In the Arena

How to Begin with Iran

Looks like Dennis Ross is about to become the U.S. envoy in charge of Iran. But I’m not sure that sending Ross directly into the fray is the best way to launch negotiations. Here are four other things that should happen first:

1. The Obama Administration should send a U.S. Ambassador back to Syria. Pulling Margaret Scobie from Damascus was one of the stupidest diplomatic moves George W. Bush did as President, and should be rectified as soon as possible. What does this have to do with Iran? It sends the message that we’re not accepting the exclusivity of the current Syria-Iran alliance, which is not very popular among Syria’s Sunni majority–and that we’re prepared to seduce Syria out of Iran’s orbit. It also sends the message that our diplomacy is going to be subtler, more clever than it has been.

2. Push hard on nuclear arsenal reductions with the Russians, which would set the table for a stronger non-proliferation regime internationally. Bush’s failure to do this was inexplicable. This could be the gateway for another important deal with the Russians–we drop the foolish fantasy of a European-based anti-missile system (and slow-walk the accession of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO) in return for real, verifiable Russian pressure on Iran to drop its nuclear enrichment program, including the possibility of a much stricter UN sanctions regime. 

3.Offer Afghan carrots. There’s plenty of business in western Afghanistan that can be done jointly, if quietly, between the U.S. and Iran. The Afghan opium problem is a disaster for Iran: it has the highest percentage of heroin addicts in the world and might be open to joining NATO on an interdiction regime. There are also contracts–for asphalt, machine parts etc–that could be offered to Iranian companies as part of the U.S.-led Afghan development program. There should be a renewal of the Bonn process–that is, Afghanistan’s neighbors plus the U.S. and E.U.–in the stabilization of Afghanistan. (Iran was very helpful in Afghanistan until the Bush Administration declared it part of the Axis of Evil and froze it out.)

4. Open a U.S. interests section in Tehran. Condoleezza Rice was about to do this last August but Bush, unrelenting to the last, vetoed it. This would be the first step toward re-establishing diplomatic relations with Iran.

After the U.S. did all these things, the ground would be prepared for more direct, bilateral talks with Iran at the special envoy level. There should be no rush to enter into direct talks, unless there is an intervening crisis. It can wait until after the Iranian presidential elections in June. But it’s crucial that the approach be comprehensive, using the variety of carrots and sticks at our disposal–in Syria, Russia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty No. 2), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay-marriage advocates — as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • mackenzie92

    For the sake of pragmatism, is it just accepted now that Iran should not make concessions of its own?

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Joe,
    It would be hard to argue with any of your suggestions. They all would represent opportunities to improve the climate without any of them representing a fallback or consession. The pursuit of non-proliferation generally as opposed to simply holding 1 nation to be a pariah while turning a blind eye elsewhere, would certainly represent a solid improvment in our position.
    .
    Now, about that AP report….
    . ;-)

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    mackenzie92: Joe does not suggest making any concessions to Iran in this post.
    -
    Why would the accession of Ukraine and Georgia to NATO make the US, NATO, or the world better safer?

  • Cliff

    Bush’s failure to do this was inexplicable.
    .
    It is explicable. They want Armageddon. It’s also why we have lockstep support for Israel – they want to get everything set up for when their great and terrible war god Jesus shows up and destroys all the non-believers.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    “The Afghan opium problem is a disaster for Iran: it has the highest percentage of heroin addicts in the world and might be open to joining NATO on an interdiction regime.”
    .
    So is the heroin addiction problem in Iran a a symptom of a larger problem, ie lack of jobs and future for Iran’s citizens? Or is is merely a result of the close proximity of Afghani poppy fields? And if poppys are the only crop the poor people of Afghanistan can hope to make a living with, what will NATO’s attempts to squash opium production do to their co-operation w/ NATO? Mostly it seems to me, these drug interdiction programs are either used to smoke screen imperial motivations, or used by local power brokers to stamp out rivals, as a financial windfall for various police states, or justification to squash any perceived threat to the prevailing power structure, or to just keep the poor down. What ever the reason, human rights abuses are sure to follow.

  • mzmustafa

    Don’t you hear what President Ahmadinejad asked: “An apology for past US ‘Crimes’ committed against Iran.”

  • http://rodeomati.blogspot.com pattonmat89

    cincinnatus- I don’t know what exactly is a factor in Iran’s high percentage of opiate users, but the economy and the proximity of Afghanistan could be major factors. According to the CIA Factbook, the “pipeline” of heroin from Southwest Asia to Europe passes through Iran. Plus, the Iranian government is really more pragmatic than we give them credit for. I think it would be a good idea to seek some detente there. We could send oil and gas from Central Asia overland through Iran, and we wouldn’t need to worry so much about oil in the Gulf.

