Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Rep. John Tierney (D-MA) are at the forefront of a bold new effort to pull US policy away from its belligerent stance towards Iran and to rally strong congressional support for President-elect Obama’s long-maintained preference for real diplomatic engagement with the Islamic Republic.
Yesterday, these two Congressional leaders and Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE) all appeared at an event held on Capitol Hill to launch a new Experts’ Statement that spells out in broad terms how a new policy of diplomatic engagement could be pursued and that– equally importantly– dispells some of the key “myths” that, being widespread especially on Capitol Hill, have served until now to blunt congressional support for engagement with Iran.
These are the five steps the Experts’ Statement urges:
- 1. Replace calls for regime change with a long-term strategy [that includes meaningful dialogue]
2. Support human rights through effective, international means [as opposed to unilateral, US-only means that seem to aim at regime change]
3. Allow Iran a place at the table – alongside other key states – in shaping the future of Iraq, Afghanistan and the region.
4. Address the nuclear issue within the context of a broader U.S.-Iran opening [rather than by maintaining “peremptory preconditions on dialogue.”]
5. Re-energize the Arab-Israeli peace process and act as an honest broker in that process [including, quite possibly, through “dealing, directly or indirectly, with Hamas and Hezbollah.”]
Among the 20 experts who issued the statement are veteran high-level diplomats Thomas Pickering and Jim Dobbins.*
At yesterday’s session, Dobbins appeared and talked very eloquently about the many helpful things the Iranian government did that enabled the early phases of the US war against the Taliban in 2001 to succeed. He knew– because he’d been completely involved in leading those efforts, including at the Bonn conference in December 2001.
Tierney and Specter also gave very effective and courageous presentations in support of the Experts’ Statement. Specter recalled that he has been a supporter of dialogue with Iran for a long time (“since long before Barack Obama became a U.S. Senator.”) Tierney stated outright that the policy of isolation and exclusion that the Bush administration has pursued toward Iran in recent years “has not worked,” and he quoted almost directly from the Experts’ Statement in several parts of his speech, expressing its sentiments as his own.
Carper was less impressive and courageous, doing much more to couch his words in terms that “all options must stay on the table”, etc etc. Still, he had agreed to host the gathering there in the Hart Senate Office Building, not far from his own office. And having it there did, of course, give the event and the Experts’ Statement additional standing among lawmakers.
This initiative has been extremely well timed. Though Obama has held fundamentally true to his insistence that, as President, he intends to undertake serious exploration of the possibilities for real diplomatic engagement with Iran, he will still require strong backing from Capitol Hill for this policy. And AIPAC, which has made the ratcheting up the level of threat, hysteria, and war-readiness against Iran the centerpiece of its advocacy for several years now, remains a very powerful player on Capitol Hill. Including, as we know, among the Democrats there…
So having Specter and Tierney so strongly on board the new “engage diplomatically with Iran” effort is extremely important. This is a movement that needs to continue to grow.
—
* Of course, it would be easier for this movement to grow if the “experts” whose names appeared on the statement were more gender-inclusive. Why only two women among the 20 people named as “validators” there? Why this ridiculous devaluing of the kind of contribution that a Nikki Keddie or a Farzaneh Milani– or a host of other distinguished women experts on Iran– could have brought to the project?
helena, here’s the Middle East Strategy at Harvard version of Strategic case for U.S.-Iran rapprochement
i like the timing of all this, lots of people weighing in anticipating the new administration.
The recent Russian intervention in Georgia has made an American rapprochement with Iran highly desirable both for the United States and for the West as a whole. Israel has long opposed such a rapprochement, but this would also serve its interests too. Here’s why:
Europe has become increasingly dependent on Russia for natural gas supplies, and this dependence is only likely to increase. This would not be undesirable, except that Moscow has shown a proclivity for cutting back or halting gas shipments to states with which it has disagreements. To prevent Russia from acquiring leverage over Europe through greater control over its gas imports, the United States and many European governments have sought alternative gas supplies from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan through pipeline routes bypassing Russia.
Iran has enormous natural gas reserves. Iran could also serve as an alternative pipeline route for Azeri and Turkmen gas for transshipment through Turkey to reach Europe. But Iranian-American hostility has resulted in Washington acting to block American and discourage other Western investment in this Iranian gas pipeline option in favor of a route through the South Caucasus…………
more at link..