As President Obama announced at the Pittsburgh G20 summit that Iran had been building a secret uranium enrichment facility in Qom, he was flanked by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy at his side.

Notably absent from this condemnation of Iran was Russia. Russia has struck a middle ground in regards to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Russia has had its doubts, yet it has reluctantly agreed to talks over sanctions with Iran. This is a good sign for improving relations between the U.S. and Russia that will ultimately lead to a safer world.

In his speech in Prague this past April, Obama explained the gravity of the Iran situation by saying, ‘So let me be clear: Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran’s neighbors and our allies.’

The stakes are high for the U.S. to get along with other countries, especially Russia.

The New York Times seems to agree with this point. On Saturday, a headline read, ‘Report Says Iran Has Data to Make a Nuclear Bomb.’

In an attempt to quell fears about Iranian nuclear weapons and also to reach an agreement about the enrichment of uranium, Iran has agreed to meet with members of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (which includes Russia), as well as Germany in Geneva, Switzerland.

The Geneva talks, called the P5 plus 1, are key in determining Iran’s future. Should Iran decide to comply with inspections and demonstrate ‘peaceful intentions,’ they will be accepted into the community of nations. Should they abandon talks, they will be punished by sanctions and will remain a pariah in the international system.

Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer recently criticized the Russian response to tepidly agreeing on Iran saying, ‘Do the tally. In return for selling out Poland and the Czech Republic by unilaterally abrogating a missile-defense security arrangement that Russia had demanded be abrogated, we get from Russia…what? An oblique hint, of possible support, for unspecified sanctions grudgingly offered and of dubious authority.’

What Krauthammer alludes to is the Obama administration’s decision to scrap a missile defense system in Eastern Europe left over from the George W. Bush administration. This system has been a sore in Russia’s side for many years. By getting rid of a system that has missiles aimed at Russia, the United States is hinting at a more amicable relationship in the future.

Susan Rice, the Obama administration’s ambassador to the United Nations gave some insights to the milquetoast Russian response, ‘it’s true that Russia and China have historically resisted sanctions, but we have moved Russia and China in a very constructive direction just recently on North Korea. We are united in presenting this choice to Iran, and Iran now has the responsibility either to adhere to its obligations internationally or face that pressure.’

Russia has responded by rethinking its approach on Iran. Russian President Medvedev even talked to President Obama saying that in specific cases, sanctions with Iran were ‘inevitable.’

Russia may no longer be as friendly with Iran. The Economist reports that ‘Iran has long counted on cover from China…and from Russia; both dislike sanctions. Qom may yet change that.’

The balance of power is moving against Iran. It has long been regime associated with skepticism and dubious leadership; it now seems that Russia has come to realize this too.

With U.S. support from Russia as well as the major economic powers of Europe, the UK, France and Germany, Iran is under a unique amount of pressure to comply with the demands of the world. It is now Iran’s choice to decide where its future lies.

Andrew Swab is a sophomore magazine and international relations major. His columns appear weekly. He can be reached at ajswab@syr.edu.

Published on October 3, 2009 at 12:00 pm