When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
Geopolitics

Why Is Washington Balking On Iran?

Certain Gulf States have joined Israel in sounding the alarm about a nuclear armed Islamic Republic. Washington, in the meantime, has been reluctant to show its cards.

Walking past portraits of Khamenei and late Ayatollah Khomeini in Tehran
Walking past portraits of Khamenei and late Ayatollah Khomeini in Tehran
Ahmad Ra'fat

-Analysis-

The Islamic Republic's nuclear program is no longer a saga restricted, as it was in the past, to Iran and the world powers known as the P5+1, namely the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) plus Germany.

The P5+1 powers still play an important role, of course, but new players have stepped in that cannot be overlooked. Indeed, the geopolitical environment has changed since the 2015 nuclear pact, as U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman recently observed.

When it was signed, Israel was the only country to consider Iran's nuclear power a grave threat to its existence. Today, in contrast, Arab states and particularly the Persian Gulf monarchies are also alarmed at the prospect of an Islamic Republic armed with nuclear and ballistic weapons. And while Russia verbally supports the regime, it too is effectively concerned, and not just behind closed doors.

A united front?

Israel's defense minister, Benny Gantz, recently confirmed press revelations of past weeks on attempts to forge a military alliance with several Arab states. He said while visiting army units near Gaza that Israel had begun extensive efforts to forge this alliance with states of the Persian Gulf and beyond.

None were named, but one guesses that the countries in question may be the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, and beyond the Gulf, will likely include Jordan, Egypt, Morocco and Sudan. Gantz said talks included all states for which Iran had become a priority.

While Russia verbally supports the regime, it too is effectively concerned.

He also revealed that Israel has updated its plans to strike Iranian nuclear installations. In Syria, Israel has already struck positions manned by Iran-backed militias or the Revolutionary Guards more than 500 times since early 2020. It is reportedly preparing for a major confrontation with Hezbollah in Lebanon, which Israeli reports suggest will entail hitting some 3,000 targets a day there.

Comments by Gantz and Foreign Minister Gabriel Ashkenazi suggest there may be an unwritten accord between Israel and the Biden administration along two broad axes: collaborating to ensure the Islamic Republic will not have a nuclear arsenal and consulting before any actions against Iran. Ashkenazi has spoken of a small, working group including top Israeli and U.S. officials, though its members were not immediately clear.

Mixed messages

While Israel and regional states are, at the very least, clear on their policy toward the Iranian regime, Washington and its western allies have been conspicuously vague.

Wendy Sherman told senators at her nomination hearing that conditions had changed since 2015, and something more enduring than the nuclear pact was required. In the meantime, however, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken keeps talking about a return to past commitments by the U.S. and Iran. And in a recent speech on U.S. foreign policy priorities, he talked about China, Russia and the environment, but made no mention of the Islamic Republic and its nuclear dossier at all.

Feb. 22 protest in Berlin demanding the EU's policy on Iran be revised— Photo: Fabian Sommer/dpa/ZUMA

The United States seems reluctant to give a decisive or crushing response to Iranian strikes and provocations in Iraq and Syria. Echoing official Iranian media, it has even downplayed the number of victims from its strike on the Kata'ib Hizballah militia in the Syrian district of Abu Kamal.

In the meantime, prior to a meeting of the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the EU3 board members and the U.S. had threatened to issue a resolution to chide the Iranian regime for impeding the work of IAEA inspectors on its territory. That would have paved the way for taking Iran's dossier back to the UN Security Council.

Policy contradictions toward the Islamic Republic are far from exceptional.

And yet, no such resolution was put to the vote in spite of 30 out 35 board members expressing support for it. What could have happened at the last minute to scupper the move? One European diplomat told Kayhan London that the Iranian government had taken a step back by suspending the production of uranium metal at a plant in Isfahan.

Anything will do for the West it seems!

Not even the Islamic Republic's 18-month refusal to inform the IAEA on the modified isotope samples found on three sites it had kept secret was enough to push through a resolution. Indeed, U.S. State Department Spokesman Ned Price confirmed that the U.S. was pleased the Europeans withdrew the resolution.

Double standards

Policy contradictions toward the Islamic Republic are far from exceptional. Days ago, the Biden administration placed sanctions on Houthi naval and air commanders in Yemen, a week after it had lifted sanctions from the most important Houthi group backed by the Islamic Republic, the Ansarullah. There are reports of Ansarullah emissaries talking to members of the State Department in the Omani capital, Muscat.

The Islamic Republic is also prone to weathercock tendencies. Days ago, one of the country's reputed conservatives, journalist Morteza Nabavi, suggested the country may vote to join the international money-laundering outfit it has so far rejected. But 170 legislators including Mojtaba Zolnur, head of the parliamentary Foreign Policy and National Security Committee, said they still opposed the pact, as it would block its remaining recourses in sidestepping UN sanctions.

Iran was meant to vote on the matter by the end of March, but has postponed debates on it to late April.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Green

Forest Networks? Revisiting The Science Of Trees And Funghi "Reaching Out"

A compelling story about how forest fungal networks communicate has garnered much public interest. Is any of it true?

Thomas Brail films the roots of a cut tree with his smartphone.

Arborist and conservationist Thomas Brail at a clearcutting near his hometown of Mazamet in the Tarn, France.

Melanie Jones, Jason Hoeksema, & Justine Karst

Over the past few years, a fascinating narrative about forests and fungi has captured the public imagination. It holds that the roots of neighboring trees can be connected by fungal filaments, forming massive underground networks that can span entire forests — a so-called wood-wide web. Through this web, the story goes, trees share carbon, water, and other nutrients, and even send chemical warnings of dangers such as insect attacks. The narrative — recounted in books, podcasts, TV series, documentaries, and news articles — has prompted some experts to rethink not only forest management but the relationships between self-interest and altruism in human society.

But is any of it true?

The three of us have studied forest fungi for our whole careers, and even we were surprised by some of the more extraordinary claims surfacing in the media about the wood-wide web. Thinking we had missed something, we thoroughly reviewed 26 field studies, including several of our own, that looked at the role fungal networks play in resource transfer in forests. What we found shows how easily confirmation bias, unchecked claims, and credulous news reporting can, over time, distort research findings beyond recognition. It should serve as a cautionary tale for scientists and journalists alike.

First, let’s be clear: Fungi do grow inside and on tree roots, forming a symbiosis called a mycorrhiza, or fungus-root. Mycorrhizae are essential for the normal growth of trees. Among other things, the fungi can take up from the soil, and transfer to the tree, nutrients that roots could not otherwise access. In return, fungi receive from the roots sugars they need to grow.

As fungal filaments spread out through forest soil, they will often, at least temporarily, physically connect the roots of two neighboring trees. The resulting system of interconnected tree roots is called a common mycorrhizal network, or CMN.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

The latest