June 13, 2008

Last week, the presumptive Democratic and Republican presidential nominees Senators Barack Obama and John McCain spoke to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington, D.C. and each addressed the threat posed by Iran. While it is implicit that the next president will have to approach this issue, each differs in how they would negotiate with Tehran and its leadership.

While both candidates claim that diplomacy is their preferred path, Senator Obama (D-IL) argues that his Republican counterpart is advocating the same hands-off approach as President Bush, which will lead to a failed Persian Gulf policy.

"Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking," Obama said. "But as president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing--if, and only if, it can advance the interests of the United States."

Citing the examples of Presidents Truman, Kennedy, and Reagan, Senator Obama underscored that strong leaders talk to their enemies and believes that the United States has not exhausted its non-military options in confronting the threat posed by Iran. America has yet to utilize these methods, making "diplomacy a tool to succeed, not just a means of containing failure."

On the other hand, presumed Republican presidential nominee Senator McCain (AZ) has repeatedly advocated for a more distant response to Iran, arguing for strengthened economic sanctions against the country in order to pressure its leadership to halt its uranium enrichment program, but also as a means to freeze its supposed terrorism financing and weapons proliferation to Hezbollah and Hamas.

"We must create the real-world pressures that will peacefully but decisively change the path they are on," McCain stated in his address to AIPAC. The Senator's recommendations included urging Iran's neighbors to deny visas and freeze the assets of Iranians, proposing an international divestment campaign, and imposing financial sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran.

Referring to Obama's suggestion that if elected president, he would engage in direct, principled diplomacy to address the threats that Iran poses to other countries, McCain remarked that "such a spectacle would harm Iranian moderates and dissidents, as the radicals and hardliners strengthen their position and suddenly acquire the appearance of respectability."

With combat forces overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and more tax dollars funding those conflicts, Americans are war-weary and have, over the years, increased their opposition to the United States' involvement in these particular regions, but also become more critical of U.S. foreign policy. As Iran takes center stage as a foreign policy issue for America, the next president will have to address what the Bush Administration has called "a threat to world peace."

While both Senator McCain and Senator Obama differ in their approach towards diplomacy with Iran, it is in our national interest to ensure global peace via the disarmament of nuclear weapons across the world. The only way to truly win the hearts and minds of people is through respect and diplomacy, particularly in dealing with our adversaries.