Roger Cohen: Sanctions won’t work
Sanctions against Iran won't change anything, writes New York Times columnist Roger Cohen, who argues in his latest column for broad Iranian-American cooperation, along the lines of the France-Britain relationship in the European Union (!?).
Others might draw the opposite conclusion: If sanctions don't work, a bigger stick might be needed.
Cohen writes:
Sanctions won’t work. Ray Takeyh, who worked on Iran with Dennis Ross at the State Department before losing his job last month and returning to the Council on Foreign Relations, told me that “sanctions are the feel-good option.”
Yes, it feels good to do something, but it doesn’t necessarily help. In this case, sanctions won’t for four reasons.
One: Iran is inured to sanctions after years of living with them and has in Dubai a sure-fire conduit for goods at a manageable surtax. Two: Russia and China will never pay more than lip-service to sanctions. Three: You don’t bring down a quasi-holy symbol — nuclear power — by cutting off gasoline sales. Four: sanctions feed the persecution complex on which the Iranian regime thrives.
A senior German Foreign Ministry official last week told an American Council on Germany delegation: “The efficiency of sanctions is not really discussed because if you do, you are left with only two options — a military strike or living with a nuclear Iran — and nobody wants to go there. So the answer is: Let’s impose further sanctions! It’s a dishonest debate.”
Here's Cohen's argument for Iran-U.S. cooperation:
France and Germany fought three wars in 70 years before the bright idea dawned of enfolding their problem into something larger: the European Union. The United States and Iran have not gone to war but have a relationship of psychotic mistrust. The answer can only be the same: Broaden the context...
I believe monitored enrichment on Iranian soil in the name of what Obama called Iran’s “right to peaceful nuclear power” remains a possible basis for an agreement that blocks weaponization. Zero enrichment is by now a non-starter.
For fruitless sanctions to be avoided, the mantra of William Burns, the U.S. under secretary for political affairs who will attend multilateral talks with Iran starting Thursday, must be: “Widen the canvas.”
The Iranian regime is weak. Its disarray was again evident last week; it actually feels threatened by George Soros. Significant factions now view an American breakthrough as needed. They have a favorable view of Burns.
Burns must seek to open a parallel bilateral U.S.-Iran negotiation covering at least these areas: Afghanistan and Iraq (where interests often converge); Hezbollah and Hamas (where they do not); human rights; blocked Iranian assets; diplomatic relations; regional security arrangements; drugs; the fight against Al Qaeda; visas and travel.
Isolated, nuclear negotiations will fail. Integrated, they may not. Iran’s sense of humiliation is rooted in its America complex; its nuclear program is above all about the restoration of pride. Settle the complex to contain the program. Triangulate. Think broad. Think E.U., not Versailles.
Share
Facebook
6 Comments
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
i would really like to know if the Iranians are paying Cohen off. Nobody could be this stupid on their own.
Nah. Roger Cohen has this one correct.
China now owns about 45% of the USA’s national debt. This is frightening because China is in direct competition with the USA for Middle east oil - and is the world’s 2nd largest consumer of oil.
All China has to do is tweak the USA economy buy turning in, say, 3%-4% of their treasury notes and this would force US interest rates up - as much as 2% - and lessen US oil consumption.
So China has a very strong hand to play and their main oil supply is - can you guess? --- correct: Iran. Saudi Arabia is solidly with the USA and has too much to loose strategically if they switch to China.
Russia is the world’s 2nd largest oil producer - after Saudi Arabia - and supplies mostly across Eastern Europe. Unlike Middle East oil, Russia’s oil is “sour” crude - high in sulfur - and much more expensive to process to a clean, usable form.
Russia could certainly use a supply of “sweet” crude - low sulfur - such as Iran has. So Russia wants a happy Iran and gleefully gave Iran nuclear reactors, and technological help. This will put a thumb in the eye of China who has no oil and who is a natural enemy of Russia. Saudi Arabia and the other Arab oil producers are solidly in the Western camp and unavailable to Russia.
So the USA is pinched by China and China and Russia are fighting for the hearts and minds of the Mullahs.
And finally, there are no examples I can find where sanctions ever worked. Even South Africa. The So. Africans were driven by two conditions:
(1) The Whites were just under 5% of the population and that % was shrinking quickly along with the growing military strength of the ANC;
(2) Rhodesia had made a smooth nearly bloodless change from minority White rule to co-ruling to Black controlled rule.
So, South Africa went for it.
All sanctions are porous and Iran’s will have open flood gates. Even the 50+ year sanctions against Cuba have proved absolutely nothing.
As with every country under sanction, the government and its pet military get all they need while the population suffers. In North Korea, the population has head a few million dead in recent years while Kim Il Jung and his military eat and live like kings.
What is the answer? I don’t know. It depends on who blinks first, but blockading Iran’s ports and controlling all shipping in and out is an option. Iran can bluster about closing the Straits of Hormuz, but they cannot militarily pull it off.
But we had better make sure China gets oil from somewhere and it will be OK. Russia will rumble and grumble, but will not risk WWIII over this situation. The Russians are NOT ideologues and will not risk their own total annihilation over Iran. It is a power play on Russia’s part, but one they are willing to give up if need be - at least for now.
As an insight, all one has to do is dig a little into the aftermath of the 1982 war between Israel and the PLO in Lebanon. The Reagan Administration was weighing extra heavy on Israel, including forcing Israel to let PLO leadership escape - escorted by French ships!
Gorbachev made overtures to Israel to join the Soviet camp and Begin started talks. This so unnerved Reagan and the Pentagon that suddenly weapons shipments restarted, the $10 billion loan guarantee was immediately approved, a Memorandum of Understanding (military and economic cooperation) went from the ashcan to being signed --- all of these very quickly.
So Russia will play to its strong side. Right now Iran holds the key to crippling China economically and a war clobbereing Iran? Hey, Russia has oil to sell.
Geopolitics is not hard to understand when you look at the obvious and understand the interconnections.
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Claude S. on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Yaakov Cohn on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Herbert Kaine on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
- Lloyd Trufelman on Netanyahu doth protest too much?
- ASC on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
Truthiness Macabbee
09/29/09 05:00 PM
Roger Cohen must feel that if he keeps talking about Iran, eventually he’ll get something right.
Germany and France had both become peace-loving democracies before they started talking about European Union. It’s a boneheaded analogy.