|
Trending Topics
|
Source: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/debating-next-steps-on-iran
Debating Next Steps on Iran
(Foreign Policy) Michael Singh - The failure of the latest round of negotiations over Iran's nuclear program will likely bring calls for changes in the American approach. One such proposal - focusing on strengthening the U.S. "diplomatic track" with Iran - was put forward recently by The Iran Project, a group of distinguished former U.S. officials. There is much in the report with which I agree. However, I would differ with the report on the way forward on Iran policy. Both Iran's nuclear ambitions and its hostility toward the West are elements of a strategy to advance the regime's interests, as it conceives them. For a strategic shift to occur, the regime must be convinced that this strategy is no longer tenable. Far from compelling the regime to rethink its strategy, however, the current Western approach is likely seen in Tehran as vindicating it. U.S. policies at the negotiating table and across the region - a reduction in our military posture, our inaction in Syria, and our continually improving nuclear offers - are interpreted as successes by the regime and perceived by it as indications not of good will but of desperation or decline. The U.S. objective, therefore, should be to reverse this dynamic. Such an approach would require a firmer posture in the nuclear arena - refraining from further improvements to our offer, setting red lines for Iran's nuclear program, taking steps to enhance the credibility of the U.S. military threat, and leaving open for now the question of whether we will hold further talks. The regime should come to believe that a confrontational, rather than cooperative, approach to its own security will come at a price, exacted by the U.S. and our allies. There are a number of ways to send this message - pushing back against Iranian support for terrorism, greater support for the Iranian opposition - but the most important way to do so is through greater involvement in Syria, where Iran has much at stake. None of these steps exclude continued or even intensified diplomacy. But the goal of all of these actions should be the same. A strategic shift by Iran - from a zero-sum policy of confrontation to one of cooperation - would benefit the U.S. and the region whether or not a formal nuclear agreement is reached. A nuclear agreement without such a shift, however, will prove a hollow achievement. The writer is managing director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.