How to Engage With Iran

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


President Obama has been preoccupied with Iraq, Afghanistan, and most recently North Korea, but his attention will soon inevitably turn to one of Washington’s greatest diplomatic wild cards: Iran. A new white paper (PDF) prepared by a group of former US ambassadors and progressive foreign policy experts urges the Obama administration not to succumb to hawks pushing an unduly harsh and counterproductive stance regarding Iran. At issue is how to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. In clear reference to Iraq invasion (remember those elusive WMDs Saddam was supposedly stockpiling?), the Iran Nuclear Policy Group warns, “publicly assuming the worst in the absence of evidence–and issuing an ultimatum based on that assumption–is a singularly bad idea.”

The Group instead suggests a three-part approach to the problem, emphasizing reliance on facts rather than hype (a novel idea), a clear expression of US foreign policy goals in a way that leaves Iran space to manuever and save face, and “true diplomacy” that emphasizes not “the bad things that American can do to Iran but… things that the United States can withhold,” namely foreign investment, diplomatic respect, and help developing Iran’s oil and gas sectors.

See the white paper for details on the group’s recommendations. Its conclusion, though, is clear in its criticism of past approaches and the resulting setbacks Washington has suffered:

For five years, efforts to coerce Iran to stop enriching and answer potentially embarrassing questions have failed. Sharpening the sticks and sweetening the carrots will not change that.

The current path leads only to a painful choice between escalating to armed conflict or backing down in embarrassment. A change of course is needed. We expect hardliners in Tehran will crow over any concession that opens the door to the possibility of enrichment in Iran. In diplomacy, as in war, however, a tactical shift to more defensible terrain is often the key to success.

What is needed now is a calm, firm, measured and principled response that clearly defines and protects U.S. vital interests; respects the rights and legitimate interests of Iran; and finds a way for Iran to accommodate U.S. core interests while also advancing its own. This statement has outlined the key elements of a diplomatic strategy that we believe meets these conditions and has the best chance of succeeding.

 

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest