Apr

19

Plain Talking

April 19, 2006 |

Sometimes leadership is about staying the course. Sometimes it is about doing unpleasant but necessary things. Sometimes it is putting the proverbial cards on the table.

President Bush is in the midst of a second term slump. Down to his bedrock base in terms of American public opinion. Assorted semi-allies are not happy with Iran but are not willing to do much. The Middle East is showing signs of improvement but also signs of backsliding into the apocalyptic end of Islam. Iran is rattling a nuclear sabre and supporting some of the forces of chaos in Iraq and surrounding Israel.

There is very little doubt that the United States could, if it choose to, take out the Iranian nuclear program and most of the Revolutionary Guard. And it could do it alone and without nukes if it was willing to take the casualties. And there is little doubt that Bush’s approval rating would probably go up if such an adventure was undertaken.

The more interesting question - recognizing that the purely military option is on the table, is what else the Americans can do.

Pushing various resolutions through the UN is an option. But not a very good option given that the Russians and the Chinese are unlikely to agree to anything save limited sanctions when push comes to shove. Plus the Iranians have been playing the UN for years and, in the face of a concerted effort, might well agree to stop their disclosed programs for a while. This would, of course, leave a good deal of uncertainty as to what is going on in secret.

Building a consensus among the Euro allies and the Arab states certainly has some merit; but the question becomes “a consensus to do what?” Talking amoungst ourselves is not addressing the real issues which Iran presents.

An American President is not, however, without huge non-military resources. People take his calls. Now might be time to make one.

President Ahmadinejad of Iran has been very vocal promising the end of Israel, support for the Palestinians, an Iranian nuclear program and a host of other weapons. Many analysts see him as nothing more than a figurehead for the real masters of Iran, the radical Shi’ite clerics, and they may very well be right. Other analysts point out that he was fraudulently elected. And they may well be right. However, for the moment he is the President.

It may be time for President Bush to have a rather plain spoken, relatively public, conversation with President Ahmadinejad. Face to face. In Washington and at Camp David.

Talking points:

1. Nuclear Power and the control of enrichment processes
2. Nuclear Disclosure
3. The State of Israel and the need for a Palestinian state
4. Resumption of diplomatic relations
5. Respect for the soverignty of Iraq
6. Resumption of commercial relations
7. Terrorism

What is needed here is a combination of plainly stated positions and points on which compromise is possible. But what is also needed is for President Ahmadinejad and the people who surround him to understand very basic facts about this Administration and the people who are likely to form either a Republican or Democratic next administration.

While the bulk of the conversation would be President to President it would also make a good deal of sense for President Ahmadinejad to meet with the Clintons, John McCain, John Kerry and several other potential Presidents. Unscripted. (There is, after all, no sense in pretending that there are no disagreements in American politics.)

American Presidents don’t go into conversations with foreign leaders without managing expectations and this would be no different. The big difference would be that the expectations would be set very, very low. “A frank exchange of views” in diplo-speak. But a clear exchange and an opportunity for both sides to take the measure of the other.

While there are some risks associated with talking to Iran, those risks are trivial in comparison to invading Iran. More to the point, a blunt conversation making clear the Washington (and quiet European and Middle Eastern) consensus that a nuclear capable Iran is not going to be tolerated may give the ayatollahs pause. Especially if it is combined with a genuine offer to improve relations between the United States and Iran.

For the last quarter century much of Iran has seen America only within the caricature of “The Great Satan”. While a large Western influenced Iranian middle class rejects that caricature, for the poor, the ignorant and the hyper-religious there has been no other message.

Changing that message may be impossible; but that does not make the effort any less worthwhile. Moreover, while world opinion is not in the least important, a well made summit could shift that opinion dramatically.

If, as various analysts suggest, President Ahmadinejad’s anti-Israel, anti-American threats and nuclear claims are really about an appeal to Iranian nationalism, or if they are about President Ahmadinejad’s own sagging political support, a trip to the White House might well be in his interests as well.

Ultimately an American President’s real power lies in his capacity to achieve the ends of the American People. The ends of the American People in the Middle East are peace and prosperity for the region, the elimination of terrorism of all sorts and the emergence of an Islam which is tied to the twenty first rather than the thirteenth century. On the first two items Iran and its government could be very helpful. On the third, well, one theory is that as the region evolves so will the religion.

Sitting down with the titular President of Iran may not prevent war. It may not change the face of Iran or the Middle East. And it may not Winston Churchill, hardly a peacenik, said at a White House luncheon 1954, “To jaw jaw is always better than to war war.” It does not always work. It assumes a degree of rationality on the other side. But it is usually worth a try.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind