(Washington Institute for Near East Policy) Patrick Clawson and David Makovsky - The U.S. has apparently been unable to convince Israel that it would be able to both identify an Iranian dash to the nuclear weapons threshold and then act militarily in short enough order. At least a few Israeli leaders are concerned that despite its best intentions, the U.S. will not be able to act in time to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. To show its determination to stop Iranian nuclear progress rather than allow interminable, unproductive discussions, Washington must establish benchmarks to be met in order for diplomatic negotiations to continue. Benchmarks offer a more effective alternative to a deadline, which would allow Tehran to stall until the last minute and then set out proposals that may seem attractive at first glance but are really unhelpful. The benchmark model is based on results, not the calendar, taking away Iran's ability to run down the clock. When diplomacy fails because Iran fails to meet the established benchmarks, more forceful measures will follow. The best way to improve the chances for a negotiated settlement is for the West to keep increasing the pressure on Iran. There is much wisdom in the quip that Iran does not respond to pressure; it only responds to great pressure. Tehran does not believe the U.S. and Israel will use all means available to prevent Iran from getting close to having a nuclear weapon. As a result, Washington and Israel must find better ways to demonstrate that they are prepared to take military action if needed. The U.S. and P5+1 focus should always be on stopping Iran's nuclear progress, not on preventing an Israeli strike. Patrick Clawson is director of research at the Washington Institute. David Makovsky is director of the Washington Institute's Project on the Middle East Peace Process.
2012-09-27 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive