Skip Navigation

The Daily Dish - 2006-2011 archives for The Daily Dish, featuring Andrew Sullivan

Russia And Iran: No Movement?

By The Daily Dish
Sep 28 2009, 2:44 AM ET

Larison counters:

The Kremlin said that the Russian government wants the IAEA to investigate and that it will assist the investigation. This is not quite diplomatic boilerplate, but it is close. This is not, as Andrew says, a “breakthrough,” but a minimal statement expressing concern about reported violations of Security Council resolutions. At most the Russian government is saying that it has not officially decided how it will respond until the IAEA investigates. Russia has committed to nothing new, and it has not altered its stance on Iran sanctions, and there is little reason to think that this will change.



One of the things that worries me about trying to acquire Russian support for sanctions on Iran is that sanctioning Iran is already a counterproductive, foolish policy. It does not become a wiser policy when it has Russian backing. Significant Russian cooperation with a sanctions regime would make it more “successful” in that it would isolate Iran more fully, which would at least address part of the practical problem of imposing sanctions on Iran, but this would not lead to the result that sanctions advocates want. Most likely, China would pick up the slack and become even more heavily invested in trade with Iran than it has been. On the contrary, as opponents of sanctions keep saying, a tighter sanctions regime will harm internal political opposition to the regime, increase the political-military establishment’s hold on the economy and cause Iranians to rally behind their government in the face of outside hostility.

I take Daniel's points. But there was a question mark in my first post and I have continually expressed skepticism that Russia will come through in the end. As to his deeper point, I'm not fully persuaded that real sanctions, if actively backed by Russia or passively allowed by China, would be as counter-productive as Daniel implies. At the very least, I think exploring this option as thoroughly as possible is a good idea regardless. The worst that can happen is that Obama will have shown to the world the West's willingness to reach a peaceful solution - and the responsibility of Ahmadinejad if such a solution is impossible.

This is a tough call - as tough as Afghanistan. I lean toward doing all we can to avoid a military conflict in Iran and getting out of Afghanistan as responsibly as possible. But I'm open to alternative arguments in two excruciating dilemmas. I learned my lesson on Iraq - not to get locked onto a position without considering every possible angle. And one such angle is containing a nuclear-armed Iran rather than taking the huge risks of attempting to stop it through force.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

A Western Diet High in Sugars and Fat Could Contribute to ADHD A Sugary, Fatty Western Diet Could Be Contributing to ADHD
The Psychology of Feminism and the Queer Case of Hugo Schwyzer Can Men Be Feminist Leaders?
'Chronicle' Shows Us Teenage Superheroes With Daddy Issues A Tale of Teen Heroes With Dad Issues
The Global Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War Syria's Looming Civil War
The Agony of Nabeel Rajab The Agony of Nabeel Rajab
Special Report
Election 2012 Reuters Election 2012
The destination for full politics coverage, from the primaries to the White House. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Athens in Flames

Feb 13, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)