Advertisement
September 30, 2009
Iran’s taunting of the West has reached a critical peak, even for a regime that seems to delight in goading the United States, mocking the historical truth, and snubbing its nose at human rights and the will of its own people. In the past week, the regime was forced to spill the beans on a second uranium enrichment plant, even as it test-fired new missiles, welcoming Yom Kippur with weapons that may be capable of striking Israel, not to mention Moscow and Europe.
In turn, President Obama told world leaders in Pittsburgh that Iran is “going to have to come clean, and they are going to have to make a choice,” although he was hardly specific on what that choice would be.
Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) has fleshed out the options, in a way that provides a useful roadmap to confronting and containing Iran. The author of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, which aims to link the flow of refined petroleum products to Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities, has outlined a strong set of steps for the next few months.
Berman supports the president’s efforts to engage Iran diplomatically, but also calls for “clear timelines and benchmarks by which to judge Iranian intentions as well as unambiguous consequences if Iran fails to meet the criteria.”
The consequences would include, in the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “crippling sanctions.” Berman recommends a mandatory UN Security Council resolution that would require the cooperation of countries like Russia and China, two Iranian allies. Failing that, he calls for multilateral agreement on sanctions by the Europeans, Japan, Australia, and Canada.
Tehran has the power to switch off such sanctions by suspending its program of nuclear enrichment, and making transparent its nuclear intentions in ways that satisfy the International Atomic Energy Agency and Western powers.
Iran is vulnerable, at least in the short run. Its economy is in ruins and its leadership has lost legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens. The West has options short of supporting military action. Now is the time to deliver a clear message of “or else.”
Reader Discussion
Comment on this article
--TOP--
