Engaging Iran

This Washington Post editorial addresses some of the thorny issue currently facing the American relationship with Iran. On one level, freedom and democracy are good things, and if an American involvement with Iranian hard-liners hurts democratic movements, then we should avoid them. On the other hand, the U.S. has an interest in eliminating the Iranian nuclear program and fighting terrorism. For that, the U.S. needs to talk to the people who can get it done, and right now that means the hard-liners. (A reformist-dominated government would probably seek nuclear weapons with the same alacrity, but cooperate more against terrorists.)

However, I'm not convinced that simply engaging Iran really hurts reformist efforts that much. It strikes me as highly possible to find ways to aiding the regime economically without giving the government new tools of oppression, and when you develop relationships with governments, you also gain tools to use if you want to pressure them for something else. At the same time, I'm not sure whether the student movement favored by the Bush administration is capable of changing the country. They have manpower, but lack leadership and a clear program for change. The reformists, by contrast, have a program and are in leadership positions. Their greatest failure is probably not acting like the students are really on their side, forming a tight alliance against the hardliners.