22 April 1998
GULF POLICY EXPERTS CALL FOR MORE DIALOGUE BETWEEN US AND IRAN
(Some urge full speed ahead, others urge caution) (680)
By Peter Sawchyn
USIA Staff Writer
Washington -- Despite sharp disagreement over the pace and timing of
expanding U.S. contacts with Iran, there is a general consensus that
increased dialogue between the two countries may help ease nearly two
decades of strained bi-lateral relations, according to some experts on
U.S. Gulf policy.
Speaking at an April 22 conference on U.S. policy in the Gulf
organized by the Middle East Policy Council, a panel of four speakers
expressed wide-ranging views on the current state of affairs in Iran,
and on Iran's interest in "opening a dialogue with the American
people."
The panelists also expressed their views on other aspects of U.S. Gulf
policy, such as Iraq and the Middle East peace process. However, the
issue of U.S.-Iranian relations figured prominently in a 90-minute
question and answer session that followed brief opening statements by
the experts.
"We (the United States) should grab any chance at an opening from
Tehran," said Dov Zakheim, an adjunct scholar with the Heritage
Foundation and a task force member on U.S. defense reform at the
Pentagon.
"Regardless of whether (Iranian President) Khatami is serious or not,
we should exploit every chance we have for dialogue to allow outside
ideas to flow into Iran."
Zakheim was referring to a televised interview in January during which
Khatami called for more private and academic exchanges with the United
States. The Iranian leader, however, stopped short of calling for any
official, government contacts, saying the time is not right.
The United States responded by saying it welcomed the overture for a
dialogue with the American people, but stressed that the best way to
address bilateral issues of concern was for directs talks between the
two governments.
Moreover, the State Department has said the scope of any direct talks
between Washington and Tehran must also include U.S. concerns over
Iran's support for terrorism, its development of weapons of mass
destruction, and violent opposition to the Middle East Peace Process.
That view was echoed by Joseph Marty, a director in the Near East and
South Asia directorate of the National Security Council.
"We are a long way away from having normal relations with Iran," Marty
said. "It's clear that some kind of change is under way in Iran, and
that Khatami is taking certain steps. The U.S., however, is not
rushing into anything. We will take it a step at a time and respond to
appropriate openings from Iran," he said.
"Iran has rejected our offer for official dialogue. Still, we've shown
that we will continue to listen, and demonstrated that we will respond
to any expressions of positive behavior," Marty said.
Also urging a cautious approach were Shibley Telhami, who holds the
Anwar Sadat Chair at the University of Maryland, and Ivan Eland,
director of defense policy studies at the CATO Institute.
"There is structural change under way in Iran, Telhanmi said. The
election last May (of President Khatami) was a genuine expression of
Iranian public opinion." But the jury is still out on what it really
means, and the U.S. should proceed cautiously, he said.
Still, Telhami stressed that the United States needs to engage Iran in
dialogue and not isolate it. He also urged that U.S. sanctions on Iran
not be toughened, a move, he said, that could strengthen the hand of
hard-line conservatives.
The underlying theme of the conference, despite the disparate issues
and views, however, was the importance of and the need for more
substantive dialogue among all parties and peoples in the Gulf region.
Summing up the session, Chas. W. Freeman, president of the Middle East
Policy Council and former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the
Gulf War, said a basic element of military warfare calls for not
cutting off or losing contact with the enemy. That same strategy,
Freeman said, can also be applied to diplomacy.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
