In the Arena
Iran

Iranamok

By Joe Klein | @JoeKleinTIME | September 10, 2009 | +

It seems an appropriate time to resurrect The New Republic’s clever name for the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal. It seems the Iranians are playing hardball on the nuclear negotiations.And David Ignatius poses the question of what the Obama administration should do about it, offering three options: engage, contain or attack. It seems to me that the answer is a no-brainer: Engage if you can, while making plans to sanction, contain and deter.

The response of the  P5+1 (the UN Security Council’s permanent members plus Germany) to the Iranian diss becomes crucial. And U.S. diplomacy now faces a real challenge: how to get the Russians and Chinese to agree to a more aggressive sanctions regime, perhaps including the barring of gasoline sales to Iran. The answer is: carrots.

It is now time to offer the Russians what they want–the abandonment of the foolish and probably useless anti-missile system based in Eastern Europe (although, obviously, U.S. anti-missile defense research should be continued) and  offer quiet assurances, if they haven’t already been offered, that the U.S. will not press for NATO membership for Georgia or the Ukraine. The quid pro quo should be a guarantee that the Russians will agree to a specific set of sanctions.

As for the Chinese, that’s more difficult. The pillar of their foriegn policy is business: they seek to do business, especially when it comes to oil, wherever they can, regardless of the nature of the government involved. But the Chinese have an Islamic radicalism problem in their western provinces–remember the Uighurs? And we’ve been doing some of China’s dirty work, fighting the Islamic radicals–Al Qaeda, for example–who train and supply the Chinese rebels. Perhaps some accomodation–intelligence sharing, if it is not already being done–can be reached to bring the Chinese on board with regard to Iran.

In any case, Obama’s open hand has been met with a closed fist, for the moment. The Iranian regime is cracking down on dissidents, reverting to Soviet-style show trials–several of my friends and sources, Iranian patriots all, remain in prison–and seems to be in the process of mounting a Revolutionary Guards Corps coup. Iran’s need to meet the IAEA’s requirements for openness in the nuclear process seems to me a threshold issue, given the recent events. (I didn’t always believe that was the case, but the Iranian regime’s recent behavior has changed the game.)

It is entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that the Iranians have not crossed the line and begun to weaponize. But if that’s the case, what are they hiding–why are they being so recalcitrant? It’s time for Obama to stand strong, and bring the Russians and Chinese along.

Related Topics: anti-missile defense, China, IAEA, nuclear proliferation, russia, Iran, Uncategorized

  • Latest on Swampland

    Must Reads May 29, 2012

    Morning Must Reads: Secret

    From our Partners

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images
    Mitt Romney May 29, 2012

    A Tale of Two Economies: Mitt Romney vs. Republican Governors

    The great recession has left the state of Ohio battered and bruised–and Mitt Romney would have you believe it’s Barack Obama’s fault. Writing in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer on May 4, Romney advised Ohioans that the President has delivered them “paltry results,” and that their state is in need of “a fundamental change in direction.”

  • Ffred

    Oh yeah, we focus on Cheney nowadays but he genuinely crinkles noses, while Reagan got away smelling like a rose. S&L anyone? Back on topic, though, it seems to me that real the sticking point is inspections. Iran, as a NPT signatory, has every right to peaceful nuclear research, as long as certain obligations are upheld. What’s wrong with that? Not that the IAEA did Iraq any good.

  • destor23

    What? Really? I just don’t believe they’re anywhere close to a nuclear weapon.

  • esblofeld

    I think the Iranians want the same nuclear weapon capability that the Japanese have- they aren’t weaponizing uranium, but they could basically flip a switch and start the next day (although Japan has added constitutional prohibitions that Iran doesn’t).

  • centfan

    What, exactly, is our negotiating leverage? Your plan is to placate both China and Russia so that in turn they stop supporting Iran so that in turn Iran stops it’s nuclear ambition so that in turn Iran will see the light and never again consider trying to get to the top of the world power chain even with a largely educated society and a mound of oil under their feet?

    Wouldn’t it be simpler to stick a wind turbine in every US backyard and a solar panel on every US roof at taxpayer expense and let the world oil economy crash and the Middle East dry up and blow away? Or, couldn’t we let the concept of MAD become clear to a new generation of Iranians? It’s kept us alive for 65 years and counting.

