Check for web archive captures
Iran: What Next?
By maudeaster on 2015-10-24 11:01:03
The nuclear agreement with Iran is off to a good start. The US and Iranian parliaments approved the plan (as have the other
signatory powers whose approval seemed never in doubt). Iran is moving [caption id="attachment_7692" align="alignright"
INA Wy A)
width="223"]: wa » a Se IAEA Inspectors[/caption] quickly on its obligations. The International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced on October 16th that Iran has complied with its deadline for submitting
information on the history of its nuclear program as the agreement required. Earlier, in September, the IAEA endorsed
samples collected from an Iranian nuclear facility, confirming that video surveillance of the collection process and a
subsequent facility tour showed no violations of its standards. The vista of the agreement bringing lifted sanctions in the not
too distant future has excited Iranians eager for more involvement with the rest of the world, including importantly those
advocating more democracy. Other major economies, sadly with the exception so far of [caption id="attachment_7693"
align="alignright" width="300' af 0" German Delegation Visits Iran[/caption] he
US, are excited as well - eagerly sending delegations to Tehran to explore the trade and investment opportunities which will
be opened up by sanctions relief. My expectation is that it will not be long before US corporations are pressing Congress to
end the additional US trade restrictions which currently are preventing them from joining in. See US Should Forge
Economic Ties with Iran for a good analysis of this in The Hill. However, the successful conclusion of the Iran nuclear
agreement has the potential to benefit the US in multiple ways beyond the economy. For decades US foreign policy in the
Middle East has been shaped by hostility to Iran and an alliance with Saudi Arabia, no matter what terrible things the Saudis
have undertaken. The horrendous human toll of the current Saudi air campaign in Yemen is one example. Funding of
extremist Sunni opposition groups in Syria by the Riyadh government and by many Saudis privately is another example.
Over the years, the US has armed the Saudis to the teeth, with many of those weapons funneled by Riyadh into the area’s
conflict zones and now fallen into the hands of multiple warring parties. Hardly a recipe for peace making in Syria, Iraq and
Yemen US needs to re-balance its approach to the region based on the reality that Iran and Saudi Arabia are both strong
regional powers. Tehran has been in fact much strengthened by the US wars in Iran’s bordering states of Iraq and
Afghanistan. If there are going to be negotiated settlements to the existing regional crises, it will require that the US and
others encourage the Saudis and Iranians to shift [caption id="attachment_7694" align="alignright" width="313"]
bine Iran and Saudi Arabia[/caption] from their proxy battlefields to diplomacy.
Ending the fighting is the first step on a path to co-existence and regional development. What does this mean in terms of
choices right now for Washington policy makers? Here are 4 ideas: 1. If there is going to be a negotiated settlement to end
the bloodshed and destruction in Yemen, the US needs to stop supplying the Saudi coalition with military assistance and to
support Iran’s participation in Yemen peace talks, since Tehran has a relationship (although not as [caption
id="attachment_7695" align="alignright" width="240"] = “Yemen Being Destroyed by
War[/caption] a significant military supplier) to the Houthis. 2. In Syria, the US CIA should stop further inflaming the
situation by continuing to ship American weapons to the Saudis for covert distribution to multiple Syrian combatant groups.
The new Pentagon plan to surge weapons directly into the Syrian conflict should also be halted. Instead, the US should
prioritize securing negotiations on Syria involving Iran, Russia, and Turkey as well as the Saudis. The previous US
opposition to Iranian participation in talks on Syria was identified by the EU and the UN as a serious obstacle to negotiation
efforts to date. Right after the conclusion of the Iran nuclear talks, President Obama seemed to be shifting to support Iranian
participation in Syria negotiations — and with Russia now involved militarily, this is ever more urgent. 3. In Iraq, the US and
Iran may find they share a common interest in stabilizing Iraq through a negotiated settlement. There would be various
options for a resolution, with one possibility being a kind of partition, ceding part to the Islamic state (and focusing on
preventing its spread), while acknowledging Kurdish areas of control and supporting the role of the Baghdad government in
the remainder of the state. The US should be exploring with Iran and others all [caption id="attachment_7696"
align="alignright" width="266"| PM! War Toll on Civilians in Iraq[/caption] possible
paths to limiting the carnage and displacement of the current situation. 4. American and Iranian interests also coincide in
Afghanistan. A helpful New York Times piece on September 14, 2015 points out that Washington and Tehran both have
already been cooperating quietly on Afghanistan, and that “...both sides want to prevent a return of the Taliban and to block
Al Qaeda from re-establishing safe havens. And Tehran also worries intensely about the heavy flow of Afghan opium and
refugees into Iran which shares a long border with Afghanistan.” Instead of planning to extend the US military presence in
Afghanistan, an approach that has not worked for 14 years, Washington should be working with Iran and others to try to
stabilize the country through a negotiated settlement. With conflicts raging throughout the region, an important door has
been opened to allow the US to rethink its Middle East alliances. Please join me in leaving a message for President Obama
urging him [caption id="attachment_7697" align="alignright" width="242"] President
Obama|/caption] to take advantage of this opportunity for increased economic and diplomatic cooperation with Iran. Call
the White House comment line at 202-456-1111.
