Is diplomacy with Iran futile?
Experts gathered to debate US policy toward Iran, and then let the audience decide.
from the May 24, 2009 edition
Page 2 of 3
YES, Diplomacy beats another war
Argued by NICHOLAS BURNS, No. 3 diplomat in the Bush administration, and KENNETH POLLACK, Brookings Institution analyst
On diplomacy's record so far:"It's difficult to say diplomacy with Iran is going nowhere when we haven't started diplomacy…. We've had three decades of a nonrelationship with Iran." – Nicholas Burns
On why diplomacy is a necessary step for winning international backing:"How do you propose to get tough [international] sanctions without going through diplomacy?" – Kenneth Pollack
"We need to be able to say to the Russians and the Chinese, 'We did what you wanted, we tried diplomacy; now you need to back us.' " – N.B.
"We know diplomacy might not work, but if we give it a shot, it strengthens us for what's ahead." – N.B.
On what to say to Iran:"The choice we put to the Iranians is simple: You get the thriving economy that the Iranian people want, or you get a nuclear weapon. You don't get both." – K.P.
On alternatives – military strikes, regime change, a Middle East war – and their unpredictable consequences:"I'm not aware of a scenario [concerning Iran] where the use of force works." – N.B.
"We should leave the use of force on the table. But if we give up [on diplomacy] now, we'll never know the answer [to], 'Was peace possible?' " – N.B.
RSS feed
