Political Advisor to the President

Political Advisor to the President on Iran Policies

Defining the Issue

Over the last several years, the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions has been continually facing a number of different starts and stops. Part of the reason for this, is because of the country's insistence, on developing nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Yet, the rhetoric from various leaders has called for the destruction of Israel and America. As the Secretary of State, the big challenge going forward is to offer Iran encouragement, to engage in constructive talks with the world about abandoning such ambitions. Where, various incentives have been offered to halt the enrichment of uranium. However, at some point later on, these activities continue, creating more uncertainty. As a result, the central questions that need to be addressed by the group include:

Is there a way of allowing Iran to have a peaceful program and satisfy the concerns of the world community?

Can direct negotiations and relations with the U.S. have an impact on improving communication?

Goals

The main goals for addressing this issue are: to improve relations between the United States and Iran, establish open communication, to bridge any kind of difference between the two sides and persuade Iran to take a different course of action (in one way or another). The priorities should be: to improve communication and establish confidence building measures going forward. The goals that are negotiable include: improving relations and bridging differences between the two sides. The different objectives that are not negotiable include: persuading Iran to take a different course of action. (Sick)

Policy Options

If communication and the underlying relationship are not improving, it is a sign that Iran is not going into the negotiations with the intention of not resolving the issue. Once this occurs, it means that bridging any kind of differences and persuading Iran to change their behavior have been reduced. As diplomacy has failed to yield the desired results; setting the stage for alternative choices to be utilized.

An alternative course of actions that could be considered is the possibility of military action against the Islamic Republic. This should be the very last option that is used, only after all efforts of diplomacy have failed. The problem is: that it is difficult to tell when a change in strategies is needed. As various intelligence agencies believe that they are developing nuclear weapons, but they are unsure. A good example of this can be seen by looking no further than, comments from Dennis Blair (the Director of National Intelligence). Who said, "Although we do not know whether Iran currently intends to develop nuclear weapons, we assess Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop them." ("2007 Iran National Intelligence Estimate ") This is significant, because it shows the challenges when using alternative policy options, as you do not know when diplomacy has failed. Where, the inability of intelligence agencies to understand the ambitions of the Islamic Republic, are making diplomacy more difficult. This is because no one can be able to confirm the intentions of the Iranians. If more specific information could be provided, it would help to establish a foundation, as to the overall scope and nature of their nuclear program. (Podherdtz)

Recommendations