It's all about Tehran and Pyongyang

Posted By Jamie M. Fly Wednesday, January 20, 2010 - 6:00 PM Share

President Obama starts 2010 with a crowded agenda for his second year in office. His greatest challenge this year will be turning his rhetoric about a world free of nuclear weapons into reality.

Despite having spent much of 2009 pursuing a follow-up agreement to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), Obama has little to show for his abandonment of U.S. missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic and other steps taken as part of his "reset" of the U.S.-Russian relationship. Instead, Russia has drawn out negotiations on a treaty that President Obama said in July 2009 "would be completed this year." Even if he and his Russian counterpart wrap up an agreement in the coming months, its fate in the Senate remains uncertain. In addition to his problems reaching a follow-up to START, Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) does not appear imminent. Posing perhaps the greatest challenge to the president's disarmament agenda in 2010 will be the actions of Iran and North Korea. Obama has bolstered his disarmament agenda by arguing that U.S. nuclear reductions and ratification of treaties like the CTBT will somehow convince Iran and North Korea to forgo their nuclear ambitions. In reality, Iran may go nuclear in the near future, setting off a wave of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. North Korea has rebuffed all Obama administration attempts to lure it back to the negotiating table and may be proliferating its nuclear wares to other rogue regimes.

President Obama spent 2009 talking about disarmament and pursuing engagement with rogue regimes. If he wants to rescue his disarmament agenda in 2010, he should focus less on the supposed threat posed by the U.S. nuclear deterrent and more on the real problem -- the regimes in Tehran and Pyongyang.

KNS/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:IRAN, NORTH KOREA, NUKES, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

(5)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

WOLFBOY

7:10 PM ET

January 20, 2010

Obama is right

US calls for restrictions on other countries' nuclear activities were broadly seen as hypocritical during the Bush presidency, whose consideration of development of multiple new nuclear warhead designs was inconsistent with US obligations under the NNPT.

US efforts to reduce its own arsenal are a necessary and appropriate accompaniment to US demands that other countries abide by their obligations.

BABAZULA

1:31 AM ET

January 21, 2010

Concessions to Tehran

If Obama wants to impress Tehran, he should try out to back away from the concept that the gulf-oil is a vital interest of the USA, launched by carter in 1979, known as Carter-Doctrin.

The outcomes after the fall of the Sovietunion shows us, that putting the interests of the US over the needs of the countries of that region in 1979, was an overbearing act , which could break the back of the US in the future.

Without concessions to Tehran, Obama will remain in beeing portrayed as incapable on foreign policy.

HASS

4:06 PM ET

January 21, 2010

Accept Iran's compromise proposals.

There's zero evidence that Iran seeks nuclear weapons and in fact they've repeatedly made offers to impose additional limits on their nuclear program well in excess what they are legally required to permit, such as opening their nuclear program to joint participation by the US (a suggestion endorsed by the IAEA, incidentally) but the US has continually ignored these offers and instead insists on trying to deprive Iran of a fundamental right to make its own nuclear reactor fuel. In the meantime, the pro-Israeli lobby has been pushing for confrontation. Thus, the Obama administration is following in the footsteps of the Bush administration, leading inevitably to the same outcome of another miserable war for Israel's sake.

HAMFAR

12:04 AM ET

January 22, 2010

Tehran needs the US as enemy

Faced with a civil & political rights opposition that puts its survival at risk, the Iranian regime is in dire need of a common enemy to create a semblance of national security emergency that can justify its harsh repressive policies. That would have been easy with the Bush administration policies but proves quite a challenge given President Obama's more sophisticated approach. Regardless, the chance of an agreement between the Islamic Republic and the West is negligible but the real prize is the maneuvering space Obama's prudent policies and strategies provide to the Iranian Opposition. Until now, the Islamic Republic leaders have proven their own worst enemy and if we maintain the gentle pressure of "cold negotiations", they'll end up in the abyss they've dug.

SURESH SHETH

9:01 PM ET

January 28, 2010

It is all about Teheran and Pyongyang

Obama is NOT going to be able to accomplish any more than previous administrations did about Teheran’s or Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions in this multi-polar world where US and China do NOT see eye to eye. China’s/Russia’s economic interests in Iran and China’s strategic interests in North Korea will prevent resolution of either case.

The beef that all non-nuclear weapons states have with NPT/CTBT is that those treaties do not mandate world’s denuclearization. Both treaties allow five nuclear Brahmins to improve and add to their nuclear weapon stockpiles, manufacture weapons grade uranium and reprocess spent nuclear fuels while forbidding have-nots to do so in the name of nonproliferation.

No wonder India’s foreign minister once called NPT and CTBT the biggest fraud perpetrated by five nuclear Brahmins.
So Obama is trying to approach the same issue from different angle. He is trying to create a treaty to destroy all the nuclear weapons including manufacturing capabilities of all the countries in the world, bar none thereby removing this legitimate divide that separates nuclear haves and have-nots.

Afterall Iran can be persuaded to forego nuclear weapon manufacture and stockpile once US, UK, China, France, Russia, India, Pakistan and Israel do the same.

Shadow Government is a blog about U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition and curated by Peter D. Feaver and William Inboden.