In the Arena

The Iran Approach

For the past few weeks, I’ve been arguing that the best way to approach Iran is obliquely: set the table for negotiations by improving our relations with Russia and Syria, among others. And it appears that is exactly what the Obama Administration is doing. Starting with Joe Biden’s stated willingness to “push the reset button” on relations with Russia last month, the Administration has made it clear that it wants to move forward on mutual reduction of our nuclear stockpiles and also expressed a willingness to drop the proposed European anti-ballistic missile system in return for a successful Russian effort to help end the Iranian nuclear enrichment program. Today, the New York Times reports that the President has proposed just such a deal in a letter to the Russians.

Furthermore, the U.S. is opening a channel to the Syrians–Iran’s primary Middle Eastern ally. A more neutral Syria and a stronger US-Russian alliance would serve to weaken and isolate Iran, and perhaps make it more amenable to talks. I suspect that the US will soon raise the possibility of cooperation with Iran on matters relating to Afghanistan–where the Iranians played a positive role until the Bush Administration consigned them to the “Axis of Evil” and shut down the cooperative efforts. It is not impossible that a year from now there will be a NATO supply route into Afghanistan through Iran.

I should add that the Obama Administration seems to have made some creative approaches to the Chinese as well–who may now offer an Afghanistan supply through their miniscule (76 kilometer) and sky-scraping border. These sorts of approaches can lead to stronger diplomatic cooperation across the board–in fact, to partnership as a commonplace–including to Chinese help with Iranian nonproliferation.

A major caveat is necessary, as always: The Obama Administration may be making all the right moves, but that’s no guarantee that Iran will respond. There is no knowing the mind of the Mullahs, especially at this moment of economic distress and potential political upheaval in the presidential elections this June.

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 [...]

  • dbrddr

    Joe,
    I think you’ve become the “voice and energy” of the administration’s Middle Eastern policy :p

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

    Why do you suppose that letter was leaked? I don’t like that there’s a quote above the fold of the NYT from some anonymous US official saying “put up or shut up” to Russia. What good does that do?
    -
    Who knows how Iran will respond. But when Saddam failed to respond to what we wanted in 1991, the result was sanctions and a massive coalition. Diplomacy can’t end all wars, but it can prevent many, and lay the groundwork for more effective action if needed. (Not that invading Kuwait is the exact equivalent of processing uranium, but you get the point).

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Presumably the letter was leaked to let the Serious People know what is being done, and build support among them.

  • mikedonoh

    Iran pursues its objectives in spite of US maneuvers, not because of them. It is naive to think that a country that can flaunt the UN sanctions against it will consider any move by the US to entice Russia and Syria as a threat to their long term position in their own backyard. Iran will do what they consider best for Iran, and do not respect empty talk about building consensus in the region by outside player. They have more to be concerned about when the Saudi minister proposes a Sunni front against Iranian intentions than anything the West can dream up.

  • stuartzechman

    Joe Klein:
    .
    This is fantastic news.
    .
    Of course outcomes remain to be seen, at which point we’ll be forced to either admit as a nation that the Bushists aren’t even worth noticing, or to reevaluate our ideas in light of new information.

  • http://nathanmyers.wordpress.com/ Nathan Myers

    Joe,
    .
    Thank you for talking about this issue…your analysis I think is spot-on. Let’s assume that Bush only had one presidential term from 2005-08 and gained re-election. Would his aggressive unilateral maneuverings as per the missile-defense system in Europe, Georgia, and blustering rhetoric about Iran have re-ignited the Cold War on a massive scale? I believe so.
    .
    This change of administration that, so far, has led to wiser, more discerning decisions on the foreign policy front is a breath of fresh air for those of us who value not bluntly repeating the mistakes of the past because of sheer ignorance or profit-mongering.
    .
    Nate
    .

  • stuartzechman

    Bobblespeak on Afghanistan:
    .

    The Chris Matthews Show
    March 1, 2009
    *******************************
    .
    Matthews: Talk Taliban to me
    .
    Mitchell: Afghanistan is Obama’s Korea
    .
    Cooper: Obama is going to Surge in Afghanistan and look for Al Qaeda
    .
    Tweety: maybe they’re on that island in Lost
    .
    Inskeep: We can’t breathe too hard or we will destablize Pakistan
    .
    Ignatius: thank god Obama is going to tell the bloggers f*ck off and join the DC consensus and realize there is no military solution in Afghanistan
    .
    Matthews: isn’t that what bloggers have been saying all along?
    .
    Ignatius: yes but DC pundits believe that but want to stay anyway

  • esblofeld

    The “leaked” letter wasn’t secret, and wasn’t meant to be secret; copies of it were distributed all over the foreign policy/diplomatic apparatus.

  • cougargal06

    We should be creating a diplomatic partnership. It will help make America a safer place to live in. Another thing that the Obama administration should be focusing on is helping eradicate global hunger. The more people that are left starving, the more people there are for the Taliban to potentially recruit. If all it takes is giving them food, shelter and schools for their children (which are things they really need) why wouldn’t you want to pledge an allegience to them? The Borgen Project (www.borgenproject.org) has some great ideas to help reduce poverty and make developed countries a better place to live in.

  • http://www.theimperator.com/wire/2009/03/russia-syria-and-iran/ Opinion Wire » Russia, Syria and Iran

    [...] are solid moves when taken alone, together they are extremely encouraging. As Joe Klein points out, if successful, it will put enormous pressure on the Iranians to cooperate, without resorting to [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus