Iran
In Iran, Outcomes or Outcry?
February 7, 2012
Reporting that Israel is considering military strikes against Iran this spring, and continued calls from some conservatives for the U.S. to take military action have brought strong responses, including from former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rogers and even Iranian opposition figures. These diverse figures – along with a range of bipartisan [...]
Heather Hurlburt Discusses Iran, Syria, And The Responsibility To Protect With Robert Farley On Bloggingheads
February 3, 2012
Heather Hurlburt and Rob Farley discuss the tightening sanctions on Iran, the situation in Syria, and some problems regarding the “Responsibility to Protect.” For the original piece, click here.
Heather Hurlburt Cited On ThinkProgress on Guide to Not Attacking Iran
February 1, 2012
As a useful guide by the National Security Network’s Heather Hurlbert shows, a trio of elite opinion-makers buttressed that view with pieces on Monday.
“A Rare Period of Momentum and International Unity Regarding Iran”
January 31, 2012
As International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors visit Iran, and Tehran considers a return to the negotiating table, this week gives hints of a window of opportunity for diplomacy to defuse tensions and resolve the crisis. Security leaders and experts from the U.S. and Israel continue to speak out in growing numbers about the need [...]
Heather Hurlburt Cited In The Atlantic On Iran
January 30, 2012
For background reading right now, this excellent summary by Heather Hurlburt at Democracy Arsenal points toward a number of useful analyses.
Iran, Politics and Rejecting False Choices
January 17, 2012
Tensions with Iran continue to rise against the backdrop of the U.S. election campaign. But the job of the commander-in-chief is much more complex than the caricatured false choice of a military attack or “looking weak.” The job of the commander-in-chief is to balance strategic, military, economic and political concerns – to play “three-dimensional chess” [...]
The Power of Diplomacy
January 12, 2012
Against the backdrop of threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, the announcement of uranium enrichment at Iran’s Qom facility and the death of another Iranian nuclear scientist this week, the U.S. and its allies are pushing hard for a return to negotiations with Iran. Results-oriented diplomacy will be at the core of a lasting [...]
Pressure and Possibility
January 4, 2012
Facing intense political pressure, with elections due in March, and economic and currency collapse brought on by sanctions, Iran has ratcheted up its military bluster in the Strait of Hormuz and sent conciliatory messages looking toward new talks on its nuclear program. Meanwhile, Iran’s regional support is dwindling as Syria’s travails continue and its former [...]
Heather Hurlburt Quoted In Jewish Telegraphic Agency On New Iran Sanctions
December 18, 2011
Heather Hurlburt, the executive director at the National Security Network, a group oriented to the realist school of foreign policy with ties to the Obama administration, said that “uncertainty” still dogged the administration’s perception of the amendment, despite the compromise.
“It leaves the administration some flexibility on the timeline” for sanctions, Hurlburt said of the amendment, but it was not so clear what discretion the president had on whether or not to administer them in the first place.
Amid Tensions with Iran, “No Need for Hysteria and Panic”
December 6, 2011
Tensions on the ground and the political calendar in the U.S. have put concerns over Iran’s nuclear program again in the spotlight. A report out today and a presidential candidates’ forum tomorrow will highlight a one-dimensional approach – public threats of force. But military and intelligence experts argue for a firm, but quiet and multi-dimensional approach. They say that an Iranian nuclear weapon is neither inevitable nor the beginning of the apocalypse – and that a smart, realistic policy must be twinned with clear communication in order to avoid sleepwalking into war. As Ambassador James Dobbins and his RAND colleagues write: “Pure engagement has little short- or even medium-term prospect of attaining any of the three main U.S. objectives. Containment affects only Iran’s external behavior. Preemption deals only with the nuclear issue, and then only temporarily. Deterrence makes sense only if combined with containment and some minimal form of engagement, if only to prevent accidental disaster. Neither normalization nor regime change is a feasible short term objective. Realistic policy must be fashioned at some intermediate point across each of these three spectrums.”
