President George W. Bush has always claimed he can recognize and defeat threats more effectively than his political rivals. Unfortunately, he has yet to succeed on the latter and tends to bungle the former. Now the United States faces another—potentially more important— threat in Iran, and the government needs to learn from past mistakes and negotiate effectively. Georgetown students should seize this opportunity to engage in America’s post-9/11 foreign policy.
Iran’s recent decision to unseal its nuclear fuel production facilities has sent diplomats scrambling for a response and put the “axis of evil” state back on newspaper front pages. As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice meets with foreign ministers from Russia, China and the EU-3 (France, Britain and Germany) in London on Monday to prepare a united front for the meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency early next month, it is important for our country to weigh its options.
Historically, our Iranian diplomacy has not been judicious. Writing Tuesday in The New York Times, former National Security Council Senior Director Flynt Leverett revealed three failures to act: Following 9/11, an overture from Iran to assist in the U.S.’s War in Afghanistan was rebuffed when the President denounced Iran as a member of the “Axis of Evil” in his 2002 State of the Union address; a full-fledged proposal for bilateral negotiations was ignored in 2003; and the U.S. refused to join a 2003 initiative between the EU and Iran to resolve nuclear disagreements, causing its failure.
Since appeasing states who routinely violate the human rights of their citizens is never an appropriate course of action, engagement is the best way to bring an end to these violations. While it would be proper to support military force as an option to stop an imminent threat to the United States, it is clear that our military currently lacks the resources available to engage Iran. Even an Osirak-style bombing campaign—reminiscent of Israel’s decision to destroy Iraq’s nascent nuclear program—could not ensure the end of nuclear testing and would only hurt our already damaged credibility in the region.
It has become apparent that it is necessary for the U.S. to commit seriously to multi-lateral negotiations at the side of the EU-3. Now, Russia is suggesting that it can manufacture the nuclear fuel safely for Iran if the enrichment stops. The U.S. officials have said they will bring the matter before the U.N. Security Council and impose sanctions if progress is not made soon. School of Foreign Service Dean Peter Krogh recently told The Voice that he believed it was time for the next generation to think seriously about how the U.S. should relate to the rest of the world, and this is our opportunity. Students should urge the president to deal with the Iran threat soon, remembering that engagement is better than inaction.
