Iran: Entainment -- A Way Forward
We are at a particularly sensitive, and difficult, stage with Iran, one that calls for a thoughtful, nuanced approach vice simply defaulting to policies of the past. So, where do we go from here?
We in the West, and particularly in the United States, feel compelled to honor the bravery and sacrifice of the Iranian people. And we should. But we must recognize their actions for what they are; an almost desperate effort to convince the ruling Islamic regime that what they are asking for is not inimical to a strong, independent and Islamic oriented Iran. In fact, their desire for freedom of expression and representative, accountable government is a sign of the very strength that all Iranians seek and potentially a natural progression to the path that the clerical regime itself has claimed it represents. These are of course ideals, and ideals often run smack up against the realities of power, money and narrow special interests. That is what is happening in Iran now. What we are seeing play out is not about religion. The Islamic wave that carried and supported the '79 revolution is largely spent. What we are seeing now in Iran is power politics at its most base and brutal. Religion has become at best a tool and at worst a weapon in the hands of those who hold power and a bludgeon to be used against those who seek to dilute the power of those at the top, or share more fairly in the enormous wealth of the Iranian nation. The "opposition", large numbers of whom are card carrying members of the Islamic regime from its very inception -- and many of whom literally sat at the feet of the Imam, Ayatollah Khomeini -- now appear to see a different road ahead, one that reintegrates Iran into the international community of nations and celebrates and promotes a proud and prosperous Iran. Their vision clashes with that of the ruling elite, one that includes elements of both the clerical and military establishments desperately fearing any change in the status quo, and they are paying a price for their presumption.
Yes, we must honor and recognize their efforts, but this is not our fight. As the ongoing "showtrials" clearly demonstrate, any attempt to too directly support or bolster the oppositions' efforts to challenge the regime merely plays into the hands of the hardliners by providing them with an even bigger stick with which to strike back. And, not once have they asked us to do so. Not once among the flood of videos, twitters or other messages coming out of Iran have we seen a plea for intercession or material support. They have asked only that we see and hear their struggle. In addition, we in the West must keep in mind several truths -- The fact is that the Iranian people participated in and brought about the revolution that overthrew the Shah. They did this because they were dissatisfied with what their leaders were doing, and not doing, on their behalf. So, they opted for change. True, the initial vision of many of a truly representative and responsive government, one that would work to realize the best possible future for all of its people, was highjacked early on and they are now living with the result, as have many revolutionary societies in history. At the same time, however, we must recognize that many in Iran are in fact far better off than they might have been otherwise. Education and literacy have increased dramatically, particularly among women; quality medical care is available throughout much of Iran; rural electrification and transportation is reaching areas as never before. And while many are struggling to make ends meet due to financial mismanagement and corruption, and a generally dysfunctional economic system, the vast majority have enough to eat. And they are proud of what they have accomplished. As a result, many Iranians are not so much looking for wholesale change as a natural evolution of the revolution they helped bring about. So,while they have realized the basics that most seek in their lives, as defined by Maslow's "Needs hierarchy" they now clearly seek more. And this is the rub. With this, you might say that the Islamic regime is to a degree a victim of its own success. Having lifted the overall level of living standards they are now forced to deal with the informed populace and raised expectations that naturally follow. And while the people are demanding that they do so this is something they must do on their own.
We can, however, help. We have tried the sanctions route. As a single threaded strategy it has proven largely ineffective and has in fact strengthened many of the very institutions we seek to weaken. Many among the ruling elite in fact seek to preserve the status quo of sanctions given the historical personal benefits they have seen. There have been some limited successes, U.S. Treasury actions for example, and following this strategy allows us to point to concrete steps aimed at confronting and mitigating Iranian mischief in the region. But an objective analysis of sanction's efficacy simply does not support continuing to rely on this course of action as the sole pillar of U.S. policy. Another simple truth is that the Islamic regime has proven itself to be too resilient and resourceful to be brought down via this route. And regardless of wishful thinking among some, barring a dramatic change in the international strategic landscape (read Russia and China) this is unlikely to change anytime soon. In order to have some chance of success we simply must continue to pursue some level of direct engagement. Politically, this is difficult, particularly given the appalling behavior of the regime in reaction to their botched handling of the Presidential election. It is also less satisfying to us in the West than an aggressive, can do -- or gotta do something/anything -- type of approach. But, it has become abundantly clear that our ability to positively influence events inside Iran from a distance is extremely limited. Lastly, based on the realities we are faced with, implementing an effective sanctions regime alone is simply not realistic and leads us into a trap that significantly limits our options by forcing us to rely overly on the good will of others, some of whom do not have the best interests of the U.S. at heart (again -- read Russia and China). Bottom line -- We need to put our Iran policy back in the hands of those who are best prepared to protect U.S. interests, Americans.
Let's not kid ourselves. There are no easy or quick fixes here. And at this point, given the intense historical distrust and fear of the U.S. by Iran's leadership, exacerbated by recent events, the hardest step of engagement will be the first. In addition, another hard truth -- the Iranian leadership simply does not believe it must engage with the U.S. in order to survive. Thus, like it or not, they will need to be convinced that it is to their overall advantage to do so, and not just ours. So, in all likelihood, and as distasteful as it may be, in order to move the process forward the U.S. will have to make the first move in order to demonstrate some level of good faith. This will place Iran's leadership in the position of having to respond to a concrete action vice a nebulous expression of intent. What does this all mean? Simply put, the only real chance for success in reaching out to Iran is to implement a carefully crafted strategy of engagement and containment. Call it a policy of "entainment," if you will. What would make this different from past efforts? It is clear that without the U.S. at the table the Iranians have little incentive to take either sanctions or engagement very seriously. But, with the U.S. directly involved, Iran's leadership will for the first time be able to truly measure the cons of continued containment versus the pros to be had via the adoption of a serious and comprehensive diplomatic relationship with the U.S. -- and the broad, tangible benefits that could ensue. And make no mistake about it -- we will need to clearly demonstrate that there are significant long term benefits to be had from unclenching the proverbial fist.
How to begin? The sanctions/containment component is largely already in place. Recent discussion of embargoing refined gasoline is unlikely to make any significant impact, particularly given the Iranian leadership's current focus on mitigating this strategic vulnerability. This clearly falls into the "gotta do something/anything" category. Better to focus initially on demonstrating that the U.S. is truly serious about developing a new relationship by implementing unilateral actions aimed at specific issues impacting Iran as a nation. An example of how to do this? The recent series of air crashes in Iran points to serious problems in this key sector. Part of this appears to be Iran's increasing reliance on Russian aircraft. If the U.S. were to relax sanctions specifically to allow Iran's airlines to improve maintenance and safety, and perhaps even purchase western aircraft, this would have an immediate and positive impact on all Iranians. Given the severity of the problem and the significant number of deaths that have already occurred, Iran's leadership would be hard pressed to simply reject this offer without looking even more petulant or uncaring than they already do to the Iranian populace. They would also be pressed to respond in some manner other than the deafening silence we have seen so far. For those that would point to the potential dual-use aspects involved -- there is that potential -- but that is the nature of compromise.
There are certainly other actions that could be taken but this is not the venue to explore them. In the end, the issue here is how to find a way forward out of the untenable and increasingly dangerous situation in which we currently find ourselves. For a variety of reasons we have been able to muddle through vis a vis Iran over the last 30 years. We no longer have this luxury. The accelerating Iranian nuclear program, and the alarm it is generating in the region and the west, is a game changer and must somehow be addressed. The worst case scenario is one in which we find ourselves facing a nuclear armed Iran convinced that its very survival is at stake. At best, we owe it to all concerned to find a way to re-integrate Iran back into the international community of nations. At a minimum, we must reach a Modus Vivendi that minimizes the risk of military confrontation, the results of which would be catastrophic.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Mr. Fowler. This is for you.
The Iran Human Rights Documentation Center believes that the development of an accountability movement and a culture of human rights in Iran are crucial to the long-term peace and security of the country and the Middle East region. As numerous examples have illustrated, the removal of an authoritarian regime does not necessarily lead to an improved human rights situation if institutions and civil society are weak, or if a culture of human rights and democratic governance has not been cultivated. By providing Iranians with comprehensive human rights reports, data about past and present human rights violations and information about international human rights standards, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the IHRDC programs will strengthen Iranians’ ability to demand accountability, reform public institutions, and promote transparency and respect for human rights. Encouraging a culture of human rights within Iranian society as a whole will allow political and legal reforms to have real and lasting weight.
http://www
Very interesting article.
Ultimately, I believe that the Islamic Republic of Iran will be compliant and cooperative only if their security concerns are addressed and if their regional status is acknowledged and respected by the West.
US policy toward Iran should be in the interests of the US citizens. It should be devised and implemented by people with undivided loyalty to the US citizenry. Enough of the tail wagging the dog.
Alas, economics does dictate your politics. Just a shame on your humanity though.
People please wake up. Your pockets will be more enriched if you have a legitimate regime in Iran not a bloody mullah regime which has lost its last ounce of legitimacy. Remember the losses incurred in aftermath of 1979 Iran revolution when you were on wrong side? You want that to be repeated?
