Obama Administration Committed to Engage Iran, but Will It Play to Succeed or Fail?

Mar 17, 2009

To: FCNL Key Contacts
From: Jim Fine, Legislative Secretary for Foreign Policy
Re: Obama Administration Committed to Engage Iran, but Will It Play to Succeed or Fail?

FCNL has been lobbying for direct negotiations with Iran without preconditions for more than two years. We've cited support for direct talks from five former secretaries of state, other U.S. foreign policy and military professionals, and think-tank researchers.

Now the Obama administration is prepared to engage Iran. The key questions are how to engage and how to manage the process once it starts. Within the administration, a debate seems to be occurring between positions not very different from the Bush administration's policy, on the one hand, and, on the other, a constructive approach outlined by former National Security Advisors Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on March 5.

The Scowcroft/Brzezinski Prescription

If the United States is to persuade Iran to satisfy U.S. concerns over its nuclear program, Scowcroft told the Senate panel, "we need to be willing to engage Iran in strategic discussions that make clear we understand that Iran has legitimate security interests." Brzezinski emphasized the need to approach Iran "with some degree of patience, prudence, and with a deliberate effort to shape the atmospherics of engagement." The alternative policy, Brzezinski argued, would be to manage the negotiations to encourage Iranian intransigence, so that the negotiations fail and the blame for their failure falls on Iran. This goal, contrary to U.S. interests in his view, would be advanced by

• insisting that Iran meet preconditions prior to the start of negotiations;
• threatening Iran with more sanctions if it does not comply with U.S. demands;
• continuing to assert that force could be used against Iran;
• continuing to indicate that regime change in Iran is a U.S. political objective;
• continuing to speak of Iran as a terrorist entity, or as a sponsor of terrorism; and
• imposing a time limit on negotiations.

Administration Debate

Brzezinski may see this as a formula for failure, but some people in the Obama administration seem to have embraced it. Special State Department advisor Dennis Ross has argued that "penalties, more than inducements, are the key to altering the Iranian position." During her recent trip to the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reportedly told the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates she was "very doubtful" that U.S. diplomacy alone would dissuade Iran from seeking nuclear weapons. Press reports indicate that the United States is offering to halt its planned deployment of antiballistic missiles in Eastern Europe if Russia agrees to tighter sanctions against Iran, which also sounds to Iranian ears like threats of more sanctions.

Anyone in the administration attending to Israeli advice will also be drawn closer to the formula for failure outlined by Brzezinski. The Israeli government, according to press reports in Israel, laid out four "red lines" to Clinton during her recent visit. These lines correspond almost exactly to the recipe Brzezinski warned against: talks with Iran should be preceded and accompanied by stronger sanctions; before talks begin the United States should reach agreement with Germany, China, Russia, France, and Britain on what to do if talks fail; negotiations should have a time limit defined as a "one time only" opportunity for Iran; and the United States should reconsider whether it makes sense to approach Iran before the Iranian presidential elections this June.

In contrast, the February 15 statement by Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, is an example of how to create the kind of positive atmosphere for engagement that Brzezinski advocates. "It is absolutely clear that Iran plays an important role in Afghanistan," Holbrooke said. "They have a legitimate role to play in this region, as do all of Afghanistan's neighbors." This statement was followed three weeks later by a State Department announcement that the United States is inviting Iran to attend an international conference on Afghanistan.

Administration officials are also putting out differing assessments of Iranian capabilities and intentions. Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen has said he believes Iran is moving rapidly to acquire nuclear weapons, a view that corresponds with public Israeli assessments of Iranian intentions. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in contrast, has said that Iran "is not close to a weapon at this point." Gates's view was seconded by Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, who told a Senate hearing recently that although he believes Iran is holding open the option of developing nuclear weapons, he doesn't "believe they have yet made that decision."

"A-Team" Views

The mixed signals from the Obama administration come while the administration's review of Iran policy is still underway. Originally expected to have been released by now, the review should be completed by the end of the month. Sen. Edward Kaufmann (DE) told Brzezinski and Scowcroft at the March 5 hearings that they constituted the "A-Team" for dealing with Iran. FCNL also believes that the patient approach to Iran, free of threats and new sanctions, that Brzezinski and Scowcroft advocate is essential to resolving the conflict between the United States and Iran and beginning to transform the U.S. relationship to the greater Middle East.