  • persianadvocate

    Mr. Klein,
    From the tenor of your argument it appears that you are of the opinion that we, the US, should ask two countries that have consistently been antagonized by our foreign policy economically, militarily and socially for decades now to join in sanctioning Iran, their business partner, ally and regional neighbor, for exercising it’s rights under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Upon what rationale does your viewpoint originate? That of Israel’s consistent propaganda (“hasbara”) designed to distract from the Palestinian issue? Certainly it was not the most recent National Intelligence Estimate (reported by the New York Times last Wednesday) that stated no convincing evidence exists that Iran has militarized their nuclear program. Further, what do you think of Israel’s clandestine program?

  • Joe Klein

    Persian–So if the nuclear program is as benign as all that, why is Iran refusing to comply with the IAEA inspection regime? My sense is that the findings in the 2007 NIE still are seen as valid in our intelligence community…so I”m mystified: Why is Iran being so recalcitrant.

    As you may know, I’ve long advocated diplomatic recognition and a better relationship between the U.S. and Iran. The President of the United States wants a better relationship, too. Why is this so threatening to the Iranian regime? Why can’t they take yes for an answer?

  • Ffred

    Actually, I’m hoping that Russia and China can help convince Iran to ease up on the inspection issue.

  • persianadvocate

    Mr. Klein,
    Benign is a peculiar word. Benignity is always such that it can transform readily into malignity. In other words, a nuclear program is never truly benign. Not in America, not in Israel, nor India, Pakistan, France, Iran — basically not anywhere on this blue planet, period.
    As for your advocacy of better Iran and US relations, I am well aware of your opinions on this matter and agree, many times over, with many of your statements in past entries. I think in light of your good amount of knowledge about Iran’s recent history, particularly of that period starting from what I call our revolution into darkness (circa 1979), you should keep in mind that Iranian cynicism of US intentions in bettering relations is well-founded. I shouldn’t need to mention to you that the US overthrow of our nascent democracy in the early 1950s for joint US/UK oil interests, the arming of Saddam to the teeth with chemical weapons, which he used on Iranians after an invasion motivated by the US, profoundly affecting millions of Iranians to this day, and the continued US push for internationally-unsupported sanctions against the Iranian economy without any convincing evidence and thought as to how that may affect the goal of “bettering relations” would make Iran reluctant to say “yes” — as if the US came to the table with clean hands. What reason does Iran have to think that US duplicity has ended after 60+ years of espionage and numerous other events that I did not mention above? Why should Iran should give up an internationally recognized and bestowed right to peaceful nuclear technology? Because Israel is crying about non-existent Iranian bogeymen (or the next Reich as Netanyahoo would like us to believe)? Why should Iran give up this lawful right for an offering of hot dogs on the 4th of July? As Iran saw with the past administration, any cooperation with America could very well be nonreciprocating. The big elephant in the room remains: where is the evidence? There is none, and arguments based on conjecture and hypothesis have been preferred and proffered instead.
    Unfortunately (and I say unfortunately because I openly despise the Iranian regime), the Mullahs have the higher ground on this issue. Without evidence, America’s double standard of supporting one rogue nuclear-armed regime that has started war after war in its short 60 year history and disdain towards a country that is asking no more than its internationally recognized right to peaceful nuclear technology is exposed and the US public image is tarnished even further.
    Finally, what deviation has Iran made from IAEA protocol that you are aware of? Are you referring to Iran’s refusal to readily hand over any of their military secrets upon request? Is that Iranian audacity or simply the same kind of rejection the IAEA would face if it asked Israel or the US for the same?

  • Ffred

    …a nuclear program is never truly benign

    I agree there. I’m against nuclear fission in principle as a wasteful, dirty, expensive, potentially catastrophic boondoggle.

    From a political point of view, if I were Iran and the U.S. asked me to stop nuclear research, my reply would likely be “I’ll stop when you do.” And I’d be annoyed by U.S. deals with India, which isn’t even a signatory nation. Not exactly constructive diplomacy, but after 8 years of Bush, it’s going to take some time to rinse out the consequences of his ham-fisted policies. Which is pretty much what China is saying right now: be patient.

  • dollared

    Bless you, Joe. With Wolfie and Perle and Darth in exile, how would we at AIPAC get our message out, if it weren’t for you?

blog comments powered by Disqus