Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Iran Let's Talk, Not Attack

by Carah Ong [contact information]

Published by The Mountain Mail on February 8, 2007

Recent comments from the Bush administration and media reports indicate the working group in the National Security Council focused on raising international outrage against Iran is beginning a new spin cycle.

While the administration previously expressed its ire for Iran vis-

This, combined with the recent movement of U.S. military forces into the Persian Gulf, and changes in the rules of engagement in Iraq regarding Iranians, reveals brewing schemes within the administration to either justify the use of some form of military force or to coax Iran into a military confrontation.

Just this week, President Bush said he has no intention of "going into" Iran. What is more significant is what he did not say - whether he has the intention of attacking Iran, which is much different than "going into" or "invading." It is worth noting that the president used the same language prior to the Iraq war.

Any form of military action against Iran would be counter to the national interest of the United States or its allies in the region, and would have disastrous consequences.

It could drive the price of gasoline as high as $5 a gallon; endanger U.S. soldiers in Iraq and throughout the region; and severely limit the ability of the United States to successfully deal with the existing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Instead of provoking a military confrontation, the United States should engage Iran in constructive dialogue without preconditions. Such a dialogue could begin by identifying issues on which critical U.S. and Iranian interests converge. For example, the Iraq Study Group stated in its report, "Iran's interests would not be served by a failure of U.S. policy that led to chaos and the territorial disintegration of the Iraqi state." The United States should build upon this mutual interest to develop a framework for dialogue on Iraq that can be a basis for broader future engagement.

But what about the argument that if it is in Iran's interest to cooperate in Iraq, why isn't it already doing so? Such an argument conveniently overlooks the fact that the United States has thus far not given Iran a chance to cooperate. The argument also does not take into account that after Iran cooperated with the United States on Afghanistan following the Sept. 11 attacks, we repaid them by labeling Iran as part of the "axis of evil."

There are legitimate concerns about the regime in Iran, particularly its human rights violations. But Iran is not a monolithic society and any struggle for reform must come from within the country itself. While Iranians themselves are angry about the declining economic situation, censorship and human rights abuses, they believe these are domestic concerns and should be addressed by Iranians, not foreign military intervention. Even in the last few weeks there has been a dramatic shift in top-end policy in Iran, including election victories by moderates and reformers, and the Supreme Council giving the green light for members of the Majlis to publicly criticize President Ahmadinejad.

It's time to put aside the spin and sit down and talk. We can't bomb a country simply because we don't like it. Doing so would be recklessly shortsighted and only strengthen the hand of hardliners in Iran. In addition to the Iraq Study Group, there have been other bi-partisan commissions and study groups, including a 2004 working group established under the Council on Foreign Relations and co-chaired by Robert Gates and Zbigniew Brzezinski; and a 2001 Atlantic Council of the United States Working Group, co-chaired by Lee H. Hamilton, James Schlesinger and Brent Scowcroft, which have called for various forms of dialogue and engagement with Iran. Even if the administrations won't talk, we can pursue parliament-to-parliament and people-to-people exchanges in the near term.

If we want to see a change in Iran's behavior, we must pursue courageous diplomatic leadership to establish a serious sustained dialogue.

Only then can we truly gauge Iran's intentions to deal with issues of concern to the United States, from settling outstanding questions regarding its nuclear program to helping stabilize Iraq.