  • queencersei

    I think Russian involvement to achieving a postive outcome in Iran is critical and also unlikely. But that is just my two cents.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    pattonmat89, my beef is really w/ these interdiction programs which are often as I describe them above. I’m suspicious of those who suggest more police powers as a solution.
    .
    “Don’t you hear what President Ahmadinejad asked: “An apology for past US ‘Crimes’ committed against Iran.”
    .
    No need to put quotes around “crime’, we did indeed commit crimes in Iran. Including the overthrow of their democratically elected government in the 1950s, and our collusion w/ Saddam’s usage of chemical weapons against the Iranian people. Sorry to burst your freedom bubble.
    .
    “I think Russian involvement to achieving a postive outcome in Iran is critical and also unlikely. ”
    .
    Whose ‘positive outcome’ is the issue.

  • queencersei

    Ahmandinejad is kidding himself. But then again he knows it. Even if America was in the habit of publicly apologizing for actions like that, most American’s simply have no knowledge of what our Middle Eastern policy was in the 1950′s and don’t care to.
    As for the positive outcome issue. It’s all relative to which side you ask. For me it would be a non-nuclear Iran. But obviously the Iranians would probably not interpret that event as being positive from their end.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    He might be kidding himself, but it doesn’t make him wrong queencersei. When you spend 50 years or so playing the bully, we shouldn’t be surprised that some of the bullied might decide owning a big ole gun to keep the bully at bay might not be such a bad thing.

  • queencersei

    Agreed cincinnatus. Though I think he absolutely knows no apology will be forthcoming. It is all a chess game and we are simply seeing the first couple of moves.

  • defendingiran

    With all due respect, the author of this article is still engaging in imperialist discourse. What kind of language is “using the variety of carrots and sticks at our disposal.” Either the author is ignorant or just repeats political jargon without knowing its meaning. Does he realize that carrot and stick is an idiom that derives from methods used for training MULES and other animals by drawing them foward with rewards (the “carrot”) and driving them foward with punishment (the “stick”). So basically he wishes for the administration of HOPE and CHANGE to treat Iran as if it is a donkey and induce it to change in such a manner. Is this what is called mutual respect? Is this what is called dialogue? So he wants US to negotiate with a donkey?

    Please people stop this nonsense. The journalist elites of the western world must stop employing such insulting language and metaphors and treat the people of the 3rd world with respect and dignity, which they deserve. The Iranian people are nothing but victims of illegitimate interventions (Mossadegh in 1953) and instigated wars (Saddam’s invadion of Iran in 1980 at behest of Brezeinski). They are not animals, but peple who also want to be treated with self-respect. This is the only way to resolve the tensions between the 2 nations. By dehumanizing a people it makes it easier to get support for killing them. I demand the humanization of Iran and all people of the 3rd World. This is the least I expect from Mr. Klein who is of Jewish descent and knows firsthand about discrimination and oppression!

  • http://rodeomati.blogspot.com pattonmat89

    I agree, cincinnatus. We need to be thoroughly honest: we suck, big time, at drug eradication (Columbia, Peru, Bolivia, anyone?). And really, drug eradication in Afghanistan is closely related to counterinsurgency tactics. We can’t just say “Don’t plant opium,” and expect them to not plant opium, if it’s the only way they’ll make money. Maybe we could start programs (if they don’t already exist) to give alternatives to opium growing, or revitalize any existing programs. Given that the Taliban make a lot of money from the opium trade (always have, since the beginning), that might be a way to get back at them. Of course, it’s all very complicated, much more so than I can express before I have to get to class. If you want someone who is very good on Afghanistan, try Joshua Foust at Registan.net. He’s done some very smart pieces on the Afghan opium trade. All my knowledge about Afghanistan is cribbed from him and a few other people.

  • http://rodeomati.blogspot.com pattonmat89

    defendingiran-
    All good points, but if the shoe were on the other foot, can you honestly say that Iranian hegemony would be perfect? Doubtful.

  • donovong

    Hmm, let’s see. I either have to support President Obama’s approach to Iran or Joe Klein’s approach.

    Sorry, Joe. I’m sticking with the new guy.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    The journalist elites of the western world must stop employing such insulting language and metaphors and treat the people of the 3rd world with respect and dignity, which they deserve
    .
    We are discussing Joe (the Teddy Awards) Klein.
    .
    It will be long time before the assumption that the world belongs to us to rule as we see fit and that diplomacy is the art of getting all the other nations to realize this simple truth without killing too many unnecessarily falls by the wayside.
    .
    Unfortunately it will probably take something much worse that the Iraq fiasco for that to sink in.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    Just saw someone on MSNBC discuss the Iranian overthrow in 50′s…anchor quickly changed topic.

