U.S. Will Need Allies Against Iran

A German court has condemned the Islamic Republic of Iran and its top leadership for state-sponsored terrorism and assassination of its opponents on German soil. The verdict promptly caused the expulsion from Germany of four Iranian diplomats and the recall, for “consultations,” of almost all Western ambassadors to Iran. At the same time, new reports continue to surface implying that Tehran had a hand in last year’s bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 U.S. servicemen. If conclusive evidence is found in the U.S. and Saudi investigations, U.S.-Iranian relations will reach a dangerous point.

Ironically, concurrent with these events certain policy analysts, journalists and proponents of the Islamic Republic are encouraging direct U.S. dialogue with the Tehran regime and the lifting of U.S. economic sanctions. These advocates of rapprochement argue that engagement and direct dialogue will prove to be a more effective policy and that U.S. business is losing out on lucrative contracts in Iran. Naturally, corporate America does not look favorably at any situation in which the Europeans, the Japanese and others are benefiting at their expense. But corporate America is likely to support a policy that clearly advances and protects U.S. national interests and as in the past will stand with the government if the administration makes every effort to bring other major powers on board.

Over the years, the Iranian regime has proved to be politically devious and sophisticated in its dealings with the international community. Unfortunately, until recently, the majority of the Western democratic countries did not realize or come to terms with the hypocrisy of the ruling mullahs, preferring the convenience of paying attention to the Iranian regime’s words rather than its deeds.

For 17 years, the mullahs have been unwilling to adopt and implement pragmatic policies in order to rehabilitate Iran domestically and with the international community. Since its inception, the “Islamic” regime has been actively engaged in the pursuit of arms and weapons of mass destruction, support for international terrorism and hostage taking, subversion of the Arab-Israeli peace process, abuse of human rights at home, assassination of political opponents abroad and the promotion of radical Islamic fundamentalism with the aim of overthrowing pro-Western regimes in the Persian Gulf and Africa.

Furthermore, the “critical dialogue” policy that has been pursued by Europe and Japan has failed; it has had no influence on the behavior of the Iranian regime, even in those areas of utmost importance to the Europeans.

The U.S. policy of unilateral sanctions on Iran has had some positive, albeit limited, effects. A senior member of the Iranian Parliament’s oil commission recently admitted that the U.S. sanctions have slowed foreign investment in petroleum projects. Yet U.S. economic sanctions alone are unlikely to change the Iranian regime’s policies or behavior. The German court’s ruling against the Tehran regime’s terrorism has provided an appropriate opening for the United States to intensify its efforts to attract the cooperation and compliance of the international community for an effective multilateral policy toward Iran.

If the investigations into the bombing in Saudi Arabia also lead to Tehran, a multilateral approach to ostracizing the regime will become even more vital. It would be a mistake for the U.S. to respond with military force. Although such action may be popular in some circles, it would have negative long-term implications. The ruling mullahs would turn it around and use the U.S. military response, however limited, as a propaganda tool to divert the anger of the Iranian people from the cause of their ongoing suffering. A new burst of xenophobic hysteria would erupt just when the democratic forces in Iran, which have remained mostly underground due to the brutal nature of the regime, are slowly becoming visible. In anticipation of large- scale unrest caused by political and economic conditions, a law has been enacted allowing the internal security forces to “shoot to kill” street demonstrators. Under these prevailing conditions, a military response by the United States most likely would strengthen the mullahs’ grip on power and in effect delay the dawn of democracy and freedom in Iran.

Because of the enormous potential of its resources as well as its position at the strategic crossroads of the world, Iran is a vital factor in the question of regional and global security. U.S. interests would best be served by the formulation of a comprehensive and consistent policy toward Iran that encompasses a political/diplomatic front and an economic front. A good first step on the political front would be for the U.S. to publicly state its support for the forces of freedom and democracy inside and outside of Iran. On the economic front, the timing is right for the United States to more persuasively and vigorously pursue multilateral sanctions. Such moves would demoralize the tyrannical forces and hasten the triumph of freedom and democracy in Iran. Then, a democratic Iran will be in a position to guarantee the stability and security of the Middle East as well as the Muslim republics of Central Asia.