Iran, the Neocons and the Bomb

by William D. Hartung

If the neocons are to be believed, Ahmadinejad's theft of the Iranian elections - and his continuing crackdown on dissent - are not the results of internal dynamics in Iran, but rather of the words of conciliation spoken by President Obama prior to the vote.

As the latest incarnation of Mitt Romney - the fire breathing hawk - put the right-wing case on ABC's "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos, "It is very clear that the president's policies of going around the world and apologizing for America aren't working."

An excellent post by Ali Frick that ran on Think Progress earlier this week quotes Iraq-war advocates Richard Perle and Frank Gaffney asserting that Obama's willingness to talk to Iran about curbing its nuclear program has helped legitimize Ahmadinejad's regime and emboldened the "thugs" in Tehran due to "our weakness." And Robert Kagan has put in his two cents worth in today's Washington Post in an article entitled "Obama, Siding With the Regime."

What would the neocons do differently? What should be done in the face of Ahmadinejad's repression, and how will it influence efforts to stop Tehran from seeking a nuclear weapon?

First, it should be noted that the struggle in Iran is far from over. It is too early to tell whether Ahmadinejad will maintain his power through the barrel of a gun, or whether the popular protests can last long enough and be strong enough to force him out of office.

But, if Ahmadinejad prevails, it will be with reduced power. As Joe Cirincione has noted on the Huffington Post, "he will be greatly weakened, handcuffed in his ability to play the nuclear card as a nationalist rallying cry. Pressed at home, he will need to show some gains internationally; the nuclear issue must be compromised to realize those gains." In particular, the needed economic progress that either an Ahmadinejad or a Mousavi government will need to show will depend on an opening to the West, which means putting the nuclear program on the table.

In any case, no one is suggesting that negotiations on Iran's nuclear program go forward immediately. Obviously there will need to be a pause while the current political crisis plays itself out. But when the dust settles, negotiations will still be the most viable option for curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.

The neocon's alternatives - from economic strangulation to military intervention - make about as much sense as their brilliant plan of invading Iraq to eliminate weapons of mass destruction that did not in fact exist.

William D. Hartung is director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New America Foundation, a Ploughshares grantee.