NIAC Iran Conference on Capitol Hill

Tag : l/r fabric

THE NATIONAL Iranian American Council (NIAC) organized an April 8conference titled “Breaking the U.S.–Iran Stalemate:Reassessing the Nuclear Strategy in the Wake of the Majlis Elections.” The event was moderated by NIAC’spresident and co-founder, Trita Parsi.
The first panel discussed the Majlis (parliamentary) elections and possible impacts. Scott Peterson,current Istanbul bureau chief for The Christian Science Monitor, described how in the recent elections conservatives disqualifiedthe majority of reformist candidates linked to former PresidentMohammed Khatami, who were dubbed by the media as “enemiesand traitors.” “The conservatives will never letthemselves lose another election again,” Peterson stated,adding that it is not time for change in the Iranian government.“Presidential politics in Iran are obviously more aboutpersonalities,” he observed. In Peterson’s opinion,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be preparing a second run for president bywaging successful campaigns in provinces all over Iran,“dishing out cash, toys, and sending ministers to find,finance, and check up on scores of projects.”
According to panelist Barbara Slavin, senior diplomatic reporterfor USA Today and current Jennings Randolph fellow at the U.S. Institute forPeace, “The main slogan was ‘I feel yourpain’…because the economy is a major issue inIran.” Using the Majlis elections as an indicator of upcoming presidential candidates,Slavin introduced three men from the “so-called pragmaticconservatives”: former nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani;Mohammad Baqr Qalibaf, Ahmadinejad’s successor as mayor ofTehran; and Mohsen Rezaie, former commander of the RevolutionaryGuard Corps. While she was in Iran covering the March 14 elections,Slavin said she was told that the current Majlis speaker, Haddad-Adel—whose daughter is married to SupremeLeader Ali Khamenei’s son Mojtaba—is a favorite for2009’s presidential elections.
Ahmad Sadri, professor of sociology and chair of Islamic WorldStudies at Lake Forest College, provided an answer as to whyIranians participate in elections many outsiders considered to be“rigged.” “Participation in the electionsprevents total domination by theocrats,” he explained,“and a huge landslide can overrun the theocratic stopgaps andlead to historical victories such as that enjoyed by MohammedKhatami in 1997.”
Peterson, Slavin and Sadri agreed that the Majlis elections will not chart a new path for Iranian nucleardevelopment—which, the panelists concurred, has been sewninto the fabric of Iranian pride and national identity byAhmadinejad’s administration. The second panel went on toaddress this issue.
Ambassador Thomas Pickering, current vice chairman of Hills &Company, co-authored a March 20 New York Review of Books article on Iranian nuclear development. Outlining its three mainpoints, he said that “the United States should be open totalk with Iran without any preconditions” and that Washingtonshould “propose that there be multilateral or multinationalenrichment in Iran” in order to meet civilian needs whilepreventing stockpiling of enriched materials. Lastly, Pickeringsupports “wide-ranging international inspections [beyond theIAEA’s Additional Protocol] connected to the acceptance ofthis proposal by…Iran and the West.” Acknowledgingthat no proposal is perfect, Pickering stressed that “whetherthis will work or not, of course, depends heavily not just onwhether Iran accepts it, but whether others—principally theUnited States—are prepared to propose it.”
Dr. Hans Blix, chairman of the independent Weapons of MassDestruction Commission in Sweden, stated that, under theNonproliferation Treaty, which it has signed, Iran has “theright and freedom to build enrichment facilities for the enrichmentof uranium and reprocessing fuel for non-weapons purposes.”This has resulted in a “stalemate” over the enrichmentof uranium on Iranian soil. Saying he is “skeptical of theformat in which the contacts with Iran have taken place,”Blix noted that for Tehran “to suspend its enrichment programas a precondition for talks about the future of the program seemscurious…[and] somewhat humiliating.” Perhaps what isneeded, he said, are offers including “guarantees againstattack from the outside and attempts at regime change” withinIran, as well as “guarantees that the Security Council wouldnot raise any obstacle, any sanction to the purchases [of uranium]in the world market” as long as Iran remained free of anuclear fuel cycle.
Noting that the conference date was National Nuclear Day in Iran,physicist David Albright, president of the Institute for Scienceand International Security (ISIS), urged that the time has come“to consider new approaches.” Agreeing with his fellowpanelists, Albright supported a “move away from theimposition of unilateral sanctions.” “The U.S. needs tospend less [time] thinking about military options,” heargued, and instead “negotiate directly with Iran.”Albright identified as two important points future proposals mustprovide “incentives to offer Iran” as well as arecognition that “a suspension is not permanentcessation.”
The keynote address was delivered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA),whose California constituency “has a large and growingIranian community.” Citing Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixonas examples of men who took bold moves which yielded significantpayoffs, Senator Feinstein called for a “fresh approach andfresh ideas” in place of the Bush administration’srejection of diplomacy with Iran. “Only by talking andbringing to bear the best efforts of diplomacy can real progress bemade,” Feinstein emphasized. “The process is likely tobe difficult, but the results may well be significant, and oneday…it could lead to a more stable and peaceful MiddleEast.”
—Nina Hamedani