I trust that when you think this through you will notice that the greatest asset you have is an Iranian populace that has risen against the clerical regime and you should chart a sensible strategy not to obstruct that movement. Just keep out of its way and don't shake bloody fist in Tehran.
Thank you Jubin. Cuddling another dictator in the ME will only be a temporary reprieve. How many times do we have to repeat the same mistake before we learn.
Iranian people have spoken and don't need US interference again in the quest for freedom.
See Pye Ian's Profile
Great proposal by Mr. Fowler involving commercial engagement with Iran's aviation sector. Yet he, and we, shouldn't stop there. As I've written before, the US should lift sanctions and engage economically with Iran in the energy, biomedical, agricultural, textile, nuclear development and environmen
Also, it's no use using words like "containment" anymore. Anywhere. It won't work. By the way Iran has married Russia, China, South American states and members of the SCO, it is clear that our efforts at containment and sanctions won't scratch the surface.
Also, considering both a) the increasingly precarious state of the US Dollar (and in turn, the petro-dollar), and b) the schemes for circumventing US/UK fiscal control of energy pricing/trading by Iran, Russia and others, it is clear that we need Iran much more than Iran needs us.
Let's start engaging Iran like we do India and other allies - economically and politically. It will serve US strategic interests incalculably, and benefit the majority population of Iran to the point where reforms will become unavoidable.
Economics dictates politics.
Let's hope the Iranian hardliners are open to normalization of relationship with the US. If history is any indication, I highly doubt it.
Hardliners on boths sides oppose engagement -- all the more reason for it.
I meant to post this in reply to Pye Ian but it went into wrong thread. So I am posting again just in case.
Alas, economics does dictate your politics. Just a shame on your humanity though.
People please wake up. Your pockets will be more enriched if you have a legitimate regime in Iran not a bloody mullah regime which has lost its last ounce of legitimacy. Remember the losses incurred in aftermath of 1979 Iran revolution when you were on wrong side? You want that to be repeated?
I trust that when you think this through you will notice that the greatest asset you have is an Iranian populace that has risen against the clerical regime and you should chart a sensible strategy not to obstruct that movement. Just keep out of its way and don't shake bloody fist in Tehran.
See Pye Ian's Profile
Jubin,
ANY regime in Iran would be a contentious one, whether a monarchy, theocracy, or parliamentarian. Iranians/Persians are a patriarchical people who naturally favor being led by strongmen. Visions of Iran imminently turning into a Greek-inspired Democracy are AN ILLUSION.
Where is the regime change you were promised?!? Hmmm? Ban Ki Moon at the UN recently congratulated Ahmadinejad, and the Obama admin. is planning on engaging his government soon. I sense the 'waking up' is necessary in your expatriate camp, which refuses to acknowledge political realities.
Mr. Fowler:
The US should consider nuclear-armed Iran as a forgone conclusion. They probably have a few stashed.
So, what to do now?
What US does not understand is the fact that the hardliners in the Islamic coached by Putin et al are not interested in raproachment with the US. They would feign a conciliatory posture only to buy more time.
Now, who are the hardliners and those who are in charge of 2/3 of the economy? What drives them beside power and wealth? What are the short- and long-term goals? What was Khomeini's vision for his revolution? (see his book Islamic Rule or Islamic Government Not Islamic Republic)
Cuddling Ahmadinejad and IRGC inc. will lead to a catastrophic war in the next decade. Short-temr gains might be achieved but in the long term they will prove very costly.
Sanctions as you put it will only entrench the IRGC further in cosolidiating it's military and economic powers.
In regards to spare parts for airplanes, I agree, the sanctions should be lifted. However, the reason for not buying safer planes and not maintaing safety standards is pure greed. The Islamic Republic just does not care...
The IR can purchase Boeing and/or Airbus equipment (aircraft and parts) so long as the planes are at least 6 years old,
Read the article below and the comments:
http://www
And if you read the comments to the article you cited, you'll see that ICAO has criticized the US for violating international law by refusing to provide IRan with the spare parts and maintenance required to operate its US-made jets.
I think you were refuted once on that site. No need to rehash things over here.
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
Let us look outside this box (USA-Iran foreign policy) we have forced ourselves into during this last 30 years.
Mr. Mark Fowler states: "In the end, the issue here is how to find a way forward out of the untenable and increasingly dangerous situation in which we currently find ourselves. For a variety of reasons we have been able to muddle through vis a vis Iran over the last 30 years." We have a window of opportunity to establish with the younger Iranian population through simple common sense steps, such as those identified by Mr. Fowler "... to allow Iran's airlines to improve maintenance and safety, and perhaps even purchase western aircraft, this would have an immediate and positive impact on all Iranians."
