Experts Warn Against Engaging Iran

Annie Berman -- Talk Radio News Service

A number of foreign policy experts warned the House Foreign Relations Committee Wednesday against engaging Iran.

“We should not be thinking or talking about engagement yet, just as we didn’t want to intervene with Iran’s internal affairs after the election by forcefully coming out in favor of the opposition,” said Karim Sadjadpour, an assoicate from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace . “I think by prematurely engaging before the dust has settled in Tehran we may implicitly endorse these election results, demoralize the opposition and unwittingly tip the balance in favor of the hard-liners,” Sadjadpour said during hearing on U.S. foreign policy options concerning Iranian nuclear development and societal tensions between the Iranian people and the military government regime.

Dr. Suzanne Maloney, Senior Fellow at The Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institute, said that the US needs to adjust it’s assumptions about Iran and “[The U.S.] approach to dealing with concerns about Iranian policies.” Maloney also warned that once the US is engaged with Iran, it must be aware that Iranian government

“The US has to deal to deal with an increasingly paranoid and dogmatic Iranian regime, one that is preoccupied with a low-level popular insurgency and a schism among it’s leadership,” Maloney warned.

Congressman Dan Burton (R-Ind.) advocated applying sanctions against the country.

“We are sitting here talking. They are developing a nuclear weapons program...for almost two decades. They haven’t made any allusions about stopping [that nuclear program]...We’re messing around by waiting and not imposing sanctions today. Every day that we wait we are risking a major conflict over there,” said Burton.

Burton also believes that putting pressure on Iran’s government, rather than on the Iranian people, is the best form of foreign policy for this particular issue.

Wednesday’s hearing was held six weeks after the Iranian election results which sparked massive protests in Tehran.

Experts Support Obama’s Response to Contested Iranian Election

By Mariko Lamb- Talk Radio News Service

Nick Burns, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, countered critics who have described Obama’s response to the allegedly fraudulent election in Iran as overly passive. Instead, Burns said that Obama was “sensible” and “handled it superbly.”

Mounting evidence has suggested that the results of the recent Presidential election in Iran, which resulted in the apparent re-election of former President Ahmadinejad, suffered from fraud. The newly surfaced evidence includes: millions of extra ballots that were printed but unaccounted for, a refusal to use mandated see-through ballot boxes, a refusal to monitor ballots, and voting stations running out of ballots early despite being given an overabundance of blank ballots.

“I don’t have any doubt that it was a stolen election,” said speaker Abbas Milani, Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, in a discussion on the United States’ response to the Iranian elections Tuesday.

Karim Sadjadpour, former Chief Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, said the elections were fixed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini because “a Mousavi Presidency and an Obama Presidency at the same time would make it very clear to everyone that Ayatollah Khomeini is the impediment that is standing in the way of U.S.-Iran relations.”

Burns said, “[Obama] has been very thoughtful, measured--you’ve seen that his statements have become progressively stronger in line with events.” He continued to praise Obama for not “playing politics with the issue at home” and maintaining his focus on hopes of diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran instead of succumbing to domestic criticism.

Iranian Election Outcome Still Uncertain

By Courtney Costello-Talk Radio News Service

With the tenth Iranian Presidential election less than two weeks away, conversation is heating up as to whether sitting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will win a second term.

“No incumbent has ever lost a re-election campaign, but Ahmadinejad is indeed in real trouble.”, said Robin Wright, a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Ahmadinejad’s opponents in the presidential race include: former Iranian Prime Minister, Mir-Hossein Mousavi; former Speaker of the Parliament, Mehdi Karroubi and former Revolutionary Guard, Mohsen Rezaii.

According to recent polls Mousavi has the most support with a three to four percent lead in ten major Iranian cities, where seventy percent of Iran’s population lives.

Karim Sadjadpour, an associate at the Carnegie Endownment for International Peace said, “These elections in Iran are unfree, they’re unfair, [and] they’re unpredictable.”

Women are expected to have a large impact in the coming election, possibly due to a strong presence of Iranian women's rights activism.

“Women voters are increasingly voting independently. Women were a major factor in the election of Khatami and supporting the reformists,” Wright said.

On predictions for the forthcoming election, Sadjadpour said: “Judging by the last 30 years it usually takes 2 presidential terms for Iran to correct itself...So things may have to get worse before they get better.”

Obama should engage in multilateral talks with Iran

The National Iranian American Council held a discussion on “Can Obama Untangle the Iranian Challenge?” in which they discussed the past history of U.S.-Iranian relations and how the incoming administration could improve those relations. Three members of Congress, Chairman John Tierney (D-Mass.), Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Senator Thomas Carper (D-Del.), made appearances and gave speeches in support of the National Iranian American Council’s initiative.

Ambassador James Dobbins, former Assistant Secretary of State, spoke about how the Iranian government repeatedly tried to open up negotiations with the U.S. during the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but were given the cold shoulder by the Bush administration. Dobbins pointed out that the United States engages in discussions with other adversaries, but that they have made no effort to do so with Iran.

Iran doesn’t like the the “sticks and carrots” approach the U.S. practices, said Dr. Farideh Farhi of the University of Hawaii. The United States needs to accept that Iran’s foreign policy system is complex and that Iran’s political system is full of conflicts and competition between various factions, she said. Farhi continued, saying that the U.S. needs to stop thinking of Iran as if it is a unified body that can be controlled by a head.

Iran is “on a must-do list” for Obama, said Joseph Cirincione, President of Ploughshares Fund. Though Cirincione wanted to open up discussions, he emphasized that Obama should not rush into negotiations with Iran. Instead, he should wait to see the results 2009 elections in Iran. Cirincione also said the U.S. should engage in Iran multilaterally, pointing out the need for other countries in the Middle East to show respect for Iran. Holding multilateral talks was also necessary in the peace process for Israel and Palestine. “Not involving Iran guarantees failure” in the Israel-Palestine conflict, said Cirincione.