By providing advanced missile technology to the radical Islamic
regime in Tehran, Russia is threatening vital U.S. interests and
violating an international arms control agreement. Its assistance
to Iran, the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism, threatens
to alter the long-term balance of power in the oil-rich Persian
Gulf region and endangers such key U.S. allies as Israel, Saudi
Arabia, and Turkey and other NATO members. In just three to four
years, these countries and U.S. military forces in Europe and the
Middle East could be vulnerable to attack by Iranian medium-range
missiles developed with Russian aid.
Washington needs to act now. The Clinton Administration should
move to halt Russian-Iranian cooperation in advanced military and
dual-use technologies by threatening to cut bilateral and
multilateral U.S. aid to Russia-including aid to the troubled
Mir-shuttle space program-if this relationship continues. If the
Administration balks at linking U.S. aid to this goal, Congress
should take the lead and condition aid to Russia on suspension of
Moscow's destabilizing cooperation with Tehran.
Congress already is moving in this direction. Representative
Benjamin Gilman (R-NY) has introduced H.R. 2709, the Iran Missile
Proliferation Sanctions Act of 1997, to apply sanctions and
prohibit U.S. assistance to any foreign entity the President
identifies as engaged in the transfer of missile technology or
components to Iran. Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA) has
introduced H.R. 2786, the Iran Missile Proliferation Act, to
provide additional funding to the Pentagon's ballistic missile
defense program to improve the capability of several missile
defense systems so that they can counter the kinds of missiles Iran
is working to deploy.
Rockets for Rubles
Despite U.S. protests, Russian state agencies are selling
Tehran the technologies it needs to build ballistic missiles. Such
technology transfers violate the Missile Technology Control Regime
(MTCR), a 1987 declaration of international standards for controls
on the export of certain kinds of missiles and missile components.
Russia pledged to adhere to the MTCR and denies it is violating it.
Yet Russian state agencies and private firms involved in Iran's
missile program include the Russian Space Agency; the state-owned
arms trading company Rosvooruzheniye; NPO Trud, a rocket engine
manufacturer; Polyus, a laser manufacturer; the Bauman Institute;
and the Russian Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI). These
entities reportedly have sold Iran important components, such as
the gyroscopes used in missile guidance systems, and have helped in
the design of nose cones and missile guidance and propulsion
systems. By 2001, if this technology transfer continues, Iran
conceivably could deploy missiles able to deliver nuclear warheads
to targets in the Middle East and Europe. In five years, it could
deploy the new Shihab-4 missile, which incorporates Russian and
North Korean technology and has a reported range of 1,240
miles.
Russia is helping to build Iran's military might because its own
military-industrial complex desperately needs cash. But its efforts
also are part of an anti-U.S. strategy some analysts have dubbed
the Primakov doctrine. Named after foreign minister Evgenii
Primakov, this doctrine is a response both to Russia's perceived
defeat in the Cold War and to the enlargement of NATO. In early
1997, Primakov and his Iranian counterpart, Ali Akbar Velayati,
issued a joint statement calling the U.S. presence in the Persian
Gulf "totally unacceptable." Primakov seeks to forge a Eurasian
counterbalance to the Euro-Atlantic alliance, with Russia, China,
Iran, and possibly France as major elements in this anti-U.S.
coalition.
Russian-Iranian cooperation in military and nuclear projects
enhances Tehran's ability to undermine the interests of the United
States and its allies. Since Iran's 1979 revolution, Tehran has
sought to overthrow moderate and pro-Western governments throughout
the Middle East and the Muslim world. Russian military assistance
may encourage Iran to flex its new military muscle to coerce
oil-rich neighbors into raising the price of oil. Oil sales account
for roughly 85 percent of Iran's hard currency earnings. Iran also
could use subversion, sabotage, or military operations to disrupt
Persian Gulf oil exports and drive up the world price of oil,
severely damaging the economies of oil-importing Western states,
including the United States, the world's largest oil importer.
Dollar Diplomacy
The United States must apply both diplomatic and economic
pressure to halt Russia's assistance to Iran's military buildup.
This assistance endangers U.S. security, U.S. interests in the
Middle East, and the economic security of the West. The Clinton
Administration, which provided over $27 billion in bilateral and
multilateral assistance to Russia between 1993 and 1997, paved the
way for Russia to join the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the
World Bank, the Paris Club of creditor states, and other
prestigious international organizations. Before 2000, the IMF and
the World Bank probably will lend Russia an additional $10 billion
to $12 billion. The Administration must make it clear to Moscow
that such aid will be jeopardized by continued Russian aid to Iran.
Besides pushing for a complete halt to Russia's missile deals and
advanced military and dual-use technology transfers to Iran, the
Administration should press Moscow to recall its military and
technical experts from Iran.
Even though U.S. economic leverage to halt Moscow's lucrative
military trade with Iran may be limited, the Administration must
show leadership on this grave issue. If Moscow does not agree to
stop the flow of technology to Iran, Washington should cut off
funding for the Russian Space Agency. In addition to transferring
missile technology to Iran, this agency is involved in the
Mir-shuttle cooperative program, which is subsidized by U.S.
taxpayers. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), chairman
of the House Science Committee, has called for suspension of this
program. Already eight years beyond its intended life span, the
failing Mir space station is a threat to the lives of visiting
American astronauts. Russian space station technology is dated and
does not benefit the U.S. space industry. Washington also should
block Russian participation in development of the
European-Japanese-U.S. international space station.
If these steps are not effective, the Administration should
instruct U.S. executive directors at the IMF and World Bank to vote
against future credits and loans to Russia. These programs have
been shown to be economically ineffective and wasteful; Russian
Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin recently admitted that $250
million, the first tranche of the World Bank loan for restructuring
the coal industry, has disappeared and apparently has been
embezzled.
If the Administration refuses to act, Congress should reduce
allocations for U.S. contributions to the IMF and World Bank by the
estimated amount of future loans to Russia. U.S. tax dollars should
not finance, however indirectly, the development of Iranian
missiles that could be aimed at U.S. bases and allies in the Middle
East and Europe. Washington must send a strong signal to the
Kremlin that it adamantly opposes the transfer of missile
technology to Iran.