The argument so far

Much of the opinion in Washington against negotiations with Iran is coming from people who are convinced that Iran is the mortal enemy of the U.S. People like Adm. Michael Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Mullen believes the U.S. should not extend a friendly hand to the regimes leaders in Iran. But why? If you listen to Mullen it's because he believes the Iranians are responsible for American deaths in Iraq. Ahmadinejad has not been the friendliest face in the Middle East, but his rhetoric is just that, but Iran has not undertaken any major actions against the U.S. I think America's imperial hubris is playing a large role in the misguided choice to isolate Iran and shower it with sanctions. If you take a look over the last 50 years you will find Iranian blood on U.S. hands as well and much of the blood came from Iranian civilians not soldiers. Yes, the violence has been appalling from both sides, but this tit-for-tat mentality does not seem to be a good reason to refrain from actually moving towards peace. Sure, the U.S. could choose to not negotiate with Iran and continue with ineffective sanctions and weak attempts at destabilizing the regime, but that would just be wasting more time. The U.S. needs to engage Iran in official negotiations on the nuclear weapon issue and work towards a solution. Not to mention the benefits that would come to the U.S. from Iran's help in stabilizing the region.

But, there are other people in Washington who don't believe the nonproliferation regime is capable of dealing with states like Iran. Henry Sokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, believes that the IAEA has been ineffective at monitoring and preventing states from developing nuclear weapons. Sokolski, uses the example of security cameras installed in the nuclear reactors of various states. The IAEA reported in 2005 that over a period of six years there were 12 instances were the lights were turned off for periods exceeding 30 hours. Of course, this data is from all the states currently monitored by the IAEA, not just Iran. But this situation highlights the anxiety in Washington over whether the Iranian regime is attempting to acquire a nuclear weapon. It doesn't help the situation at all to know that even if Iran is just currently pursuing nuclear energy, most of the countries that have nuclear reactors have used their reactors to produce weapons grade material, these countries include (France, U.S., U.K., Russia, India, and Pakistan). These facts help to fuel the fear that nothing short of war can be done to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. These fears are still not sufficiently compelling strategic reasons to not pursue a better relationship with Iran. The benefits at this point and in the future far outweigh whatever it is we've gained from the insecure policies pursued by previous administrations.