of talks," said Mr Davutoglu.

Speaking on a visit to Turkey earlier in the week, Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said negotiations for new talks were under way. The last talks between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council – the US, Britain, France, Russia and China – along with Germany stalled in Istanbul a year ago, with the parties unable to agree even on an agenda.

Meanwhile, as tensions continue to rise in the Persian Gulf, a new paper The day after Iran goes nuclear: Implications for NATO from the NATO Defence College in Rome examines the implications of a nuclear-armed Iran. The author, Jean-Loup Samaan, a researcher and lecturer in the Middle East Department of the College, argues that the biggest challenge both for the region and NATO “the day after Iran goes nuclear” is not the potential for nuclear warfare per se but the risk of increasing sub-conventional confrontations and of “nuclear hedging” among NATO partners in the region. As a result, he concludes that a nuclear Iran represents a major test for NATO: it challenges the raison d’être of its partnerships and raises the need for key decisions on the future of NATO nuclear and missile defence systems.

As one of several potential responses, Samaam suggests that NATO and its Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative partners should consider adopting ‘extended deterrence’ in the form of ‘nuclear sharing’. “This would not involve the stationing of nuclear weapons on the soil of host countries but it might rely on policy measures such as information sharing, nuclear consultations, common planning and common execution”, he says. An added measure of reassurance to NATO’s Middle Eastern allies could be provided by “a relocation of US nuclear weapons currently stationed in Europe, from northern Europe to southern Europe”.

However, arms control groups contacted by NATO Watch were critical of the proposals on the basis that they risked undermining efforts to avoid a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Wilbert van der Zeijden, an international relations specialist working for the Nuclear Disarmament team of IKV Pax Christi in Utrecht, the Netherlands, said  “Samaan’s suggestion to relocate US nuclear weapons to Southern Europe makes little sense. There already are US nuclear weapons in southern Europe, in Italy and Turkey. And burden sharing with Middle Eastern countries would be solely symbolic and therefore irrelevant to Iran. The suggestion could however feed the Iranian case for going nuclear out of ‘self defence’”. He added, “The paper also raises the question as to which Middle Eastern allies he wants to share nuclear secrets. Saudi Arabia? Qatar? Israel already has a nuclear arsenal unchecked by the NPT. More ‘nuclear deterrence’ in the region is the problem, not a solution”.

Similarly, Paul Ingram, Executive Director of the British American Security Information Council (BASIC) in London said, “It is challenging enough for NATO member states to balance a continuing commitment to nuclear deterrence and diplomatic efforts to persuade others with far greater security challenges to foreswear the nuclear option. But if NATO were to ramp up its nuclear threat along the lines proposed it could prove disastrous for regional and global stability”.