December 3, 2007
An end to problems with Iran? Well, not quite..
For months now, Iran’s nuclear program has been the looming foreign policy crisis, second only to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Today there appeared to be a bit of a respite, as CNN reports:
Iran halted work toward a nuclear weapon under international scrutiny in 2003 and is unlikely to be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb until 2010 to 2015, a U.S. intelligence report says. --CNN
Does this mean the end of tensions with Iran? As the people in the Hertz car rental commercials always say, not exactly. Iran will still have the capacity to make nuclear weapons over the long haul---whether or not it chooses to do so.
Some members of Congress, like Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Joe Biden, have called on the Bush Administration to seize this relaxation of the tensions to step up diplomacy. The Bush Administration has thus far refused to talk to Iran, preferring a hardline stance to a more nuanced diplomatic approach. (Bush, in fact, has somewhat proudly declared that he "doesn’t do subtle.")
Well, that is no way for the leader of the free world to address a complex situation like our troubles with Iran. Presidents of both parties have proven that diplomacy requires the commander in chief to “do subtle.” Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan, and others knew that sometimes we have to talk to people we don’t like, don’t trust, and would prefer to banish to say---the far side of the solar system. Mr. Bush, it is time to “do subtle” in our relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran. This doesn’t mean giving the farm to the Iranians, but nor does it mean refusing to talk to Tehran.