  • justafail

    I cannot really see how Russia could sign this kind of a deal – pressuring Iran. If that were the case, then it would be a sign that Russia is becoming a weaker country in terms of deals with the U.S, as we know Russia is doing quite well these days, due to their totalitarian system connected with some Capitalist values and motherlands interests also are involved and being taken a good care of. I think pride is really important for a nation state like Russia and every other society-country which take pride for themselves. What I also think is that even at these modern days treat Russia like Soviet Union in some way. What is moving Russia forward is their growing unique Capitalist form and wise use of natural resources. Of course from a European point of view that could be seen as a not too good, but for Russian people it’s the right way to go.
    Anyway, enough with the Russia and US, I’ll save my fingers from any more typing.

  • justafail

    To add, a bit more, I don’t think relations with Iran are of top priority for the U.S right now. Relations with Russia are.

  • Aaron

    There may or may not be compromise with Russia: Russia Reported to Revise Missile Plan

    A Russian news report on Wednesday that Russia is putting off its plan to deploy missiles near the Polish border raised speculation that the Kremlin is seeking ways to lower tensions with the United States now that a new administration has taken office.

    The unnamed official was quoted as saying the Russian government had taken the step because Washington is not “pushing ahead” with the Bush administration’s proposal to deploy an anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech republic to defend against what the administration had said was a threat from countries like Iran.

    .
    I guess the Monday telecon between Barack Obama and Dmitri Medvedev was fruitful?

  • justafail

    When superpowers have relations based on profit it can only be good for us, except if you live in a country where one of the s-power’s interests are realized. Everyone is interested in making money. Money is the king? Isn’t that true?

  • WisconsinLiberal

    I hate to break the “Americans as imperialists” bubble but despite what might be a poor choice of words the idea of a carrot and stick approach is not necessarily a bad thing. Essentially we are standing up and telling people that cooperating with us is good for them and not cooperating is likely to have negative consequences. This style of diplomacy has been conducted among nations for hundreds of years. It is not necessarily condescending though it is slightly nationalistic.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    @WL,
    It’s certainly to be preferred to the all-stick-all-the-time approach we’re replacing but what you euphemistically refer to as ‘negative’ consequences only differs from cold-blooded murder by the peculiar tradition that allows nations to do with impunity what is unquestionably immoral among individuals.
    .

  • http://polaris.nationalinterest.in/2009/01/29/polaris-memo-january-28-2009/ Polaris » Polaris Memo: January 28, 2009

    [...] Klein of Time magazine offers some very sensible suggestions on how the Obama administration should improve its engagement with [...]

  • formerlyjames

    Great suggestions, Joe. Now let’s move on with how to deal with Isreal.

  • ross88

    Something I do not understand for how long we want to test government of Iran a simple mind can tell that Iranian officials are not capable of having good relations with the west in general, simply because the way their supporters are formed over the years. U S has been ready for negotiations since President Reagan to establish relation with Iran. If you think U S should give more time to Iran, I can assure you that it won’t work. The only problem is U S is giving them more times to be prepared to black mail the world and the west particularly, and kill more people in Iran , and kill more U S solders in Iraq and Afghanistan and more. Instead U S should be on the side of Iranian people and with their help change government of Iran. That is what majority of Iranians want.

  • formerlyjames

    ross88, President Reagan wasn’t just ready. He very much did deal with Iran under the table. Does the Contra scandle ring a bell? I wouldn’t give Ahmadinejad the pleasure of an apology, but I suggest you look at the things he wants apologies for, including installing the shah, who was a bigger murderer than anything Iran has seen since, and supporting sadam in their war that cost a million lives. His points are not without some cogency. You have taken on a big order in this Iran is all evil argument.

  • Cliff

    defendingiran – I think you’re right to be insulted by Joe Klein’s attitude here. You might remember the NIE report that came out a while back saying that Iran had actually abandoned its nuclear weapon program in 2003.
    .
    Klein suggested that Bush made a mistake in releasing the NIE to the public, and felt that instead he should have used this knowledge to blackmail Iran into making concessions on its nuclear power program.
    If you want I can try to google it up for you.
    .
    But apart from all that, the “carrot and stick” phrasing wasn’t meant to say that Iranians are mules or dumb animals. It’s a common phrase for setting up a reward-punishment scheme (which is plenty patronizing and insulting all on its own).

