US policy options on Iran, Take 2

Dan Darling, WindsofChange.net:

I received a great deal of feedback (positive or otherwise) on my Understanding US Policy Options On Iran, including an apparent mention in the Washington Monthly of all places (I'm not complaining, it's just that that's the last place I expected my concerns to be noted) with a lot of people asking me what I think about the US decision to offer Iran membership in the WTO as well as airline parts in return for ditching their nuclear program.

Well, ask and you shall receive ...

READ MORE

As I noted at the time:

Do we get any actual tangible guarantees to that effect [that Iran is willing to discontinue its nuclear program], or do we just get a signed document and trust in the good will of Khamenei and the ayatollahs? If so, is such an agreement worth the paper that it's printed on?

... Okay, so basically the Euros made a series of requests for us to help them out and Bush seems to be weighing his options as far as what we can do to assist them on the off-chance that the Europeans can persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions ...

... I'm not opposed to this whole idea that there has to be some give and take in the negotiating process with Europe, that's how politics works after all. What I'm a lot more fuzzy on is just what Europe is willing to give up in order to ensure that Iran doesn't becoming a nuclear power ...

... If that's the case, then my guess is that the administration is considering joining the European approach with the opinion that it is likely to fail. This also seems to imply that the Euros are willing to bend if the issue comes to the UNSC if the US bends on the issue of joining the talks - they may be hoping that Russia or China vetoes any UNSC sanctions, as Bergner noted - making this more on less a quid pro quo ...

The Euro approach is good as a stalling tactic while we figure out our strategy, not as a serious solution in of itself.

These opinions remain pretty much unchanged and you'll forgive my skepticism at taking the mullahs' claims of desiring peaceful coexistence with the West seriously when they're putting the British boats they captured last year on display for the faithful. The whole negotiating process between the has a certain Groundhog Day quality to it that Michael Ledeen first noted back in November:

The European "solution" to the threat of Iranian atomic bombs bids fair to join the "peace process" as the most boffo running gag in the history of show biz. Every few months, the elegantly dressed diplomatic wizards from London, Paris, and Berlin race across a continent or two to meet with Iranians dressed in turbans and gowns, and after some hours of alleged hard work, they emerge with a new agreement, just like their more numerous counterparts engaged in the peace negotiations. The main difference is that the peace-process deals seemed to last for several months, while the schemes hammered out with the mullahs rarely last more than a week or two. Otherwise, it's the same sort of vaudeville routine: a few laughs, with promises of more to come.

Indeed. And one of the reasons that I think we're willing to engage in this dubious song-and-dance is that we're still waiting on the results of the preemptive review concerning US intelligence on Iran due at the end of the month that seems geared in large part to avoid the intelligence problems that occurred with respect to Iraq.

In addition, the articles that have come out since the US shifted its stance with respect to Iran answered one of the more important concerns I had with the shift, namely what Europe is willing to give up. According to press reports, the Euros are willing to refer Iran to the UNSC for sanctions in the event that diplomacy fails, suggesting that they might be willing to part with their economic ties to the mullahs in the name of nuclear non-proliferation. I'm still not entirely convinced that there isn't a fix in here (China or Russia could veto the sanctions, for example), but it's always nice to hear that the course to which we have pledged ourselves isn't entirely a one-way street when it comes to the need for concessions. Next step: defining with the Euros the specific circumstances that constitute the failure of diplomacy with respect to Iran.

And for those interested in tracking the day-to-day developments with respect to Iran, I highly recommend Regime Change Iran's daily news briefs.