| Minority Leader Reid Criticizes Bush's Iran Policy |
| Written by Alex Christian | |
| Monday, 18 September 2006 | |
 Washington DC - "The US must find a third, less bleak option
beyond either bombing or appeasing Iran," according to Senate Minority
Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Several panels of experts that included
Iranians joined Sen. Reid to discuss the binary option (conflict or
appeasement) and other potential policy alternatives to address Iran's
nuclear program at the New America Foundation's conference entitled,
"U.S. Strategy Towards Iran: Thinking Through The Unthinkables-Beyond A
Binary Choice?"
Senator Reid spoke about what he characterized as the Bush Administration's failure to employ diplomacy; develop an independent energy strategy; support reformers in Iran; and change course in Iraq. He also called on Vice President Cheney to stop distorting facts about a pre-war Al-Qaeda-Iraq connection. David Sanger, a Senior White House Correspondent for the New York Times, asserted that President Bush "has not laid the groundwork for any option" with respect to Iran. Instead, the President is bypassing the United Nations and losing support for any action which could halt Iran's financing of controversial programs. He viewed any effort to weaken Iran financially as increasingly difficult because of global demands for Iranian oil. Washington bureau chief for the Financial Times, Guy Dinmore, who has lived and reported from Iran for several years, asserted that the "proponents for war with Iran [in the Bush Administration,] are pushed by ideological biases, however they're not knowledgeable on the subject, don't speak the language, and don't know the culture." Dinmore rejected what he identified as four misperceptions in the US that underpin judgments of Iran: Iranians are pro-American, the regime is totalitarian, Iran seeks chaos in Iraq, and that the ruling elite belong to a fascist theocracy. He did not differentiate between Iranians' attitude concerning US policies and US culture in his comments; however, he acknowledged that Iranians are overwhelmingly in favor of diplomatic relations with the US. Seemingly in contrast to Dinmore's assertions, Afshin Molavi, an Iranian-born Reuters correspondent said, "Iran has perhaps the least anti-American sentiment in the region." Molavi said this in response to Charles Kupchan, a former Director of European Affairs on the National Security Council, who conveyed that the US and Iran must build a relationship on trust rather than hostility. However, Molavi maintained the Iranian regime is not interested in a grand bargain, and any sort of deal must be made attractive to the Supreme Leader. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell, said that the US military does not have the ground troops to support military intervention in Iran, and thus if the US decides to invade Iran, in order to make the military option viable the US must re-institute conscription. Wilkerson also mentioned that "while air power is an option, this would serve to nationalize every, single Iranian. Therefore, we really do need to find another solution." Christopher Preble, the director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, supported the Colonel's assertion by saying, "Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi even promised, "We will defend our country from a US military invasion down to our last drop of blood." "The military option is totally unacceptable, counterproductive, and disastrous," George Soros, chairman of Soros Fund Management and Open Society Institute, declared. Soros also maintained, "[the US] must renounce the idea of even advocating regime change, which is the wrong way to promote democracy, because announcing your favor for regime change undermines elements working inside the country." Dinmore also argued that Iranian moderates had been marginalized by US policies, "Iraq was disastrous for the moderates, and thus US interests, in Iran." Sitting on another panel, Karim Sadjadpour, an Iranian-born Iran Analyst for the International Crisis Group, affirmed that, "the Iraq war soured the idea of sudden change in Iran, and any change in Iran must get the support of the Revolutionary Guard and Basij. Also, to promote democracy in Iran, the US must establish diplomacy with Iran", to eschew the Iranian mistrust of the US government, Sadjadpour reasoned. According to Soros, a comprehensive revision of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) was also in order to bring the document up to date with the current international climate. "We must prepare within the next five years for a revision of the Non-proliferation treaty. It has to be more equitable," Soros said. Daniel Levy, senior policy adviser to former Israeli Minister of Justice Yossi Beilin, emphasized two practical alternatives to the binary choice, namely "serious engagement and effective containment." However, in order for either option to be successful, Levy stressed that the Palestinian issue must be resolved and the US must favorably respond to the new Palestinian national unity government and thereby expand the Iranian problem and solution to a regional and world issue. The notion of accepting Iran as a nuclear power should it achieve nuclear capability was also considered at the conference. On one hand, Soros and Preble considered this outcome as a serious threat arguing that if Iran proliferates, the region would likely follow. On the other hand, Charles Kupchan, rebuffed this stance, saying, "The strategic implication of a nuclear Iran will probably not lead to proliferation in the region."
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|