The Road to the White House: The Iranian Threat (Part II)

About 'The Road to The White House'

Question #3

Contributors: (read it all or click on name to read post)

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York (D)

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico (D)

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois (D)

Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas (R)

Former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts (R)

Senator John McCain of Arizona (R)

Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina (D)

Senator Joe Biden of Delaware (D)

Hillary Clinton: As the outrageous, hateful comments of Iran's President demonstrate, Iran is a threat not just to Israel, but to the entire Middle East and beyond, including the United States. It is a threat because of its nuclear ambitions, and also because it uses its influence and its revenues to support terrorist elements that are destabilizing the entire Middle East. As I have said before, Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons.

I believe that the rush to war in Iraq caused the United States to lose focus on defeating Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the broader war on terror. Today, the situation in Iraq has left Iran in a much stronger position in the region.

One of the most important ways we should begin to improve America's ability to deal with this and other threats is to begin the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. That is why I have advocated beginning a phased redeployment of our troops from Iraq within 90 days.

While there may be a need for some small residual force to prevent a resurgent Al Qaeda, we must make clear that the United States seeks no permanent bases or permanent occupation. By beginning the process of withdrawing our troops from Iraq, we will be better positioned to face the threat posed by Iran's regional and nuclear ambitions.

Being able to deal with dangers such as those posed by Iran, means the United States should be prepared to employ a wide range of options, including diplomacy. We must continue to maintain economic pressure on the Iranian regime by effective sanctions.

The initiation of diplomatic discussions with Iran by the Bush Administration is a positive step, since I believe that vigorous diplomatic actions must also be part of our efforts.

Bill Richardson: The Iraq war has greatly strengthened Iran in the region. Saddam's Iraq was the main constraint on Iranian power and Iran now holds great influence with Shi'ite groups in Iraq and Hizbullah. Without a plan to constrain Iran today, thanks to a poorly executed effort in Iraq, Iran has more power and influence in Iraq and in the region than it has enjoyed in decades.

The current Iraq situation strengthens most of America's adversaries in the region and elsewhere, as it ties down our military, consumes our resources, weakens our alliances, and damages our reputation. And, as I have explained elsewhere, we need to get out of Iraq as quickly as we can, so that we can start rebuilding our reputation, redeploy our troops to fight terrorism and restore our capacity to work with and lead other nations.

Also in recent years anti-American and anti-Israeli politicians have come to power in places like Palestine and Iran. This gravely threatens our best friend in the region, Israel. A successful foreign policy will require that we be more attentive than the Bush administration has been to how our efforts can impact the domestic politics of Muslim states. I would re-establish a permanent Middle East special envoy as President.

President Ahmadinejad is a dangerous man with reprehensible views. But his power is constrained, and his popularity is collapsing. While many elements of the regime, including much of the clergy and the President, are fanatics and ideologues, there also are pragmatic and moderate figures in Iran - and much of Iranian society wants Iran to liberalize and to play a more constructive role in the world. We need to stop inadvertently assisting the most hard-line and paranoid elements, and instead start strengthening these moderate forces we can work with.

Ultimately, our challenge is to bring Iran out of the cold and into the community of nations. This will require constant engagement and tough, skillful diplomacy. We have four crucial priorities in our relations with Iran. First, we must prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons power. Second, we must steer Iran toward playing a constructive, helpful role in stabilizing Iraq.  Third, we must continue to enlist their help in defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan.  And finally, we must get the Iranians to desist from supporting terrorist organizations like Hizbullah and Hamas.

To accomplish these goals, we absolutely must engage in direct talks with Iran.  Refusing to negotiate with difficult regimes is not a foreign policy. To talk tough, you need to talk. Iran does not want Iraq to collapse and to see millions of refugees fleeing into Iran and other neighboring countries. Iran wants stability on its borders, and in the past has worked with us in Afghanistan against the Taliban. So there is some common ground, and we need to find it and build upon it.

Preventing Iran from going nuclear, and encouraging them work with us in Iraq and Afghanistan and to desist from supporting terrorists will require strong diplomacy backed up by credible power and clarity of purpose.  This sort of engagement, with a stick in one hand and a carrot in the other, is how we got Libya to renounce nukes and terrorism, and this is how we must approach Iran.

