Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

"Resist and Deter" Iran

A recent report by a hawkish U.S. think tank urges the administration to exert increasing pressure on Tehran to abandon its enrichment program and be prepared to launch military strikes.

(Inter Press Service)

A new report on how the United States should "resist and deter" Iran’s alleged ambitions to acquire a nuclear-weapons capability by a think tank closely tied to the so-called Israel Lobby has been endorsed by two key officials who are expected to exercise major influence on Iran policy in the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama.

The 10-page report, which was released here Wednesday by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), argues that the United States should engage with Iran diplomatically but at the same time ratchet up pressure on many other fronts if it fails to heed demands to suspend and eventually abandon its uranium enrichment program.

Washington should be prepared to offer Tehran the following carrots: co-operation on "shared problems, such as piracy and smuggling in the Persian Gulf," and "participation in a regional security dialogue," according to the report.

At the same time, the report stressed that failure to stop Iran’s nuclear progress may well result in a decision by Israel to carry out a military attack within the next two years. Such a decision, it warned, could be hastened if Russia goes through with the sale and delivery of sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missile systems which "are seen by Israel as seriously limiting its military options."

"Whatever Americans may think, Israeli leaders seem convinced that at least for now, they have a military option," the report asserts. If Tehran deploys such systems, the report adds, Washington "should promptly provide Israel with the capabilities to continue to threaten high-value Iranian targets—for instance, with more modern aircraft."

"Time is short if diplomatic engagement is to have a chance of success," it asserts.

The new report, which comes amid a major administration review of U.S. policy toward Iran, is likely to be very closely read in European and Middle Eastern capitals due to its endorsement by Dennis Ross, who serves as Special Advisor on the Gulf and Southwest Asia to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Robert Einhorn, the senior State Department official on non-proliferation matters.

While both men resigned from the 17-member task force that helped draft the report to join Obama’s presidential transition team, WINEP stressed that they had formally endorsed an early draft that was not substantially different from the final product.

Other members of the task force, which was convened by WINEP’s director, Robert Satloff, and its deputy director of research, Patrick Clawson, included a number of prominent neoconservatives, such as Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and some who served in senior posts under President George W. Bush, including former under secretary of state for arms control and international security, Robert Joseph; his immediate subordinate, Stephen Rademaker; and the former chairman of the Defense Science Board, William Schneider Jr.

Rep. Gary Ackerman, a liberal Democrat who heads the House Subcommittee in the Middle East and South Asia, and Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, a member of the Senate Intelligence and Armed Services committees who has been a reliable supporter of the "Israel Lobby," also signed on to the report.

Ross’ endorsement, however, is particularly notable. While the State Department has been vague about what his precise responsibilities will be, it is understood that he is responsible for developing a diplomatic strategy for dealing with Iran, particularly how to marshal regional and international pressure on Tehran in support of Washington’s positions.

Ross is expected to coordinate with Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, and Puneet Talwar, who has the Iran portfolio on the National Security Council. Both Burns and Talwar are considered less hawkish on Iran than Ross, who was President Bill Clinton’s top Middle East negotiator and has held senior positions in WINEP. Last September, Ross signed on to another report by the Bipartisan Policy Center drafted by hardline neoconservatives (see Ali Gharib, “Pundits Debate the Inevitability of a Nuclear Iran,” Right Web, November 18, 2008).

Among other things, that report called for Washington to be prepared to launch military strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities and conventional military infrastructure if Tehran did not accede to demands that it abandon its nuclear program.

WINEP, which was founded some 25 years ago as a spin-off of the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), is one of Washington’s most influential think tanks on Middle East policy—although, like AIPAC itself, its views and perspectives rarely deviate far from those of the Israeli government or national-security establishment.

Indeed, the major message of the latest report is that Iran’s acquisition of a military nuclear capability, the prevention of which is characterized as a "vital national priority" for the United States, would set off a "cascade of destabilizing reactions by other states," which, it argues, would seek to emulate Tehran’s achievement, thus weakening the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and increasing the risks of "a nuclear confrontation, with horrible consequences."

Yet the report omits any mention of the universally accepted view—accidentally confirmed by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in a December 2006 interview—that Israel already has nuclear weapons which may have had destabilizing consequences of their own.

The report, which offers a number of hints on how Ross hopes to carry out his portfolio, coincided with Secretary of State Clinton’s first Middle East trip during which she reportedly expressed skepticism about the likelihood that diplomatic engagement with Iran would succeed but also invited Tehran to a conference on Afghanistan at the end of this month,

The report stresses that any offer on the nuclear issue should come from the permanent five Security Council members plus Germany—the group that has negotiated with Iran over its nuclear program to date—"not from the United States alone." "Arab countries, Turkey, and Israel" must also be involved so as to assure a unified voice.

It also emphasizes that any deal should not permit Tehran to enrich uranium on Iranian territory, arguing that such a precedent would itself contribute to proliferation. Moreover, "the international community … should not foster debate among its members about what a compromise (on enrichment) acceptable to Iran might be." The report calls for a policy of "resist and deter" rather than "acquiesce and deter."

Instead, Washington should "respond to Iranian worries about ensuring access to fuel for its civilian nuclear power plant" by following through on its "announced intention to bring to fruition the international nuclear fuel bank [and] … on the U.S. commitment to negotiate a fissile material cutoff treaty."

While it does not raise the possibility of gaining Russian support for U.S. efforts by offering to cancel Washington’s deployment of missile-defense systems to Poland and the Czech Republic (a deal that was reportedly alluded to in a letter from Obama to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev last month) it suggests that China could be brought along through pressure from "the Gulf states—especially Saudi Arabia" due to Beijing’s dependence on their "export markets and energy supplies."

The United States should also consider offering a "nuclear guarantee (or ‘umbrella’)" to its allies in the region as part of a deterrence strategy and should, in any case, build up their defensive capabilities if Iran persists in its nuclear program. In such a case, the report calls for a rapid build-up in economic sanctions, including efforts to discourage countries and companies from building oil refineries in Iran or exporting refined petroleum products to the country.

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to PRA’s Right Web (https://rightweb.irc-online.org). His blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.

Citations

By Jim Lobe, '"Resist and Deter" Iran' Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2009). Web location:
https://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4986.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share