New Hurdle to Iran Sanctions

The Obama administration, still struggling to win China’s pivotal backing for a new round of United Nations sanctions against Iran, is increasingly worried about gaining the support of some other members of the U.N. Security Council, particularly Brazil, Turkey and Lebanon, according to U.S. and European officials.

Officials involved in the diplomacy fear that China’s stated opposition to tough new sanctions, if reinforced by other players, could weaken any U.N. penalties against Tehran. Though Brazil, Turkey and Lebanon hold temporary seats and can’t veto sanctions—unlike permanent council members including China—they could make it harder for the U.S. to get agreement by sustaining the opposition campaign.

Senior U.S. diplomats have intensified discussions in recent weeks with leaders in China, Turkey, Brazil and Lebanon in a bid to push a sanctions vote at the U.N. on Iran by next month. But on Wednesday, Brazilian officials publicly rebuffed the U.S. during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to the capital, Brasilia. “It is not prudent to push Iran against a wall,” President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva told reporters ahead of their meeting. Afterward, foreign minister Celso Amorim said sanctions “could be counterproductive.” Turkish and Lebanese officials have made similar comments in recent weeks.

The Security Council could still gain passage of new U.N. sanctions on Iran, as long as China declines to use its veto. Nine of the 15 members of the Security Council need to support a resolution, without a veto by one of the five permanent members—the U.S., Russia, China, France and the U.K. Diplomats say the Russians are increasingly supportive of fresh sanctions.

China could abstain from a vote and the measure could still pass. But tensions between the U.S. and China over other issues have intensified in recent weeks, and the bad blood is complicating Iran policy, say U.S. and European officials involved in the diplomacy. The White House this week dispatched two of its most senior China hands to Beijing to discuss Iran—Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and the National Security Council’s Asia director, Jeffrey Bader.

The U.S. has won unanimity each of the four times the U.N. Security Council has passed resolutions condemning Iran’s nuclear work over the past five years, except for one vote by Indonesia in 2008. Diplomats say new sanctions watered down to overcome multiple countries’ opposition could fall short of forcing Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful.

The cooperation of the fast-growing economies of China, Brazil and Turkey is also crucial to successful implementation of any sanctions regime, whether endorsed by the U.N. or not.

The U.S. views Brazil as a crucial player in the global debate on nuclear power. In addition to its current role on the Security Council, Brazil is also a leader among the “nonaligned” developing countries that have regularly defended Iran’s right to enrich uranium and develop nuclear power.

Brazilian President da Silva said Wednesday that Iran needs to be given more time to address international concerns about the potential military dimensions of its nuclear program. And he again defended Tehran’s right to develop nuclear technologies, though he said Brazil is against Iran developing atomic weapons.

Brazil’s own aggressive, but peaceful, nuclear-development plans help explain its position. Brazil doesn’t want sanctions against countries without what it considers hard proof of weapons programs. Energy-hungry Brazil wants reactors to feed its growing economy. Its navy is building a nuclear engine to power a submarine.

“I want for Iran the same thing that I want for Brazil, to use the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,” Mr. da Silva said. “If Iran is in agreement with this, then Iran will have the support of Brazil.”

Brazil’s support for Iran also reflects the nation’s growing economic reach and ambitions. Brazil is a major exporter of food to Iran. Mr. da Silva also has strived to position Brazil as a voice for emerging nations and a mediator in global disputes. Brazil’s foreign minister, Mr. Amorim, describes the country as a “privileged interlocutor.”

Brazil is the only country in the Western Hemisphere on good terms with all the other nations. Mr. da Silva may be the only leader to have hugged both George W. Bush and his outspoken foe, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

Brazil “sees this as a way to build its own profile and put itself on the world stage in a way that will get it noticed, and it is certainly getting noticed,” says Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas, a New York business association.

The U.S.’s inability so far to nudge Brazil closer to its position also reflects the unexpected tension that has arisen between the nations in the past year. The U.S. and Brazil have butted heads over the handling of the coup in Honduras and over U.S. bases in Colombia. Brazilian officials were furious last year after Mrs. Clinton admonished Brazil for its engagement with Iran.

“Brazil wants to make it clear to the U.S. that it is not a country that can be lectured to,” said Peter Hakim, president of think tank Inter-American Dialogue.

The tension has been a disappointment for U.S. officials, who hope that Brazil will become an important regional ally, bringing new economic might to Latin America and taking over the U.S.’s role as referee of disputes between leaders.

Brazil has credibility on the issue of nonproliferation. Along with Argentina, it is in a tiny club of nations that voluntarily gave up established nuclear-weapons programs. Brazil signed the nuclear nonproliferation treaty in the late 1990s. It banned nuclear weapons in its constitution. And Brazil is the only one of the fast-developing BRIC countries without the bomb, while Russia, India and China are nuclear powers.

Brazil has so far refused to sign a U.N. protocol that would allow officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct snap inspections of Brazil’s nuclear installations.

Turkey and Lebanon also continue to voice reluctance to support new sanctions, according to Western and Middle East diplomats in the dialogue. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has repeatedly played down the potential threat posed by Iran’s nuclear-fuel program, comparing it with Israel’s existing, if undeclared, nuclear arsenal and arguing the two should get equal attention. He also has stressed Turkey’s common border, history and trade with Iran, and has said he wants to see the two countries’ trade triple to $30 billion annually in the near future.

In recent weeks, Turkish diplomats have sought to rework an IAEA-backed offer under which Iran would ship most of its low-enriched uranium to Western countries in return for assistance in developing medical applications for Tehran’s principal research reactor. Turkey has coordinated closely with Washington on these Iran talks, Turkish and U.S. diplomats said. But the fear remains that Mr. Erdogan could seek to use these negotiations to further stall a move toward new sanctions at the Security Council.

U.S. and European diplomats also worry that Lebanon’s new government will almost certainly abstain from voting to punish Iran. Pro-Western Prime Minister Saad Hariri heads the government, but political party and militia Hezbollah holds positions in the Lebanese cabinet and is expected to seek to protect Tehran from further sanctions. Iran established Hezbollah in the early 1980s and is the principal financier and arms supplier to the Shiite movement.