Right Web

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

Iran Strategy Task Force

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

In March 2011, Freedom House and the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), organizations that have been closely associated with neoconservative advocacy efforts, created the Iran Strategy Task Force in an effort to “formulate new approaches to dealing with Iran and make recommendations after meeting with key policymakers in the Obama Administration, Members and Staff in the U.S. Congress, other experts from the U.S. and abroad, and the diplomatic community.”[1]

Commenting on the task force, Politico’s Ben Smith wrote, “With democratic revolutions shaking the Middle East, a Democratic think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute, and the pro-democracy group Freedom House are launching a new task force aimed at shifting American policy on its central regional foe, Iran, toward a more aggressive focus on democracy.”[2]

Jim Arkedis of PPI wrote, “We’re calling the task force Beyond Sanction: The Next Iran Strategy, a nod to the necessity of bringing fresh ideas and new life into the debate on how to handle Tehran. As Iran defiantly continues efforts to construct a nuclear device, it has become glaringly clear in the wake of the 2009 Tehran protests in response to the country’s sham presidential elections that the regime lacks popular legitimacy. In the context of recent upheavals across North Africa and the Middle East, it’s important to remember that the pro-democracy movement began not in Tunisia, but in Iran.”[3]

Steve Clemons of the Washington Note offered a cautious response to the group’s launching, writing in his blog, “I think America's options on Iran are limited right now—and depend somewhat on how growing fissures and feuds among Iran's ruling elites evolve, but short of adding another war to America's already too full plate, I'm interested in what the Task Force comes up with. If it's a roster of a long list of other coercive measures, I'm doubtful the Task Force will move the US-Iran policy needle very much.”[4]

At its launching, task force members included a number of people closely associated with the “Israel lobby” as well as several high-profile proponents of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of the Iraq. Chairing the task force were PPI’s Josh Block, a former spokesperson for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and Freedom House’s Andrew Apostolou, a former director of research at the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Other members included Jim Arkedis, PPI; Rafael Bardají, Atlantic Council; Jeffrey Herf, University of Maryland;
Ken Pollack, Saban Center for Middle East Policy; Steve Beckerman, AIPAC; Renee Redman, Iran Human Rights Documentation Center;
Ray Takeyh, Council on Foreign Relations;
Michael Adler, Woodrow Wilson Center; and Golnaz Esfandiari, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. The task force also had an advisory council whose members were David J. Kramer, Freedom House; Will Marshall, PPI;
Larry Diamond, Stanford University;
Rob Satloff, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and
Walter Russell Mead, Bard College.

In an email to Politico, PPI’s Marshall said, “PPI believes a more democratic world is a safer world. The United States has failed to apply that principle to Iran, even as popular movements for freedom spread throughout the Middle East. It’s time for a new approach.”[5]

Apostolou told Smith, “The dominant issues in the Middle East are democracy and freedom. The Iran regime thinks that it can escape demands for change. The United States, and its allies, therefore need a strategy that will help Iranians attain the human rights they so richly deserve.”[6]

According to a write up of the task force in The Atlantic, “The point of the group is not to criticize the Obama administration, but to supply it with strategic options. … The administration’s initial policy was an attempt ‘to test Iran and give Iran a chance to say we are serious about talking about our nuclear regime, and I think the Iranian response was loud and clear that [Iran was] not serous,’ Apostolou said. ‘What are you supposed to do, after 30 years … the same thing?’”[7]

Share RightWeb

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Sources

[1]Freedom House, “Press Release: Freedom House and Progressive Policy Institute announce Iran Strategy Task Force,” March 30, 2011, http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=1377.


[2]Ben Smith, “New Iran group to press White House on democracy,” Politico, March 29, 2011, http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/New_Iran_group_to_press_White_House_on_democracy.html?showall#.

[3]Jim Arkedis, ,” Beyond Sanction: The Next Iran Strategy,” PPI, the Progressive Fix, March 31, 2011, http://www.progressivefix.com/beyond-sanction-the-next-iran-strategy.

[4]Steve Clemons, “Could There be a Useful Nuclear Allergy Evolving in Iran?” Washington Note, March 30, 2011, http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2011/03/could_there_be/.

[5]Ben Smith, “New Iran group to press White House on democracy,” Politico, March 29, 2011, http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/New_Iran_group_to_press_White_House_on_democracy.html?showall#.

[6]Ben Smith, “New Iran group to press White House on democracy,” Politico, March 29, 2011, http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/New_Iran_group_to_press_White_House_on_democracy.html?showall#.

[7]The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/03/new-coalition-to-focus-on-human-rights-democracy-in-iran/73237/.


Share RightWeb

Iran Strategy Task Force Résumé

Contact Information

Josh Block
Progressive Policy Institute
1730 Rhode Island Avenue NW Suite 308
Washington DC 20036
Tel: 202-525-3926
Fax: 202-525-3941
Email: Jblock@PPIonline.org

Task Force Members (as of March 2011)

  • Andrew Apostolou, co-chair, Freedom House
  • Joshua Block, co-chair, Progressive Policy Institute
  • Jim Arkedis, Progressive Policy Institute
  • Rafael Bardají, Atlantic Council
  • Jeffrey Herf, University of Maryland
  • Ken Pollack, Saban Center for Middle East Policy
  • Steve Beckerman, American Israel Public Affairs Committee
  • Renee Redman, Iran Human Rights Documentation Center
  • Ray Takeyh, Council on Foreign Relations
  • Michael Adler, Woodrow Wilson Center


Task Force Advisory Council (as of March 2011)

  • David J. Kramer, Freedom House
  • Will Marshall, Progressive Policy Institute
  • Larry Diamond, Stanford University
  • Rob Satloff, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
  • Walter Russell Mead, Bard College

Related:

Iran Strategy Task Force News Feed

The Right Web Mission

Right Web tracks militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy.

For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


Falsely demonizing all Muslims, their beliefs, and their institutions is exactly the wrong way to make Americans safer, because the more we scare ourselves with imaginary enemies, the harder it will be to find and protect ourselves from real ones.


Division in the ranks of the conservative movement is a critical sign that a war with Iran isn’t inevitable.


Donald Trump stole the headlines, but the declaration from the recent NATO summit suggests the odds of an unnecessary conflict are rising. Instead of inviting a dialogue, the document boasts that the Alliance has “suspended all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia.” The fact is, NATO was a child of the Cold War, when the West believed that the Soviets were a threat. But Russia today is not the Soviet Union, and there’s no way Moscow would be stupid enough to attack a superior military force.


War with Iran may not be imminent, but neither was war with Iraq in late 2001.


Donald Trump was one of the many bets the Russians routinely place, recognizing that while most such bets will never pay off a few will, often in unpredictable ways. Trump’s actions since taking office provide the strongest evidence that this one bet is paying off handsomely for the Russians. Putin could hardly have made the script for Trump’s conduct at the recent NATO meeting any more to his liking—and any better designed to foment division and distrust within the Western alliance—than the way Trump actually behaved.


RightWeb
share