USA*Engage Commends Iraq Study Group Recommendations to Engage Iran

Washington, D.C. – USA*Engage today commended the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group to constructively engage Iran as part of a broader Iraq strategy.

“Isolation has rarely proved to be effective in changing the behavior of other governments. The Iraq Study Group report is further evidence that dialogue with the Iranian regime, however limited, is vitally important to U.S. national and security interests,” said Jake Colvin, Director of USA*Engage. “Not talking simply limits your options. Dialogue is not going to be a silver bullet, but it’s a more constructive approach to a country like Iran.”

The Iraq Study Group is the latest in a series of important commissions and study groups to endorse dialogue with Iran. Others include:

• A 2004 report published by the Council on Foreign Relations, which was co-chaired by incoming Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Among other things, the report recommended that: “The United States should work with Tehran to capitalize on Iran’s influence to advance the stability and consolidation of its neighbors.” It went on to say that, “Small steps, such as the authorization of trade between U.S. entities and Iran’s relatively small private sector, should be contemplated as confidence-building measures that would create new constituencies within Iran for a government that is fully integrated into the international community.”

• A 2001 Atlantic Council of the United States Working Group, co-chaired by Lee H. Hamilton, James Schlesinger and Brent Scowcroft, in which NFTC’s Daniel O’Flaherty also participated. That report, which advocated for unilaterally “relaxing the economic sanctions currently in place against Iran,” also said that “The development of a U.S.-Iranian relationship characterized by all of the strands of normal interaction between nations would enable the United States to further its broader national interests.”

This organization is evidently the Ayatollahs' best buddy in the USA. Here is another recent release by them:

USA*Engage Urges Congress to Oppose New Unilateral Sanctions on Iran Date: 9/18/2006 Written By: Jennifer Cummings, The Fratelli Group, Tel: 202-822-9491 Coalition Cautions Against Undermining Multilateral Diplomatic Efforts

Washington, D.C. – USA*Engage and the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) today called on Congress to oppose new unilateral sanctions on Iran. In a letter, which was also signed by Business Roundtable, the Coalition for Employment through Exports and the U.S. Council for International Business, the groups warned that a new sanctions regime would limit the President’s ability to conduct foreign policy during a time of delicate international negotiations within the UN Security Council and with U.S. allies. The letter urged the Senate to reject any bills or language similar to that included in the Iran Freedom Support Act (H.R. 282/S. 333), which would impose new unilateral sanctions on Iran.

“While there is an urgent need to address the serious issues raised by the current regime in Iran, many of the proposed changes to the U.S. sanctions program are counterproductive and should be opposed,” the groups wrote. “At this time, new legislation would seriously damage the ongoing joint efforts to influence the Iranian regime, remove vital flexibility from the President and drive a wedge between the United States and our allies.”

In the letter, the groups expressed opposition to provisions included in H.R. 282 and S. 333, which would disrupt multilateral diplomacy by taking attention away from the behavior of the Iranian regime and instead inappropriately refocusing it on international business entities operating in Iran, crippling consensus building with important U.S. allies.

“Imposing tougher sanctions at this time would simply undermine current multilateral efforts,” said Bill Reinsch, President of the NFTC and USA*Engage Co-Chair. “New legislation that would adopt a unilateral approach would be counterproductive at this point and would diminish cooperation with our allies and within the UN Security Council.”

In June, USA*Engage commended the U.S. Senate for voting down an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 2007, which would have also imposed greater unilateral sanctions on Iran. That vote came days after Administration officials met with a group of Senators to discuss policy towards Iran. Following the defeat of the amendment, the Senate approved a resolution supporting the State Department’s diplomatic initiative regarding Iran to end the current impasse over Iran’s nuclear program.

Reinsch concluded, “We must give international negotiations their greatest chance to succeed. Congress should refrain from taking action that would disrupt this process.”

They're scorpions, it's what they do.

Absolute certainty: if we talk to Syria and Iran the Democrats will find few faults with any position of Syria or Iran but will condemn virtually every move by us, the MSM employees will scream the condemnations 24/7. It's what they do.

Wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats made an unequivocal agreement to explain to the American people just why Syria and Iran are being reasonable and we are not.

Scream your patented invectives at America, Democrats, but explain why. Is that asking too much? Fat chance.

Therefore the Administration should just say, No!

The Iraq Study Group recommends engaging Syria and Iran in diplomatic dialogue without preconditions. They contend both countries worry about a disintegrating Iraq destabilizing neighbors and the region. Also, Iran should appreciate political and economic agreement with U.S. as opposed to our current stance of regime change. Syria should appreciate our help for prospect of real, complete, secure peace with Israel.

Unfortunately, the U.S. cannot dictate adversary interests or require their tabling to begin discussions. Syria and Iran show little concern for destabilizing Iraq, when they continually supply combatants and military equipment to Ba’athist and al Qaeda terrorists. Iran sees no value in economic ties, when China and Japan demonstrate voracious appetites for any additional petroleum, chemicals or petrol-chemicals produced. Iranian political ties with China and Russia provide all the military equipment needed with no questions asked. Syria demonstrates disinterest in peace with Israel through ongoing support of Hezbollah, which is dedicated to Israel’s extinction.

Syria and Iran would exhibit self-interest, and obstinate adherence to traditional goals, because the U.S. opened vital national interests to re-interpretation. Iran seeks freedom from international coercion restraining development of nuclear weapons. Syria demands freedom to absorb Lebanon as a province, or at least, into its sphere of influence. The U.S. would offer neither compelling enticements, nor unanswerable force to support its positions.

Relating this proposal to personal experiences means facing the psychologically bloody conflict of vicious divorce proceedings without a lawyer, and dismissing Iraq Study Group visions of arduous marriage counseling sessions.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.