Iran: From Engagement to Containment

  • Shahram Akbarzadeh

Abstract

President Barack Obama faces a tough challenge to his efforts to steer away from the policies of his predecessor in Iran. Obama’s diplomatic charm offensive in the Muslim world, and more specifically in relation to Iran, was hoped to breathe new life into the tortured relationship between the United States and Iran. This was a marked departure from the past. Regime change was out. Direct engagement was in. Obama refrained from repeating his predecessor’s threats against Iran, instead trying to find a way to influence the behavior of the ruling regime. In a clear effort to draw lessons from past mistakes, the Obama administration moved to address the emotive issues of respect and parity between the United States and Iran and endeavored to chart a path of noninterference. Despite this significant change in the U.S. position, little progress has been made in affecting the behavior of the Islamic regime. Iran continues to defy the international community with its nuclear program, insists on antagonizing Israel, supports Hizbullah, and dismisses international efforts to bring peace to the protracted Palestinian-Israeli dispute. In short, Iran revels in its pariah status. As a result, pressure has been mounting on President Obama to reconsider his policy of engagement and revert back to the pattern of punishment.

Keywords

International Atomic Energy Agency Security Council Bush Administration Iranian Regime Obama Administration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Note President Mohammad Khatami’s address to the United Nations, “Round Table: Dialogue among Civilisations,” United Nations, New York, September 5, 2000, http://www.unesco.org/dialogue/en/khatami.htm. (Accessed on November 1, 2010).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kenneth Katzman, “Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses,” CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service, July 2009.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donette Murray, US Foreign Policy and Iran: American-Iranian Relations since the Islamic Revolution (London: Routledge, 2010), 121.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    George Gavrilis, “Harnessing Iran’s Role in Afghanistan,” Expert Brief, Council on Foreign Relations, June 5, 2009, http://www.cfr.org/publication/19562/harnessing_irans_role_in_afghanistan.html?brea dcrumb=%2Fpublication%2Fby_type%2Fregion_issue_brief.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leslie H. Gelb, “Hillary’s Tricky Iran Game,” Op-Ed, Council on Foreign Relations, June 13, 2009, http://www.cfr.org/publication/19632/hillarys_tricky_iran_game.html?breadcrumb=%2Fregion%2Fpublication_list%3Fid%3D404%26page%3D2. (Accessed on November 2, 2010).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suzanne Maloney and Ray Takeyh, “Refashioning Iran’s International Role,” Working Paper, the Stanley Foundation [Muscatine, IA, USA, 2008, http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/powersandprinciples/IransIntlRole. pdf, 8. (Accessed on November 1, 2010).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Richard Haass and Martin Indyk, “Beyond Iraq: A New U.S. Strategy for the Middle East,” Foreign Affairs 88, no. 1 (2009): 52.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Scotte Carpenter, “After the Crackdown: The Iran Democracy Fund,” Policy Watch 1576, Washington Institute, September 8, 2009.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abbas Milani, “US Foreign Policy and the Future of Democracy in Iran,” Washington Quarterly 28, no. 3 (2005): 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haleh Esfandiari and Robert Litwak, “Why ‘Soft’ Power in Iran Is Counterproductive,” Chronicle of Higher Education, October 11, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Omid Memarian, “Activists Fear U.S. ‘Help’ Could Spur Crackdown,” IPS News, May 9, 2006, http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=33173. (Accessed on November 1, 2010).Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    Sara Ledwith, “Iran’s Neda Shows Citizen Journalism Unleashed,” Reuters, June 23, 2009, http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE55M3AJ 20090623. (Accessed November 1, 2010).Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    Michael Fletcher and Colum Lynch, “Shift on UN Seen in Rice Nomination,” Washington Post, December 2, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    David McKeeby, “American Envoy Pledges Renewed Commitment to United Nations Peacekeeping, Climate Change, Development, Proliferation Top U.S. Agenda,” January 26, 2009, http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2009/January/20090126163520idybeekcm0.41 47913.html. (Accessed on November 2, 2010).Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    Susan Rice, “A New Course in the World, a New Approach at the U.N.,” August 12, 2009, http://www.law.nyu.edu/news/Rice_UN_Speech (Accessed on November 1, 2010).Google Scholar
  16. 20.
    Peter Baker and Clifford J. Levy, “Russia’s Reaction on Missile Plan Leaves Iran Issue Hanging,” New York Times, September 18, 2009.Google Scholar
  17. 21.
    Peter Baker, “White House Scraps Bush’s Approach to Missile Shield,” New York Times, September 17, 2009.Google Scholar
  18. 22.
    Sally McNamara, “President Obama Must Not Concede to Russian Demands over NATO,” Heritage Foundation, May 8, 2009, http://www.heritage.org/research/russiaandeurasia/wm2431.cfm. (Accessed on November 2, 2010).Google Scholar
  19. 23.
    BBC, “Russia to Repay Iran for Cancelled Missile Order,” October 7, 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11495172, (Accessed on November 1, 2010.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    Suzanne Maloney, Iran’s Long Reach: Iran as a Pivotal State in the Muslim World (Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace, 2008), 126.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    For an insightful study, see Suzanne Maloney, “Sanctioning Iran: If Only It Were So Simple,” Washington Quarterly 33, no. 1 (January 2010): 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shahram Akbarzadeh 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shahram Akbarzadeh

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations