The bomb and the Middle East

With tension between the U.S. and Iran continuing to increase, the U.S. should stop trying to change the regime in Iran and start serious negotiations, Hubert Vedrine, former French foreign minister, told a packed meeting at the American University of Paris on Dec. 3. Vedrine said that we must do everything possible to avoid having to make a choice between letting Iran develop a nuclear bomb and bombing Iran. President Bush won’t do it, he said, but Secretary of State Condolezza Rice is in effect working in this direction. He cautioned that the next adminstration may not be all that different, but at least it would be less venturesome about things like attacking Iraq.

A surprise speaker, Leonard Kadychev, first counselor at the Russian embassy in Paris, also urged restraint. Kadychev said he doubted that further economic sanctions would be useful and noted that in his view no intelligence case had been made that Iran is trying to develop its own atomic bomb.

The meeting, sponsored by Democrats Abroad France to mark the inauguration of a new masters program on international affairs, was especially timely since it was held on the same day that the U.S. made public a new National Intelligence Estimate. The NIE statement, which represents the consensus of all 16 of the U.S. national intelligence agencies, said, “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003 Iran halted its nuclear weapons program.” But it also added that “We also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at minimum is keeping open the option of developing nuclear weapons.”

Vedrine, who has his own consultancy firm in France and recently completed a report on globalization for French President Nicolas Sarkozy, said regime change cannot be imposed from outside Iran. Change will come, he predicted, but we must have patience for Iran to develop democracy by itself. He added that Sarkozy wants a diplomatic solution and that he thinks Russia wants to part of the solution.

Russia’s position is reasonable and understandable, according to Kadychev, who noted that Russia shares part of its border with Iran and thus has an important interest in what happens in Iran. He wants the U.S. to consider Russia as a partner, not an opponent, but doesn’t mean that it can’t criticize the U.S. policy. He said the U.S, the EU and Russia should work together to reach an understanding with Iran. He noted that after 9/11, Russia was very sympathetic to the U.S. in its retaliatory attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Other points: Vedrine said he could not rule out a military attack on Iran, although he rated the possibility as under five on a scale of one to 10. As for sanctions, they have also been a failure in Sudan and Burma. Three quarters of the requests for UN sanctions has come from the U.S.

In response to a question on denuclearization of the entire Middle East and Southeast Asia, he said that a “no first use” policy is not likely because disarming Pakistan would also have to include India. Not to mention Israel and no U.S. president would go for that. As for outside financial support to opponents of the regime in Tehran, he said change would “have to come from Iranians in Iran, not Iranians in California.”
Kadychev said that he saw no possibility of returning to a bipolar world such as during the Cold War. He acknowledged the U.S. is the predominant power but said that multilaterism was gaining ground on a lower level.

Is any optimism warranted? Vedrine predicted that the Iranian regime would collapse and that Russia would continue to evolve but at its own pace. One thing that the U.S. should do is continue to press hard for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Ann Kratz moderated the discussion and translated for Vedrine. Kadychev spoke in English. — Barney Kirchhoff

Back to news | Previous events | Speaker summaries | Archive