Q&A
Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour, Robin Wright
{
"authors": [
"Karim Sadjadpour"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Don't Rush to War with Iran
The challenge set by Iran’s nuclear program is a post-American challenge.
Published on Nov 13, 2011
Source: GPS with Fareed Zakaria. November 13
The International Atomic Energy Agency recently released a report on Iran’s nuclear program and expressed for the first time concerns about a military dimension to the program. The report has revived the debate as to whether or not Israel or the United States should employ military action. Karim Sadjadpour argues that “the case for military action is not compelling” because “it is a simple mathematical question. Bombing Iran’s nuclear sites would set the nuclear clock back two or three years, but would resuscitate a deeply unpopular, ideologically bankrupt regime, prolonging its shelf life.” Indeed, most Iranians, despite their profound disaffection with the regime, are opposed to military action. While there is no doubt that this regime is odious, “it has homicidal tendencies, but is not suicidal,” notes Sadjadpour.
The challenge set by Iranian’s nuclear program is really a “post-American challenge,” asserts Sadjadpour. There are two options, in terms of coercion, that the Obama administration can take. The first is to impose draconian sanctions with a weak coalition that does not include important states like China, India and Russia. Alternatively, the administration can pursue more mild sanctions with a robust international coalition. The second approach is much more likely to pressure Iran to give up its nuclear program.
About the Author
Karim Sadjadpour
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Karim Sadjadpour is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on Iran and U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East.
- What’s Keeping the Iranian Regime in Power—for Now
- How Washington and Tehran Are Assessing Their Next StepsQ&A
Aaron David Miller, David Petraeus, Karim Sadjadpour
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- Beyond the Putin-Kim Alliance: How Can the International Community Engage China to Contain Nuclear Risks Over the Korean Peninsula?Commentary
Faced with an increase in strategic maneuvering by Moscow and Pyongyang, Beijing will not sit idly by and allow Putin and Kim to shape the security environment on its behalf.
Tong Zhao
- China’s Evolving Economic and Security Role in the Middle EastCommentary
The advantage that China has over other global powers, especially America, is that its foreign policy is closely aligned with those of many of the Middle Eastern countries.
Jin Liangxiang, Maha Yahya, Hesham Alghannam
- China’s Rising Influence in the Middle EastCommentary
Transactional relationships are stable but can be shallow.
- +1
Paul Haenle, Maha Yahya, Benjamin Ho, …
- Missile Defense and the Strategic Relationship among the United States, Russia, and ChinaCommentary
China views U.S. missile defense as posing a greater potential threat to China’s nuclear deterrent than other U.S. military capabilities.
Tong Zhao, Dmitry Stefanovich
- Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Has Jeopardized the China-EU RelationshipCommentary
“It’s not so clear how we’re going to get out of this.”
Paul Haenle, Philippe Le Corre
