Published October 5th, 2006 by Future Atlas
Iran: “a policy of patience”
Fareed Zakaria argues that the US would be better served by a policy of de-escalation and patience than confrontation with Iran. “If we convince ourselves that Iran is an existential threat, one that must be stopped immediately and at all costs, we will fail. If we turn this into a game of chicken, we will lose,” he writes.
Iran’s current advantages will fade, Zakaria explains:
Instead of getting scared and spooked, America should view Tehran with a healthy dose of calm and confidence. Iran’s fortunes will wane. Oil prices might head downward; Iraq could become less of a burden one way or the other; Arab regimes will get more assertive in responding to the rise of Iranian power. Washington could take the initiative on Lebanon and Palestine, which would vastly improve the political atmosphere.
The US needs some alternatives, he says:
The administration must also develop a set of creative options short of military strikes—which would only delay, not end, Iran’s nuclear program—in case Iran does not agree to stop reprocessing. Other countries will not go along with many of the toughest economic sanctions—and it’s not clear they would work anyway. One measure that would sting would be a widespread travel ban on Iran’s officials. . . . The second best alternative might be a permanent inspections system in Iran, ensuring that its civilian program is not weaponized.