For the last eight years, Democrats criticized the Bush administration for its supposed cowboy diplomacy and mishandling of U.S. international alliances. A Democratic administration, we were told, would be filled with savvy diplomatic hands who knew how to use leverage and American smart power to further America’s objectives in the world. The actions of the Obama administration over the last two weeks, however, make one wonder what happened to all of the smooth operators we were promised would land at the White House, Pentagon, and State Department. First, the administration found itself preempted by a Wall Street Journal article that was going to reveal its decision to abandon plans to place missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic. In an effort to inform close U.S. allies before they read about it in the press, the administration rushed to alert them but instead botched the rollout, leaving allies in Central and Eastern Europe feeling that they were left in the cold and sending a general message of incompetence. Then, on Friday, President Obama was forced to reveal that Iran had constructed a covert uranium enrichment facility, not at a time of his own choosing, but because the Iranians themselves decided to come clean to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Once again, senior officials were left scrambling. As one administration official told the New York Times, there was “a fair amount of anger” within the administration about Iran’s disclosure. Another official told the Times that “Everybody’s been asking, ‘Where’s our leverage?’ Well, now we just got that leverage.” Effective deployment of leverage has not been the forte of this administration thus far. Despite tough talk from the administration after North Korea’s nuclear test earlier this year, the United States has not pursued enough painful financial sanctions to force North Korea to halt its nuclear activities. On Iran, despite possessing information about the covert nuclear site prior to his inauguration and the acclaim of European leaders we were told was so important, President Obama failed to use either to bring pressure to bear on Iran prior to its June 12 presidential elections, effectively wasting six months while Iran continued to make technological progress at its previously declared enrichment facility at Natanz. On missile defense, the Obama administration managed to look like it was selling out some of America’s closest allies while getting nothing from the Russians in return. So, perhaps we should be skeptical of the administration’s ability now to effectively use recent developments to pressure Iran. The president’s announcement of the new site on Friday combined tough rhetoric that the site was “inconsistent with a peaceful program” with surprisingly weak language about the implications of a breach of Iran’s international obligations. In other circumstances, such a revelation might have led to military action (ask Syria) or at a minimum, would have been used to call for immediate tough international sanctions. Instead, plans will now proceed for a meeting next week between members of the P5+1, including Under Secretary of State William Burns, and Iran. The administration seems to think that their revelation about the site will lead Russia and China to support sanctions. This seems to be based on nothing more than hope. But, we shouldn’t worry. A senior administration official told the press Friday that, despite the president’s previous deadline for progress with Iran by the just concluded G-20 summit, “this stock-taking effort continues.” Hopefully the administration’s “stock taking” will take into account the fact that the initial reaction from Russia and China has been a bit underwhelming. As Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei put it when asked about whether Iran should be punished for its covert nuclear activities, “Personally, I don’t like the word punishment. I think that all issues can be solved through dialogue and negotiation.” Perhaps there is an opening for Vice Foreign Minister Yafei at Foggy Bottom or on the Obama National Security Council staff. He would fit right in. Even if the Obama administration is successful and convinces both countries to support a tough new United Nations Security Council resolution, the sanctions that result will not be likely to force Iran to abandon its efforts to develop a nuclear weapon. This is made clear by an important new report by Senator Daniel Coats, Senator Charles Robb, and General (ret.) Charles Wald. The report, released several weeks ago by the Bipartisan Policy Center, makes clear that the Obama administration’s options are limited and that “time is running out.” The study notes that any Security Council sanctions need to be coupled with actions by “key nations – especially our European partners – to cease or significantly reduce their commercial ties to the Islamic Republic.” It also states that current legislation regarding refined gasoline products is important, but that “even tougher sanctions will ultimately be necessary.” The most revealing conclusion of the report is that the White House should begin “serious consideration of the option of a U.S.-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities” because an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear program “would be of very short duration, less effective than a U.S. strike, would lead to larger condemnations, and…could provoke more effective Iranian reprisals against U.S. regional allies.” Despite heeding such calls, the administration seems headed in the opposite direction. Secretary of Defense Gates routinely downplays the utility of military action against Iran, allowing the Iranians to perceive that they can get away with just about anything, even a covert facility supposedly configured to produce uranium for a nuclear weapon. As the Bipartisan Policy Center Report concludes, “Time is running out; we must meet the challenge now.” It’s time for this administration to start employing some of that diplomatic finesse we’ve been promised. If they can’t leverage a covert nuclear site to punish Iran, they can’t leverage much of anything.
