Iran and the Middle East: How to Shape a Security Regime Acceptable to All Regional Actors

Continued...

On the nuclear issue, Ambassador Khazaee stressed that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful and under the full monitoring of the IAEA. He reiterated Iran’s commitment to its obligations under the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, the Nuclear Non–Proliferation Treaty, and the IAEA statute. As a result, the IAEA has repeatedly concluded that no indications of divergence have been observed in Iran’s nuclear activities.

The third question was posed to Flynt Leverett, who was asked how he would advise the next U.S. President on the issue of Iran. Tlili noted that he recently read, with great interest, Leverett’s December 11, 2007 article in the New York Times entitled “How to Diffuse Iran.” Tlili asked that Leverett elaborate on his proposal.

Leverett identified three points he would make to the next President of the United States.

First, any incoming president must understand that the Untied States needs a more positive and constructive relationship with Iran than that which presently exists. An improved U.S.–Iranian relationship is not only useful, but essential, especially given Iran’s influential role in Iraq and its importance to global energy security. Without a more cooperative relationship, the United States will be unable to solve its most serious challenges in the Middle East.

Second, in trying to put U.S.–Iranian relations on better footing, Iran must be treated as a mature state with legitimate interests of its own, rather than as a rogue state with threatening policies. There is no policy in this country of approaching Iran as a state with defined and legitimate interests and concerns, even if some of the Iranian regime’s tactical choices may be displeasing to U.S. policy–makers. The United States needs to recognize and work with legitimate Iranian interests if it is to improve its relationship with Iran.

Third, U.S.–Iranian relations must be improved comprehensively, not limited to specific issues of mutual interest. The United States’ history of tactical cooperation with Iran (i.e. over Bosnia, Afghanistan, etc.) has not, from an Iranian perspective, brought them much in return. Moments of issue–specific cooperation were not used by the U.S. as an opening for a broader strategic relationship. From an American perspective, Iran will be necessary to resolve many regional issues including Iraq, the nuclear issue, and, perhaps most importantly, the Palestinian–Israeli conflict.

Looking back in history, Leverett summoned the example of Nixon’s policy re–orientation toward China in the 1970s. He acknowledged that many differences exist between the two situations. Nevertheless, Nixon’s admission that the old American policy toward China was not working and that American interests along with regional stability would be best served by a new policy is something to learn from today.

After thanking Leverett for his policy prescriptions, Tlili turned to Dr. William Vendley for a perspective on the role of religion. Dr. Vendley was asked how religion, in general, can contribute to peace and security in the Middle East.

3 of 6 (next)>

Back to the top.