  • mashtabbas

    Dennis Ross is a terrible choice. He has proven himself to be extremely biased.
    Here’s one thing we must do – we must change our language. Let’s stop this “carrot and stick” talk. It’s insulting. We are talking to a country, not a two-year old. Countries like Iran and its people find this kind of language demeaning. Even if the “carrot and stick” approach is our policy, our engagement with Iran and other countries should at least appear to be based on “mutual respect.”
    Furthermore, singling out Iran when it come stop non-proliferation will get us nowhere. We must also press India, Pakistan and Israel to get rid of their nukes.

  • formerlyjames

    mashtabbas, since when does American foreign policy care about the concept of “demeaning” other countries? That is not in the State Dept. dictionary. Nor “respect”, nor “non-interferrence”. Nor “live and let live”. Joe Klein is a brilliant author and commentator, but I most often disagree with him on his take on foreign policy. He defends it, and hopes for a brighter day within the framework of the last 60 years. A total flop failure, a shambles, a “Legacy of Ashes” (good book, look it up if you don’t know of it). America seriously needs to wake up, smell the coffee, shake it’s head (how many cliches are there?), and totally revamp in relation to other nations. Hillary is not the person capable of doing it. Notice in the news lately, that she is in the background. Foreign policy news is not on Ms. Hillary, it is on the foreign emmisaries. Wonder why that is? I ramble, but hope for better than what Joe’s positions would bring us, which is to say the same old same old crap.

  • gmalcolms

    Another possible carrot for Iran would be to offer to build a pipeline to Europe through Turkey to let them export their gas. The Europeans and Turks should be happy about it and it would really PO the Russians.

  • needadrink

    Hopefully our Iran policy will be based on mutual interest and respect, and not as the Iraq fiasco “what is best for Israel”.

  • jippos

    In my opinion no matter what US administration does, there is no way Iran will change its behaviour on nuclear, terrorism or any other issue. The reason being that these are the tools that is keeping the regimes powerful leaders in power and they will protect their power at any cost and will not let things such as national interest get in their way. Unfortunately, the regime has gotten very powerful now and can more or less do as they please. Western governments should also take some responsibility for this as they have supported or at least have not opposed their actions when they should have, due to their financial interests (particularly Germany, France, UK and even US). So now they are left with a problem that can not be solved easily by talking dialogue etc…for example, if one has a cancer and its diagnosed early enough, it can in most cases be treated with not so much pain, but if it’s ignored, it’ll be a lot harder and more painful to remove. I suspect, unfortunately, in the case of Iran, there is no easy and painless way of sorting it out. So either accepts a nuclear Iran that supports terrorism, defies human rights etc or something drastic needs to be done may be even a war which no one wants but may be the only way. I however do hope that I’m wrong but having looked at the past 30 years of Iran regimes actions suggest otherwise.

  • radmanr

    Iran can be a very powerful and active positive player in the Middle East and possibly the best friend America has ever had, IF the US is willing to respect the Iranian nation and see it as an equal rather than demonize it due to past grievances. What the US should do in my belief is first open up an interest section in Tehran. Second, there should be direct face to face negotiations with all the differences on the table. It must tell the Iranians what worries the Americans in regards to Iranian activities and be willing to listen to what worries the Iranians in return. If the US wants Iran to be on its side it must prove to them that first, they are not after regime change in Iran (been there done that and it hasn’t paid off). Second, it respects Iran’s legitimate rights as mentioned in International treaties (the NPT). Third, full compliance with the Algiers accord and fourth recognizing Iran’s legitimate security interests in the region and finally the full removal of sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets. In return, Iran will have to prove that it is not after the annihilation of Israel by military means, it will not support militant groups against American interests, and that it will not pursue military purposes of Nuclear energy. This way Iran will enter the global community as an important and active player with many positive contributions.

  • needadrink

    Interesting article about the potential Iran Envoy. Looks like it will just be a continuation of the Bush policy towards Iran: “Israel First”; We need to stop scarifying American lives and money for the sake of Israel.

    ———–
    Dennis Ross as Iran Envoy?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-gharib/dennis-ross-as-iran-envoy_b_162116.html
    ———–

  • http://botd.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/top-posts-1008/ Top Posts « WordPress.com

    [...] How to Begin with Iran Looks like Dennis Ross is about to become the U.S. envoy in charge of Iran. But I’m not sure that sending Ross [...] [...]

  • longliveiran

    Having Dennis Ross at Iran-Desk would be like having Satan as a bouncer at the gate to Heaven! He represents the Zionist lobby groups that wants nothing but prolonged hostilities between the US and Iran. They have been hard at work gathering around both McCain and Obama prior to the elections to make sure they pre-manufacture future US policy toward Iran no matter which candidate won, and now they are telling Obama what he should be doing. Their main and ideal objective is to create the Greater Israel which includes Gaza and the West Bank with no Palestinians in it. Please read this entire article:

    http://www.payvand.com/news/08/oct/1245.html

    Also: http://www.newsweek.com/id/171256 (article by Dennis Ross)

    Their goal is to derail the new Obama policy of friendly overtures toward Iran by forcing the policy to make offers to Iran it would have to refuse, thereby failing it from the start. They want to force a military confrontation between US and Iran since it is only Iran and not the puppet Arab states who is standing between them and their goal of driving the Palestinians into the sea. The fact is that Iranians are NOT weaponizing their nuclear technology. They know that their mere “know how” would be deterrent enough for defensive purposes. They don’t want to see a day when oil runs out and they have to weave rugs to survive! To put them in a position to prove they are not weaponizing by quitting enrichment would well play into the hands of those working to create conflict since it would corner the Iranians into accepting the irrational abandonment of their legitimate rights, something they would never accept. This way Dennis Ross and his bunch could proclaim that we “tried everything and it didn’t work”, to force a military action against Iran.
    Let me state some issues here:

    - The US has seen nothing but trouble from its alliance with Israel. Had it not been for the powerful pro Israel lobby that practically puts presidents in office in the US, this alliance to this extent would make no sense at all.

    - If Iran and US were to some day become friendly allies, US-Israel alliance would be drastically diminished in stature, a nightmare for Israel which is hated by all Arabs versus Iran that is a prominent Middle East country and is liked by many and could help the US in the Middle East.

    - Middle East has oil that has to sell and the West needs to buy, this cold war notion of “we have to protect our interests” by the US through political strife and military force is crazy and must end. You don’t see the Chinese Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf, do you?

    - Iranian public have historically always liked the Jews and have sympathized with their perils, especially during WWII events. They acknowledge their natural affinity toward the land of their Prophet but it seems to no longer be a matter of pilgrimage to the Holy Land but rather a game of power and greed. It is astonishing how such a people could inflict similar acts on Palestinians. I suspect (and not in his defense) Ahmadinejad’s denial of Holocaust has more to do with denying Israel to get more mileage out of it than it has, rather than actually denying it.

    - Why anyone criticizing Israel for massacring 5000 people in a week should be accused of anti-Semitism? You can’t make the world like you by being the victim turned perpetrator.

    - Holy Land is holy to three religions. Wouldn’t it make sense to make it an independent religious zone governed by a three-religion council and accessible by all and stop fighting over it? And how about letting Palestinians have a contiguous and viable homeland they could be happy about backed by a general election to put a vote of approval on it by all Palestinians? This would be indisputable to anyone in the Middle East.

    - Stop insulting Iranians by this “carrot and stick” business, they don’t want your carrots and they are not afraid of your sticks. Start talking to them nicely instead of threatening them all the time, maybe hey can help solve many issues in the region. And stop these stupid sanctions, they are old school, obviously you don’t
    know Persians.

    The US has done nothing but wrong toward Iran since 1953, that is 56 years of abuse. An apology is the least to do to start with. Is that any harder than overthrowing Mossadegh, or instigating Saddam to attack them and giving him poison gas to kill them with, or push half a dozen UN resolutions even today, based on bogus charges?

    Obama may be the last chance for the US to finally put things right in the Middle East and around the world if the likes of Dennis Ross let him. The US is now like Gulliver in the land of little people. It has made just too many enemies and many others who don’t care what happens to it anymore. It is economically, militarily, and emotionally devastated, all as the result of an avalanche called 911 and all for the “love” of Israel

    We’re lucky if we don’t end up becoming a third world country, let alone help Israel.

  • mariedevine

    The US is called the Great Satan by Iran; we must stop proving their point. We must lift up the word of God and fight evil in our society. All holy books say to fight evil and promote good. We have done the opposite and we reap our just reward.

    The primary message of the Qur’an is to follow the whole Bible. Jesus said to live by every word of God. That is agreement. When the USA and Israel want to live by the word of God as it is written in our Bible, the violence and threat of war will end. All disagreements can easily be handled by “it is written.

    The energy crisis and wars related to power come from a wrong lifestyle. The goal is not employment. That caused pollution, global warming fears, reoccurring financial crises, poverty, war, disease and high health care costs. The goal is a garden paradise retirement lifestyle we build.

blog comments powered by Disqus