We need tough sanctions, while at the same time offering Iran security guarantees and secure access to nuclear fuel if they desist from nuclear enrichment. The Iranians also must know that full diplomatic recognition, better access to international credit and investment, an end to trade sanctions, and acceptance as a legitimate regional power will be contingent upon ending their support for terrorists.

Success in all of these areas will require the cooperation of the international community, above all the Europeans, China, and Russia. If all these parties join us in tough economic sanctions, they will work. If they do not join us, they will not work. There is reason for optimism.

The Iranian economy is fragile and vulnerable, and the regime is increasingly unpopular because of this.  With the right combination of carrots and sticks, we can strengthen Iran's moderates, weaken the extremists, and lay the bases for a more constructive relationship in the future.

Barack Obama: I have argued for many months that the time has come to begin a phased redeployment of US forces from Iraq. In a civil war where no military solution exists, this redeployment remains our best leverage to pressure the Iraqi government to achieve the political settlement between its warring factions that can slow the bloodshed and promote stability. And my plan includes a robust regional diplomatic strategy to help Iraqis forge political compromises.

The redeployment of US troops will enable a more effective use of our resources against other pressing threats that we face. Within Iraq, we should keep a limited number of US troops to continue counter-terrorism strikes, train Iraqi Security Forces, and protect US military and civilians. Within the region, we should maintain a robust force to contain Iraq's sectarian strife, curb a humanitarian catastrophe, and reassure our allies that we will stay engaged in the Middle East.

The US military has performed valiantly and brilliantly in Iraq. But a the Administration's failed strategy in Iraq has strengthened Iran's strategic position, reduced US credibility and influence in the region, and placed our ally Israel and other nations friendly to the United States in greater peril.

Iran's President Ahmadinejad's regime is a threat to all of us. His words contain a chilling echo of some of the world's most tragic history. Neither Israel nor the United States has the luxury of dismissing his calls for Israel's destruction as mere rhetoric.

The United States must lead the world in working to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy that is a state-sponsor of terrorism.

And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons.

This includes direct engagement with Iran similar to the meetings we conducted with the Soviets at the height of the Cold War, laying out in clear terms our principles and interests. Tough-minded diplomacy would include imposing stronger sanctions, both through and outside the United Nations.

It would mean harnessing the collective power of Iran's major European trading partners and Gulf state energy suppliers to increase pressure on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment. It would mean full implementation of US sanctions laws and promoting divestment strategies to choke off the crucial flow of oil and gas revenue that funds Iran's ambitions.

I've introduced legislation to make it easier for states and cities to divest their pension holdings from companies that build up Iran's energy sector. In sum, we need international sanctions strong enough to have a profound impact on Iran's economy, forcing Iran's leaders to recalculate whether nuclear weapons are indeed in their interests.

As we confront the threat posed by Iran, we need broad international support, enhanced US credibility, and maximum flexibility. A responsible redeployment from Iraq would provide all of these, and significantly strengthen our leverage.

Sam Brownback: Teheran's opposition to a secular, democratic Iraq means the US is already dealing with Iranian threats. While Iran may pose a future nuclear threat, the regime already represents the world's foremost state sponsor of terror, thanks to its actions in Iraq and elsewhere.

The best way to deal with Iranian threats today and tomorrow is to change the political conditions that enable Iranian aggression while maintaining the capability to punish Teheran, if necessary.

First, the US must push aggressively for a political solution in Iraq that will stabilize the country and undercut Iran's ability to influence events there. The US must simultaneously support the efforts of the Iranian people to moderate the behavior of the regime from within. Political progress in Iraq and Iran decreases the need for future military action.

But we cannot make our security dependent on political progress. We must counter Iran's efforts to intervene in Iraqi affairs and demonstrate that such efforts cannot succeed.  We must also remind Teheran that no matter what happens in Iraq, our commanders indicate they are prepared to address future contingencies. All options for dealing with provocative actions from Iran remain on the table.

Mitt Romney: While Iraq naturally commands a great deal of our nation's attention and resources, we must comprehend that the United States is engaged in a broader conflict with radical Islam that stretches beyond Iraq's borders. Radical Islam's goal is to replace all moderate Islamic states with a worldwide caliphate and destroy the United States and Israel.

