A Path for Progress with Iran

On the radar: Getting beyond suspicion and threats with Tehran; Iran sues Russia; From moratoria to test bans; Disarmament by default from NATO; De-alerting on the Twitters; The Kremlin’s China fears; and the stalled fissile cutoff is still stalled.

August 31, 2011 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke

Rules for Successful Engagement with Iran -”Despite this unprecedented willingness of both Tehran and Washington to talk, engagement has failed thus far, and will continue to fail as long as both sides undermine it with ‘dual track approaches,’” writes Amb. Hossein Mousavian in the New Atlanticist.

--The status quo dual track approach of increased pressure with offers for negotiations has made for easy domestic politics in both the US and Iran. However, it is also blocking rapprochement and preventing the countries from engaging on joint interests like stabilizing Afghanistan and neutralizing Al Qaeda.

--Mousavian suggests an easing of angry rhetoric, pausing of sanctions, and initiation of comprehensive talks with priority given to areas of common interest between Washington and Tehran. http://ow.ly/6hzIU

Good luck with that - Iran filed a lawsuit at the International Court of Justice in a bid to force Russia to sell it the S-300 air-defense system under a contract Moscow abrogated in 2010.

--”Right now Moscow is looking to the West to help modernize strategic economic sectors, so it's unlikely it will accede to pressure from Tehran in a legal dispute that could drag on for years,” UPI reports. http://ow.ly/6hBUe

Banning nuclear tests - 500 nuclear test explosions were witnessed every decade before the CTBT. Last decade, only two (from North Korea).

--This international norm against testing is helpful, but bringing the CTBT into force is necessary to reduce the security and environmental risks of unchecked nuclear competition. Tibor Tóth writes for Project Syndicate. http://ow.ly/6hChK

Drifting to a NATO without nuclear weapons - As NATO reviews is deterrence posture before the next summit in May, Jeffrey Larsen lays out the options and prospects for NATO nuclear policy. “Unless current trends are altered, US nuclear weapons may not have many years left before they are removed from NATO Europe through mechanisms driven by everything except a conscious Alliance decision.”

--”with no decision on its future taken by the Alliance, maintaining the status quo with modest technical updates is most likely in the near term, with US withdrawal the likely mid-term result of the passage of time and neglect.“ Read the Atlantic Council Issue Brief. http://ow.ly/6hzif

De-alerting tweet debate - David Hoffman (@thedeadhandbook) of Foreign Policy tweeted about a blog supporting reducing the excessive alert postures of US and Russia nuclear forces.This tipped off a great twitter debate with HASC staffer John Noonan (@noonanjo). Summary:

--@thedeadhandbook: "@noonanjo if bilateral, verifiable de-alerting, we can give presidents more time, and they need it in nuclear crisis. stabilizing minutes."

--@noonanjo: "@thedeadhandbook Interesting.Big fear is playing w/untested deterrence theories. We have something that is stable + works. Why mess w/it?"

Big think: China and Russia’s calculations - “Moscow’s appeals to engage other nuclear states in arms control are implicitly driven by fears of China. But Russia does not fully understand how to engage China and needs the United States to pressure Beijing to talk and for political cover should talks fail. But engaging China on arms control is not practical yet, given the disparities in size and type of each country’s arsenals.” http://ow.ly/6hBEh

Fissile cutoff treaty still stalled after P5 meeting - The permanent members of the UN Security Council recently met to discuss negotiations in the CD on a fissile cutoff treaty. The impasse continues:

--”despite the efforts of the United States, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and others to jump start action, key states including China, India, and others remain reluctant about pursuing creative solutions to stop fissile production for weapons and to account for existing fissile stockpiles.” Quick analysis on the ongoing impasse from Arms Control Now. http://ow.ly/6hB52