home > by publication type > daily analysis > Talking to Tehran
Email
| Author: |
|---|
President Ahmadinejad in front of a picture of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. (AP/Vahid Salemi)
As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama made talking to Tehran a feature of his foreign policy. Touting "tough, direct presidential diplomacy" to keep nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands, Obama vowed during his campaign to engage "without preconditions." But the Iranian response since election day has been more reticent than receptive. After a brief congratulatory letter from the Iranian president, the country's foreign ministry spokesman, Hasan Qashqavi, denounced America's "carrot-and-stick policy" on nuclear issues as "unacceptable and failed" (AP). State-run news outlets have kept up the criticism (IRNA) in the weeks since.
Obama's post-election interviews (NBC) make clear that after eight years of avoiding direct diplomacy, the United States is ready to talk with Iran's ruling mullahs. But whether Iran will listen to what Washington is pitching is another matter. Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argues that "successful engagement with Iran will require a direct channel of communication" with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, no small task given the Iranian regime's historic resentment of American policies. Yet as George Mason University scholar Jack Goldstone writes in a Dar al-Hayat, "Obama must not only signal his willingness to talk, but also a willingness to change U.S. policies." There is no shortage of opinion on what those policies should be.
CFR's Ray Takeyh, with Suzanne Maloney of the Brookings Institution, argues that Washington must "launch a comprehensive diplomatic initiative" that delinks the nuclear question (PDF) from the broader Iran policy playbook. Bilateral talks on Persian Gulf security, for instance, can proceed without uranium enrichment on the table, they suggest. Joshua Muravchik of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, meanwhile, places the onus on Iran's leaders (Daily Star). Muravchik argues Tehran must relinquish "its ambitions for regional dominance and global revolution" before reconciliation is possible. But Mark Fitzpatrick, an expert on Iran's nuclear program, offers a more aggressive strategy. In an International Institute for Strategic Studies briefing paper, Fitzpatrick suggests a dual-track approach with tougher threats-export controls and sanctions, for instance-coupled with U.S.-led engagement. "Deterrence policies were employed effectively during the Cold War against far more powerful opponents," Fitzpatrick writes.
Opinions inside Iran appear equally disjointed. While the Iranian public favors normalized U.S.-Iranian relations (Rooz), Iranian scholars and politicians are of two minds (IPS) on what the incoming U.S. administration will bring to the table. Iran insiders tell journalist Gareth Porter that while Obama's election appears to represent a fundamental shift in U.S. foreign policy, the president-elect's national security team-including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of State-seems to mean more of the same. Indeed, harsh words continue to emanate from Washington. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who accepted the president-elect's invitation to stay on as Pentagon chief, recently criticized Iran for its long-range missile program and meddling in Iraq. The latter rebuke came even as a U.S. military commander suggested Iranian support for Iraqi militants (LAT) has declined.
Prospects for a breakthrough via engagement may be ancillary to more fundamental realities inside Iran. A fall in oil prices has dramatically reduced Iran's regional leverage, and surging inflation, food prices, and unemployment could increase pressure for government reform (RFE/RL). Hossein Askari, an expert on Iran and business professor at George Washington University, argues that the Obama administration should capitalize on Tehran's economic hardships and "develop even more effective sanctions" to tighten the screws (National Interest). Then the new White House should wait-six to twelve months-before negotiating, Askari says. "Under duress, Iran is much less fanatical than rhetoric would have it seem." But as CFR President Richard N. Haass argues, time may not be on Obama's side. By January 20, "Iran will be pretty close to having produced enough enriched uranium that could make probably a primitive device," Haass says. "If you have an Iran and an Israel, each of which has a nuclear capability, think about what that would mean...for regional instability. The temptations to go first in such a situation would be enormous."
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
Explore international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation with a new interactive from CFR's program on International Institutions and Global Governance.
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.
In War of Necessity, War of Choice, Richard N. Haass contrasts the decisions that shaped the conduct of two wars between the United States and Iraq involving the two presidents Bush and Saddam Hussein, and writes an authoritative, personal account of how U.S. foreign policy is made, what it should seek, and how it should be pursued.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba’s unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
As Ray Takeyh shows in Guardians of the Revolution, behind the famous personalities and extremist slogans of Iran is a nation that is far more pragmatic—and complex—than many in the West have been led to believe.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
The Canadian oil sands present an important challenge to policymakers: they promise energy security benefits but present climate change problems. Michael A. Levi assesses the energy security and climate change effects of the oil sands and makes recommendations for U.S. policymakers within the context of broader bilateral relations with Canada.
This report explores an important element of the maritime policy regime: the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Author Scott G. Borgerson examines the international negotiations that led to the convention, the history of debates in the United States over whether to join it, and the strategic importance of the oceans for U.S. foreign policy today.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.