In case you haven’t noticed, world power efforts to contain and diffuse Iran’s nuclear plans aren’t working and haven’t been for years. Even when limited progress was made, it has always been one step forward, two steps back— or more. But then again, that depends on what you mean by “progress” in the first place: for the US and its allies, as close to nuclear negligibility Iran can get; for Iran’s UN Security Council allies like China and Russia, as close to nuclear weapons capabilities as possible.
In other words, the nuclear standoff is just that, a standoff, and so what the parties involved (as well as the world) needs now are new legs to stand on. Here are five pragmatic steps that can be taken today that would lead to more constructive relations with Iran:
Step One: Initiate Direct Dialogue. One of the most detrimental Bush legacies vis-à-vis Iran is his refusal to talk to Iranian (or North Korean, or Iraqi) counterparts under any conditions. Obama pledged to open a direct line between Washington and Tehran, but like many of his pledges it has yet to materialize. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in the best position to lead the drive towards direct dialogue, without which any other steps seem futile.
Step Two: Distinguish Positions from Interests. To make immediate headway, professional negotiators often make the distinction between positions and interests. The standard example is two sisters who want to make juice and pulp pie from apples, respectively: their position is control over the apple, making compromise impossible; but by focusing on their interests, juice and pie, a settlement can be reached. Iran does not want nuclear capabilities for nuclear capabilities sake; it wants the energy, medical and yes (in)security that comes with nuclear capabilities. World powers just don’t want Iran to be able to fire a nuclear missile anywhere near them or their allies. Find ways to address interests, and positions will likely address themselves.
Step Three: Increase Incentives. For the past decade or so, world powers (individually and collectively through the UN Security Council) have imposed sanction upon sanction each time Iran has stepped up its enrichment or acquisition of nuclear material. Few diplomats if any have proposed, and none has effected, incentives for not stepping up and for stepping down. This gross negligence is usually knowingly done under the “posture” (ironically now the US’ official name for it) of not giving in to demands. Call it dangling a carrot or whatever you will, incentives and positive reinforcement work, and not using them doesn’t, as we know all too well.
Step Four: Decrease Sanctions. If incentives are successful, sanctions will become outdated and irrelevant; if the incentives fail, then they need to be renegotiated. In either case, the incremental decreasing of sanctions can be even more powerful than their imposition, and especially more so than their ratcheting up.
Step Five: Establish Mutually Beneficial Partnerships. With the preceding steps already taken, the icing on the cake so to speak would be the formation of partnerships that would continually measure, monitor and manage the interests at stake so as to avoid flaring up the positions. Doing so could take the form of regional energy, medical and security bodies in the Middle East that could form branches of global organizations that do the same. More likely, it would take the shape of bilateral or multilateral agreements and institutions. Either case would be a current event that would lead to a future where nuclear standoffs like this one are less likely.
