Global Security Newswire

A preliminary version of a declaration that was to be issued at today's summit of European Union leaders does not call for an embargo on imports of Iranian oil as a means of curbing the Middle Eastern state's nuclear drive, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported (see GSN, Dec. 8).

Instead, the 27-nation bloc should "proceed with work related to extending the scope of EU restrictive measures and broadening existing sanctions by examining additional measures against Iran as a matter of priority," according to the draft document. Those measures should be augmented "no later" than next month, it adds.

The European Union on Dec. 1 blacklisted 180 Iranian individuals and organizations suspected of being linked to the nation's nuclear program. Reports from last week suggested European nations in January would consider cutting off purchases of oil from Iran.

The focus of discussions at the Friday summit has been on the continent's spiraling debt crisis (Deutsche Presse-Agentur/MonstersandCritics.com, Dec. 9).

Roughly 450,000 of the 2.3 million barrels of oil produced daily in Iran are sent to European Union nations, Agence France-Presse quoted the U.S. Energy Department as stating. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries assesses Iran's daily output at between 3.5 million and 3.6 million barrels.

Greece and some other European states would feel a deep sting if an oil embargo was put in place, according to one analyst.

"The Europeans are importing nearly half a million barrels per day. ... Refineries in Greece, Italy and Spain are the main customers. They would suffer very much immediately financial loss (in event of sanctions) because they cannot easily replace that Iranian crude with other crude," said Manouchehr Takin of the Center for Global Energy Studies.

"Financially, I think these refineries in Europe -- especially those three countries that are having financial problems -- would lose and suffer more than Iran would lose in finding other customers," he stated.

"There is allegedly consensus in the EU about the need to impose an oil embargo on Iran," according to an analysis from Commerzbank analyst Eugen Weinberg, referring to comments this week from Europe's energy commissioner. "It remains to be seen whether this step is actually taken, however.

"After all, crisis-ridden Italy, Spain and Greece rely on oil from Iran; an embargo would force them to source their oil requirements elsewhere at considerably higher prices," he stated (Agence France-Presse/Spacedaily.com, Dec. 8).

Meanwhile, Turkey's top envoy in Washington said his nation had prevented Iran from obtaining select items that could have been employed for nuclear operations, the Christian Science Monitor reported on Thursday.

"Some other countries have tried to transfer certain goods which would help Iran’s nuclear program, and we have stopped them,” said Ambassador Namik Tan, without providing details.

There is widespread suspicion that Iran's uranium enrichment operations and other activities are aimed at giving the nation a nuclear-weapon capability. Tehran counters that its atomic program is restricted to energy, medicine and other civilian pursuits.

“Even if you come to terms with a nuclear Iran, we will be against it,” Tan said.

Ankara has growing commercial trade connections with Tehran, and Washington has worried that the relationship could aid Iran in its efforts to acquire atomic technology. However, relations between Turkey and Iran have also become more tense in recent months, after Ankara agreed to host a U.S. missile defense radar and blasted the brutal crackdown on political opposition in Tehran ally Syria.

Turkey is also seeking unmanned aircraft and other U.S. technology to help protect its boundaries, according to Tan (Howard LaFranchi, Christian Science Monitor I, Dec. 8).

The diplomat, though, demurred on the question of whether his nation would issue sanctions against Iran, as sought by U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden during a trip to Turkey earlier this month, The Hill newspaper reported. The ambassador noted that Ankara has met its commitments under the four U.N. Security Council sanctions measures issued against Iran (Jeremy Herb, The Hill, Dec. 8).

Meanwhile, one issue analyst on Thursday said there had been a significant increase in the potential for Israel or the United States to used armed force against the nuclear program of their longtime antagonist, Reuters reported.

Both nations have publicly played down the idea that they are preparing for military strikes on Iran, while refusing to rule out the option.

"We still contend that the risk of either an Israeli or U.S. strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities remains low, but it has risen, in our view, from 5-10 percent last year to 25-30 percent now," according to an assessment by Barclays Capital geopolitical risk analyst Helina Croft.

She also addressed the potential for sanctions against the Iranian oil sector or the nation's central bank.

The Obama administration is strongly opposing current efforts on Capitol Hill to penalize non-U.S. companies that conduct business with the Central Bank of Iran, arguing that such a move could hamper global efforts to manage the nuclear impasse and cause oil prices to rise.

"If EU sanctions on Iranian oil were aimed at significantly reducing the flow of revenues to Tehran, they would perhaps seem no more likely to be successful than U.S. sanctions have been since 1988," according to Croft. "An inevitable knock-on effect of an EU embargo would be to push more Iranian oil eastward, without removing Iran's ability to market all its crude available to export. In other words, the concentration of Iran's buyers would increase, but the total volume would not be affected," she stated (David Sheppard, Reuters, Dec. 8).

Israel might have to rethink any plans to attack Iran in the wake of recent warnings by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and and former Mossad chief Meir Dagan about the potential repercussions of such a move, the Monitor reported on Friday.

Panetta said last week that the use of armed force against Iran could lead to "an escalation" that might "consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict that we would regret." Dagan has offered similar cautions.

"If something goes wrong, [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu will be in deep trouble, because he will not be able to argue that he wasn’t warned," said Haaretz newspaper columnist Akiva Eldar. "To take the risk of a confrontation with Iran without clear American support is a big risk; this is something that every Israeli understands."

However, "there could be more to (Dagan's comments) than meets the eye," said David Horovitz, a one-time editor of the Jerusalem Post. "Is he speaking repeatedly because he mistrusts Israelis public leaders? Or it is it a double bluff that maybe the international community needs to step up" in dealing with Iran, he said (Joshua Mitnick, Christian Science Monitor II, Dec. 9).

Separately, Japan on Friday expanded its list of sanctioned Iranian individuals and entities, Agence France-Presse reported.

The tally has been bolstered by 106 entities, three banks and one person, according to JiJi Press. The entire penalty list now encompasses 267 entities, 66 people and 20 banks.

However, Tokyo did not place any sort of limit on acquisition of Iranian oil (Agence France-Presse/Dawn.com, Dec. 9).