Replies

Bush, Kerry Have Different Approaches to Iran

July 14, 2004
Reuters
Carol Giacomo

WASHINGTON -- U.S. policy toward Iran, whose nuclear policies and involvement in Iraq fly in the face of U.S. interests, could hinge on the outcome of the November presidential election.

If re-elected, President Bush is expected to pursue more aggressive support for factions that want to topple hard-line leaders in Iran while Democratic challenger John Kerry is more inclined toward engaging the Islamic republic.

"I think you would see us continue a very hard line on the nonproliferation issue and support for dissident elements inside Iran would pick up," a senior administration official said. He ruled out military action.

Added another Republican insider said, "My understanding is that this tough view is one that has been expressed by the president himself on a number of occasions lately."

Reflecting a different approach, Kerry foreign policy adviser Rand Beers told Reuters in an interview: "Yes, we would be prepared to talk to Iran."

He said the Democratic candidate is "not naive" and recognizes deep differences between the two countries. These include nuclear proliferation, the Arab-Israeli conflict and policy toward Iran's neighbor Iraq.

"But we do think there are some issues about which we can talk and can move forward and hopefully those issues would represent building blocks on which to base a broader degree of cooperation," Beers said.

Relations between the two countries are still overshadowed by bitterness from the Islamic revolution 25 years ago, when radicals overran the U.S. embassy and took Americans hostage.

Bush has taken a hard line, branding Iran part of an "axis of evil" with North Korea and prewar Iraq as it seeks to quash any nuclear weapons ambitions it may have. He also accuses the Islamic republic of supporting terrorism, based largely on its support for radical Palestinian groups.

SECRET CONTACTS

Immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on America, the White House began a series of discreet contacts with Tehran. Iran, which is predominantly Shi'ite Muslim, roundly condemned the attacks by the Sunni militants of al Qaeda.

But the contacts, which had limited effect, are believed to have ended in May 2003, when U.S. officials said that al Qaeda operatives in Iran helped plan a bombing in Saudi Arabia.

The Bush administration then changed tack and sought out dissident Iranians abroad and, to a lesser extent, at home, to try to put pressure on Tehran's ruling clerics.

More recently, it has brushed off as ineffective European efforts to persuade Iran to end its questionable nuclear activities. Washington now wants the U.N. nuclear watchdog -- the International Atomic Energy Agency -- to bring Iran before the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

Tehran says its nuclear program is peaceful and aimed solely at meeting growing domestic energy needs.

Beers agreed the European initiative was unlikely to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem.

But he insisted, "this is not an issue on which we can afford to step back and point fingers" and refuse to talk to Iran as Bush did for three years with North Korea.

"We have to find ways in which to engage with Iran" in a multi-party format that could also include direct U.S.-Iranian talks, he said.

Kerry in a June speech proposed to "call (Iran's) bluff."

"The Iranians claim they're simply trying to meet domestic energy needs. We should call their bluff, and organize a group of states that will offer the nuclear fuel they need for peaceful purposes and take back the spent fuel so they can't divert it to build a weapon," he said.

"If Iran does not accept this, their true motivations will be clear," he said.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5672810