Our past political mistakes, and financial burdens we have placed on the Iranian people will not advance our long term American interests. To assist the Progressive movement in Iran, allow a greater exchange between the two societies, remove the burdens placed on the Iranian people by economic sanctions and restrictions. It is foolish to punish the people for our disagreements with their government. By removing the burden, we allow shift within the internal Iranian policy from Traditionalists toward the Progressives. The recent events during the election in Iran points to a dynamic population capable to resolve their own internal political differences, if not now, but in the near future.
Let us look outside this box (USA-Iran foreign policy) we have forced ourselves into during this last 30 years.
Mr. Mark Fowler states: "In the end, the issue here is how to find a way forward out of the untenable and increasingly dangerous situation in which we currently find ourselves. For a variety of reasons we have been able to muddle through vis a vis Iran over the last 30 years." We have a window of opportunity to establsih with the younger Iranian population through simple common sense steps such identified by Mr. Fowler "... to allow Iran's airlines to improve maintenance and safety, and perhaps even purchase western aircraft, this would have an immediate and positive impact on all Iranians."
Our past political mistakes, and financial burdens we have placed on the Iranian people will not advance our long term American interests. To assist the Progressive movement in Iran, allow a greater exchange between the two societies, remove the burdens placed on the Iranian people by economic sanctions and restrictions. It is foolish to punish the people for our disagreements with their government. By removing the burden, we allow shift within the internal Iranian policy from Traditionalists toward the Progressives. The recent events during the election in Iran points to a dynamic population capable to resolve their own internal political differences, if not now, but in the near future.
It is good to see a sensible individual, Mr. Fowler, which used to work for the CIA and was smart enough to retire as an Officer and to show this sort of open minded approach toward this issue.
I am generally happy with your assessment and proposal to engage Iran and the current Iranian government on the economic side and related issues that they feel was imposed on them illegally and unjustly.
The previous illegal sanctions that were imposed on Iran has caused great damage to the Iranian perception of the West intentions. The reversal of those sanction will have the favorable effect, which is the reversal of the Iranian diplomacy, or to "Unclench" their feast.
Iranian have shown great deal of desire to have a normal relation with US, however its been the belligerent attitude of the our government and the negative Zionist influence that has put us into this morass.
Our current president has the fortitude and the courage to pull us out of this mess and to put us back in a position that the Iranian can show more cooperation and friendship toward US. They even showed that during the Bush administration, but they were put on the AXIS of EVIL.
We have to give the Iranian a chance to trust us and it is my judgment that we owe that much after what we have put them through since 1953.
The same Iranian people massively support their nuclear program and have a history of deeply resenting foreign powers that tried to sanction/b
Irans living standards may have been improved by some metrics during this regime. But one could make the same argument about Russia during the Stalin era.
The IRI's 30 year resume includes over 100,000 political executions, assasinations, torture and rape of prisoners, execution of minors, stoning of women. And you want to integrate this regime into the world community? Now that's an ex-CIA officer talking.
Iranians distrust of the U.S. is exactly because you supported another abhorrent dictatorship before the revolution and turned a blind eye to our peoples suffering. My parents generation still bear a grudge about this. But by cutting deals with the IRI you will also turn my generation of pro-western liberals into distrustful skeptics. We do not want to become another Saudi Arabia.
We do not want interference. We want firm moral support as our people risk and lose their lives standing up to these thugs. We want to know that our people have not been forgotten because this has left the front page news. We want this regime to be recognized for what it is - an undemocratic, backward, oppressive dictatorship. "Marg bar diktator".
Iran's regime, for all of its faults, is far ahead of many other countries that are part of the "world community" which are close US allies too. The US is not the guardian of the gates to the world community.
Living standards have improved by pretty much all metrics. The average Iranian lives longer than ever, has far better access to medical care, educational opportunities, clean water, electricity, and women in particular have had tremendous gains in literacy. Infant and child mortality rates have decreased, and child immunization rates are over 95%.
And actually, when it comes to "execution of minors" the world leader until 2005 was the United States. It was only in 2005 that the US Supreme Court outlawed the practice, but it may be back since all of the conservative justices voted in favor of the practice.
Please provide those metrics and figures. IRI's sources published by the state officials do not count. They are often manufactured and not allowed to be verified.
Hass, I dare you to write your post as a blog in the Iranian.co
The author is right, to many Iranians "it" isn't about religion, but to many other Iranians it is ALL about religion.
Some are crying for a separation of mosque and state, others want the mullahs to go and take their Arab religion with them.
At the time of the election the people might have been contented to have Mousavi in office allowing more personal freedoms and other slow, gradual change, but after the horror of the past two months, they are angry and now demand more.
Here is a fascinating new article on Ahmad Kasravi, one of the most prolific intellectuals of modern Iran: http://ira
Nothing more pleasent than a good hard cold look at interests from a CIA hand. Okay, we understand that democracy in Iran is not US business and you believe US should be more interested in avoiding a dangerous nuclear armed regime and becoming cozy friends with the mullahs. But listen, democracy has never been US business in Iran, remember 1953? Or maybe this is the real problem? Ah, no, it couldn't be. The Iranian people will probably forget that the US is treacherous, that it screwed then in 1953, in 1979 and now in 2009-10. Or maybe they won't. What do you think?
Actually, Mr. Fowler, your CIA training and mentality puts you at a loss of understanding the real Iran or even US interests in that region. Look at the record. Better wake up and understand that only by not obstructing the Iranian people's will for democratic change can the US earn good will in this strategic opportunity with a stragregic asset which is the Iranian public opinion. Don't shake the mullahs bloody hands.... It is not in US interests at all.
Most Iranians want to improve US Iran ties, and the only people who are against it (and screaming "appeasement") are people who have neither the interests of the IRanians nor the Americans at heart.
Most Iranians' first priority is to achieve a democratic system of government and end clerical dictatorship and that's Iranian interests at heart. In fact, it happens to be US interests too if you could only see beyond your nose. Improving US Iran ties comes after this. If you can't see this then you have the same tunnel vision as the folks who brought us 1953.
Mr. Fowler it is very easy to understand Iran’s US policy all you need just to read Mr. Khamenai’s Lips when he responded to Mr. Obama’s new year greeting to Iranians he clearly said “ if you change we will change “ But later after the June elections seeing the green fallow up to Georgia’s rose revolution and the various other color revolution in just recent years he understood you are not changing the only thing you have tried to change is the regime he heads so as you summed up don’t bother with how to bring Iran to the table Iran will do fine without US as it has in past. Instead please mind Honduras and tell us whether the Jinni is allowed back in the bottle or he has to be hiking between Central American states.
Mr. Fowler misanalyses Iran's political failures and misprescribes a false remedy. Iranians have featured a sophisticated political culture since the 1906 constituional revolution that he conveniently ignores. That democratic culture was thwarted by the CIA in collaboration with the U.K. by overthrowing popularly elected Prime Minister Mossadeq in 1953, which interrupted Iran's democratic trajectory.
Contrary to Fowler, the current regime has been a spectacular failure. Unemployment is staggering, inflation is soaring, drug abuse is climbing, and shortages are widespread. Despite it's vast oil and gas production Iran is forced to import refined products because it is unable to maintain and operate any sophisticated domestic refineries. Productive and educated Iranians have fled to Dubai and Europe to find jobs in their specialties in lieu of working in manual or other occupations to enrich the corrupt regime.
The bleak economic conditions in Iran explain why the regime is fearful of the increased labor union membership like the Polish Communist government was fearful of Solidarity.
Mr. Fowler misinterprets the silence of brave Iranians craving democratic freedoms. The reason for the silence is a well- founded fear that open requests for help from the West would be answered by brutal punishment inflicted by the regime. Who can doubt that the Iranians protestors would welcome assistance from the West in establishing intramural communications networks that would evade government blocking.
Finally, Mr. Fowler's remedy is appeasement of the regime through the sale of passenger aircraft parts. That tactic was tried before at Munich in 1938.
The point is that despite all that you say--there is still little the US can do about it. You do realize we are still stuck in our last attempt at "regime change" in Iraq?
This is not Munich, and I am so sick of those stupid comparisons. The lessons of Munich apply obliquely at best to Iran. This is not appeasement.
Change for Iran must come from Iranians--foreign intervention and manipulation will just be putting the last two centuries of Iranian history through another spin cycle, with no clear chance for a better result.
Actually Iran's economy is doing well.
According to the US Institute of Peace:
[T]he belief that Iran suffers from dire economic conditions is one of four myths circulating about Iran's macroeconomic performance. Iran's economy has actually performed well in aggregate terms, with a moderate rate of growth in the last ten to fifteen years, including healthy GDP and per capita growth in investment. In the last three years, Iran's actual growth rate has averaged 5.8 percent...
http://www
Where did the US Institute of Peace get those figures from?? The Islamic Republic Officials, right???LOL
Right. The world economic consensus means nothing because some web sites are fearless of losing their credibility by proclaiming IRI's economy sound. And the show trials are justice. And the election was valid. And Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