Whether or not the current "surge" in troop levels in Iraq succeeds, the United States and our allies need to be prepared to deal with a new generation of challenges that go far beyond any single nation or conflict. Among the gravest of these challenges is Iran's relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons capabilities while spouting genocidal threats against Israel.

Only a strong America with a strong military can effectively confront such challenges. For this reason, I have proposed increasing our investment in national defense. The next president should commit to spending a minimum of four percent of GDP to keeping America strong.

Additionally, we need to strengthen old partnerships and alliances and inaugurate new ones to meet twenty-first-century challenges. The United States' strength is amplified when it is combined with the strength of other nations. Whether diplomatically, militarily, or economically, the United States is stronger when its friends stand alongside it. Together, a reinvigorated defense and revitalized alliances will ensure that the United States has the necessary capabilities to confront these challenges.

To aggressively combat Iran's nuclear ambitions and exploit the regime's vulnerabilities, I have outlined a comprehensive strategy. Whatever the situation in Iraq may be, we should take these steps to confront Iran's nuclear ambitions.

The new generation of challenges we face may seem daunting. Yet confronting challenges has always made the United States stronger.

We are a unique nation, and there is no substitute for our leadership. The difficulties we face in Iraq should neither cause us to lose faith in the United States' strength and role in the world nor blind us to the new challenges we face. Our future depends on our resolve to unite America and our allies to confront a new generation of global challenges.

John McCain: There can be little doubt that failure in Iraq would leave Iran in a far stronger position to exert regional hegemony, pursue its nuclear weapons program and support extremist elements throughout the Middle East. The best course in Iraq is to allow the new strategy to have a chance to succeed under General Petraeus and his team. The fifth and final brigade has just arrived in Iraq. We are paying the price for many past mistakes, most notably too few troops in the past. The course ahead will be very difficult but it is strategically irresponsible to declare the "surge" a failure before it has even been fully implemented.

We should have no illusions - Iran is engaged in a proxy struggle against the United States. Iran is gravely complicating our efforts to secure Iraq by arming Sunni and Shia extremists with sophisticated weapons that are used to kill American soldiers. Iran's president has perversely doubted the Holocaust and threatened Israel's right to exist. The Iranian danger goes far beyond rhetoric. Iran is providing financial, material and political support for the most violent enemies of Israel on three fronts: Hamas in Gaza; Hezbollah in Lebanon; and Syria. In Afghanistan, Iran has sent arms to the Taliban fighting NATO forces.  ran continues to harbor known al Qaeda members.

To date, Iran has not paid a price for its behavior and, unsurprisingly, continues to subvert American efforts to stabilize Iraq and support violent extremists dedicated to the destruction of Israel. The Iranian theocracy, however, has significant political and economic vulnerabilities. It seems clear that the vast majority of the Iranian people do not support the course their government has chosen of confrontation with the world.  Ethnic minorities regularly demand greater autonomy. Nearly a quarter of Iran's people are under the age of 15, and this youthful population sees economic and political power concentrated in the hands of a corrupt and out-of-touch elite.

Economically, Iran is dependent on foreign investment in its energy sector and relies on heavily subsidized refined gasoline imports to avoid social unrest.  Inflation has increased the cost of basic goods such as food, housing and medical care while unemployment is in the double digits.  A concerted effort to isolate the Iranian regime economically and politically will increase internal pressures and, quite possibly, lead to a change in behavior if not a change in government. If Teheran's protectors in the United Nations Security Council continue to thwart meaningful sanctions, we should work with like-minded countries in Europe, in the Gulf and beyond to further isolate Iran.

Finally, we must make clear to the Iranian regime that continuing to train and equip forces that are attacking and killing Americans in Iraq will not be tolerated.  

Every major US ally agrees a nuclear Iran is unacceptable, and China and Russia both recently voted with the UN Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran.  We should continue to work with all these major countries to isolate Iran through diplomatic measures that will, over time, force Iran to finally understand the world community will not allow it to possess nuclear weapons. Working with our European friends, we also need to offer Iran new economic incentives, which the Bush administration has not seriously considered.  At the same time, we must use new and more serious economic sanctions to change Iran's course.