|
||
|
|
|
U.S.-Iranian Relations in an Era of Change At a recent conference at the American Enterprise Institute, Senator Joseph Lieberman reflected on U.S.-Iranian relations since the beginning of the Iranian Islamic Revolution 30 years ago. The security challenge posed today by Iran, Lieberman stated, did not result from the policies of the Bush administration, but extends back to the seizure of power in Iran by anti-American and anti-Western Islamic clerics. Since that time, Lieberman pointed out, Iran has attempted to undermine moderate Arab regimes in the region; sponsored and supported Islamic terror groups throughout the Middle East; and sought to acquire nuclear weapons. The long-term goal of the Iranian mullahs is clear: to become the dominant power in the Middle East. Lieberman supports the Obama administration’s efforts to “engage” the Iranian regime, as long as the “engagement” is conducted, as promised by Secretary of State Clinton, with eyes wide open and under no illusions as to the nature of the regime. But he emphasized that engagement is a tactic, not a strategy, and should be pursued in the overall context of a coherent strategy for stopping Iran’s support for Islamic terrorists and preventing the acquisition by Iran of nuclear weapons. Lieberman insisted that the world cannot “learn to live with” a nuclear armed Iran. Containment and deterrence will not work. A nuclear armed Iran would pose a mortal threat to Israel and Arab regimes in the region; would lead to a scramble for nuclear weapons by those moderate Arab regimes and thereby undermine global non-proliferation efforts; and would threaten stability and U.S. interests in the region. The most effective way to prevent this nuclear nightmare is, according to Lieberman, to construct a “new strategic architecture” for the Middle East. This is one issue, he contends, where the United States, its allies in Europe, Israel, and the region’s moderate Arab regimes share a common goal. There is, said Lieberman, no room for complacency and no excuse for inaction. The consequences will be catastrophic if we fail. |
|||
 |
|
