Gemunder Center in the Washington Post
What now on Iran?
By Jennifer Rubin – The Washington Post
July 18, 2014
For those who realize that the gravest national security threat is not global warming but an Iranian nuclear-threshold state, this is a critical time. Secretary of State John Kerry is pleading for more time, but time is not on our side. Former CIA director Michael Hayden and former senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) explained in an op-ed yesterday:
What now on Iran?
By Jennifer Rubin – The Washington Post
July 18, 2014
For those who realize that the gravest national security threat is not global warming but an Iranian nuclear-threshold state, this is a critical time. Secretary of State John Kerry is pleading for more time, but time is not on our side. Former CIA director Michael Hayden and former senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) explained in an op-ed yesterday:
There are also great dangers if the interim agreement under the Joint Plan of Action is succeeded by another interim agreement or even if the current negotiating window is extended by another six months. The administration will be sorely tempted to let negotiations continue to drag on, hoping that the Iranians will relent and drop their resistance to any meaningful rollback of their nuclear program. But the current lull during the “freeze” on Iranian nuclear development limits only some nuclear activities; the Iranians continue to build other essential elements, such as improving the efficiency of centrifuges. As centrifuge-enrichment capacity increases, Tehran’s ability to construct clandestine enrichment sites alarmingly grows. (The lull also has let the Iranian economy improve; inflation is down and their currency has strengthened, further reducing our leverage.) Time is not on our side.
If the White House’s philosophy is that we can never increase our leverage or walk away from the table, then we will have effectively adopted a containment policy (although we don’t contain Iran anywhere in the Middle East these days).
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, raised this same concern after a briefing, telling the media: “I had a long conversation yesterday with our lead negotiator. I shared the same concerns, that I just feel the moment slipping away from us. I think all of us want to see a diplomatic solution. I don’t think there is anybody on this floor that wants to see anything less than a great result diplomatically. We are losing our leverage. Time is slipping away. The coalition is dissipating.” He’s right about that, especially given the economic recovery that Iran is making thanks to sanctions relief.
What is to be done? Kerry, frankly, can keep talking as long as he likes, but what is key is what we do to make those negotiations more effective and to stop a de facto containment policy from taking hold. JINSA, a pro-Israel foreign policy group, is out with a new Iran task force report. Co-authored by Dennis Ross, the president’s former Iran adviser, it contains important counsel for lawmakers and the White House:
While the impact of the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) on Iran’s calculus can be debated, the Iranian leadership today appears to be under less compulsion to compromise now than at the outset of the JPA interim period on January 20, leaving wide gaps between the two sides on the parameters for a comprehensive settlement. These gaps must be overcome quickly to secure a peaceful negotiated solution that prevents Iran from attaining nuclear weapons capability.
To achieve this, U.S. diplomatic engagement must be accompanied by greater pressure.
Iranian concessions will only come if Tehran believes it has more to lose than its counterparts, should negotiations fail. To peacefully prevent a nuclear Iran, American policymakers must use all available instruments of coercive diplomacy to restore credibility to their mantra that the United States is keeping all options on the table. They must do this promptly and resolutely.