Despite international condemnation and ongoing diplomatic efforts, Iran's ruling regime in Tehran continues to press ahead with its nuclear weapons program. According to many defense and intelligence analysts, the time in which the program can be stopped is quickly running out.

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is researching what is perhaps the last, best chance to peacefully prevent the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons: Using a cutoff of gasoline sales to exploit Iran's Achilles' heel. Although a major producer of crude oil, Iran must import 40% of the gasoline it needs to power its economy and military because it lacks the refining capacity to meet its internal consumption.

FDD has researched the handful of companies that are supplying gasoline to Iran and has identified significant points of leverage over them that have yet to be used. We believe that this leverage can be used to persuade these companies to stop selling gasoline to Iran. As part of a concerted international effort of sanctions and dialogue, ending gasoline sales to Iran can help convince the regime to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

What can be done?

Since the publication of these articles, and additional op-eds by FDD's Cliff May and Reuel Marc Gerecht, the major suppliers of gasoline to Iran have come under congressional scrutiny. One supplier, Reliance Industries Ltd. of India, did not ship gasoline to Iran in February and March 2009 after members of Congress called for an investigation of loan guarantees provided by the U.S. Export-Import Bank to help Reliance expand a refinery where it was refinining petroleum for sale to Iran. According to recent reports, however, Reliance has resumed shipments to Iran. A second supplier, British Petroleum, stopped its own shipments after deciding that the company's extensive North American business interests were more valuable than the Iranian market. A bipartisan group of Members of Congress has also asked Energy Secretary Chu to review a $50 million contract awarded to the Swiss company Vitol, Iran's largest supplier of gasoline, and to consider debarring Vitol for its role in the United Nations Oil for Food scandal.

On April 2, 2009, the U.S. Senate passed, by unanimous consent, an amendment to a federal budget resolution to deny funding for federal government expenditures to companies earning revenue in Iran's energy sector, including companies providing refined petroleum products to Iran as well shipment, insurance and reinsurance services assisting in those sales.

Congress also has introduced specific legislation targeting Iran's energy sector, including those companies selling gasoline to Iran.

On April 22, 2009, the Iran Diplomatic Enhancement Act, H.R. 1985, was introduced in the House by Representatives Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Brad Sherman (D-CA) and 23 other Democratic and Republican House members. H.R. 1985 seeks to extend current U.S. sanctions to suppliers, brokers, insurers, and tankers involved in selling refined petroleum to Iran.

On April 28, 2009, The Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act was introduced by a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators. The legislation would provide for sanctions on any person or entity that provides refined petroleum to Iran or helps Iran to import refined petroleum or develop its refinery capacity. Co-sponsors included Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN), Joe Lieberman (ID-CT), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Kit Bond (R-MO), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Susan Collins (R-ME), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), James Inhofe (R-OK), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), James Risch (R-ID), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), John Thune (R-SD), David Vitter (R-LA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

President Obama has spoken favorably about a ban on gasoline sales to Iran. Major papers, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times, have weighed in with support for gasoline sanctions. And, as the document, "Broad Support for Cutting Off Gasoline Sales to Iran," posted here confirms: This policy idea has extensive support across the political spectrum.

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is preparing a monograph entitled, "Iran's Achilles Heel: Leveraging Iran's Energy Vulnerability," on the policy options that are available to U.S. and European lawmakers to use gasoline as a source of leverage over the Iranian regime's nuclear weapons program.

Resources

The following pages provide resources for understanding the issue, including work by FDD:

Iran Energy Monitor

Presidential Candidate Remarks

Congress

State and Local Activity

Policy Institutes

Editorials from Leading Newspapers

Media

Press Releases

Broad Support for Cutting off Gasoline Sales to Iran (pdf)

FDD Senior Fellow Orde Kittrie testifies
before Congress on gasoline sanctions

Critics of gasoline sanctions argue that they amount to a game of whack-a-mole, and to some extent that's true. But the goal of the sanctions isn't to create an airtight regime so much as to sharply raise the costs to Iran for pursuing its nuclear programs. "This is no silver bullet but it may be silver shrapnel," says Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that has brought the idea of gasoline sanctions to political attention.

--Wall Street Journal editorial, March 25, 2009