Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Navigation
home > by publication type > daily analysis > Taking Iran ‘Off the Table’
| Author: |
|---|
Democratic presidential hopefuls Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., pass each other during a break in a debate at Drexel University in Philadelphia.
Although Iraq was supposed to be the definitive issue for the 2008 campaign, from the outset Iran seemed to present the biggest national security test for all candidates. Republicans assured voters they were ready to take military action to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapons program, while top-tier Democratic candidates stressed military force could not be ruled out as a preventive tool.
But the December 3 release of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) indicating that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 forced the candidates to clarify their views. The biggest stir was among Democrats, where contenders who long trailed Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in the polls saw a chance to exploit her perceived hawkishness on Iran. While Clinton said she was “relieved” at the NIE’s findings, the report may have done more damage to her campaign than to any other. The barrage of criticism that followed her vote in favor of the Kyl-Lieberman resolution, a nonbinding Senate measure that designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a terrorist group, was just beginning to subside when the NIE catapulted the issue back into her opponents’ talking points. In the December 4 Democratic debate hosted by NPR, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) pointed to Clinton’s cautious language on Iran as indicative of what he believes are her true sentiments. Biden chided Clinton for merely opposing the “rush to war,” rather than coming out unequivocally against striking Iran.
Also in that debate, Clinton again had to go on the defensive with regard to her Kyl-Lieberman vote, insisting that the bill “did not in any way authorize the president to take any action that would lead to war.” She said as a result of labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization, “We've actually seen some changes in their behavior.” Clinton and her Democratic rivals all favor some form of expanded engagement with Iran, but in light of the new NIE they should clarify their “vague incrementalism,” write national security experts Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett in a New York Times op-ed.
On the Republican side, the outrage was directed at the report more than fellow candidates. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich claimed on ABC’s This Week that the NIE’s release was “the equivalent of a coup d'etat” by members of the intelligence community seeking to undermine the Bush administration. GOP candidates, with some exceptions, reaffirmed their skepticism toward the Ahmadinejad regime, and some even questioned the validity of the NIE. Rudy Giuliani said on Meet the Press that it does not eliminate the possibility of a preemptive strike on Iran. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) also said (Fox News) the NIE does not take military action against Iran “off the table.” McCain also stopped short, in an interview with CFR.org, of endorsing broader diplomatic talks with Iran. “I don’t want to give the president of Iran a forum to declare his rather radically extreme views particularly as regards to terrorism and the state of Israel is concerned,” he said.
Fred Thompson responded (Fox News) to news of the NIE with the greatest cynicism. “They're undoubtedly intent upon nuclear weapons. I don't care what this latest NIE says. That's foolishness that represents our own inability to get a handle on it more than anything else.” Mitt Romney was more cautious, calling (Fox News) the report’s findings “good news,” but asserting (Real Clear Politics) that Iran is still enriching uranium and should still be viewed as a threat.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
In Termites in the Trading System, Jagdish Bhagwati reveals how the rapid spread of preferential trade agreements endangers the world trading system.
America Between the Wars explores how the decisions and debates of the years between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Twin Towers shaped the events, arguments, and politics of the world we live in today.
In The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Noah Feldman tells the story behind the increasingly popular call for the establishment of the sharia—the law of the traditional Islamic state—in the modern Muslim world.
Complete list of CFR Books.
This report argues that the United States must lead with domestic action on climate change and proposes a U.S. negotiating strategy for a global UN climate agreement that includes commitments from all major economies, while also promoting a less formal Partnership for Climate Cooperation that would focus the world's largest emitters on implementing aggressive emissions reductions.
This Task Force report examines changes in Latin America and in U.S. influence there, while taking account of the region's enduring importance to the United States. The Task Force offers an agenda for U.S. policy toward Latin America and identifies four critical areas that should provide the basis of a new U.S. approach.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR.
This report outlines the nature of the challenges in Pakistan's tribal areas, formulates strategies for addressing those challenges, and distills the strategies into realistic policy proposals worthy of consideration by the incoming administration.
This report analyzes the debate over U.S. use of assurances against torture, explaining the contexts in which they are used, how they can be conveyed, and what they can contain, and recommends a number of ways to respond to criticism so that the United States can continue using assurances.
Complete list of Council Special Reports.
“The Next President:” Richard Holbrooke says the next U.S. president will inherit a more difficult set of international challenges than any predecessor since World War II.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1-212-434-9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
To request permission to reuse Council materials, please email publications@cfr.org or fax +1.212.434.9859.
Please include the complete information of the requested work—author, title, sections/pages to be copied or reprinted, and number of copies to be made—along with a brief description of where and how you would like to reuse the work.
You may also request permission for Council material through Copyright Clearance Center. For more information, please click on the link below.
Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
Copyright 2008 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
