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 3 of 3
NO, It takes two to talk, and Iran isn’t
Argued by LIZ CHENEY, former State Department official, and DANIEL SENOR, Bush foreign-policy adviser and spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq
On Iran’s record:
Thirty years of history with the Iranian regime offers no glimmer of hope that "efforts to reach out to them" will succeed. "To say 'Diplomacy has not begun' ignores 30 years of history." – Liz Cheney
On flaws in president Obama’s approach:
"We are not saying no diplomacy, but the current diplomacy is flawed diplomacy." – L.C.
Obama's overtures lack the three elements that might budge a regime resisting negotiation: a guarantee of quick and crippling sanctions if talks fail, a timeline "to prohibit talks from going on and on," and a credible threat of using military force. – L.C.
On the current status with Iran:
After Obama's overtures, "The Iranian government has still not returned the call." – Daniel Senor
On the nature of the Iranian regime:
"If it is a radical theocracy, I'm not sure they can be dissuaded … from having a nuclear bomb." – D.S.
On showing that your debate opponents actually agree with you:
"It's not just Ken [Pollack] who has been involved in failed attempts at diplomacy with the Iranians" – in a quip about Mr. Pollack's book "The Persian Puzzle." "Nick [Burns] and I have had our fair share of it as well."
– L.C.
RSS feed
