Thursday
Mar052009
Senate leaders want negotiations with Iran
Thursday, March 5, 2009 at 4:49PM
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony today of two experts on foreign policy dealing with Iran: Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security adviser to President Carter, and Gen. Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser to Presidents Ford and George H.W. Bush. Their purpose was to advise on the strategy which the United States should take when dealing with negotiations with Iran.
Dr. Brzezinski stated in his testimony that a nuclear Iran would be a “disaster,” as would a military collision with Iran. He then noted that there are two ways to approach negotiations: The first is to design the negotiation to fail, and to make Iran appear to blame. This would be achieved by setting preconditions, threatening with sanctions and force, calling for regime change and labeling the Iranian government as a “terrorist entity.” The second approach to negotiation is to, “Seek to engage the Iran in a process in which there emerges the possibility of some consentual arrangement.”
Gen. Scowcroft stated that the real threat from a nuclear Iran is the road to nuclear dissemination in the region. If Iran gets nuclear capability, Turkey, Egypt and other countries in the region will want to follow suit. He noted that in the past, the U.S. and even Israel have had good relations with Iran, and it is important not to view the current situation as permanent. When asked if he thought that negotiations would actually work, he stated, “It seems to me that it is worth a try because in the process of trying, if the United States is really sincere, we are likely to get on board people who suspect now who say we’re sitting off in the corner throwing rocks at them and asking for sanctions; not trying to solve the problem.”
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) concluded the hearing with the sentiment of productive negotiations, stating, “We’ve got to be smart, restrained, thoughtful and skilled in our diplomacy so that we have an opportunity to really pursue every avenue with the greatest potential for success.”
Dr. Brzezinski stated in his testimony that a nuclear Iran would be a “disaster,” as would a military collision with Iran. He then noted that there are two ways to approach negotiations: The first is to design the negotiation to fail, and to make Iran appear to blame. This would be achieved by setting preconditions, threatening with sanctions and force, calling for regime change and labeling the Iranian government as a “terrorist entity.” The second approach to negotiation is to, “Seek to engage the Iran in a process in which there emerges the possibility of some consentual arrangement.”
Gen. Scowcroft stated that the real threat from a nuclear Iran is the road to nuclear dissemination in the region. If Iran gets nuclear capability, Turkey, Egypt and other countries in the region will want to follow suit. He noted that in the past, the U.S. and even Israel have had good relations with Iran, and it is important not to view the current situation as permanent. When asked if he thought that negotiations would actually work, he stated, “It seems to me that it is worth a try because in the process of trying, if the United States is really sincere, we are likely to get on board people who suspect now who say we’re sitting off in the corner throwing rocks at them and asking for sanctions; not trying to solve the problem.”
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) concluded the hearing with the sentiment of productive negotiations, stating, “We’ve got to be smart, restrained, thoughtful and skilled in our diplomacy so that we have an opportunity to really pursue every avenue with the greatest potential for success.”
Reader Comments