How not to deal with Iran [AV]

The otherwise sensible David Ignatius has a column in today's Washington Post urging the administration to engage Iran. Indeed, he supports more than the "direct negotiations" that Iran's leadership is calling for. Ignatius wants "more air travel to Iran, more scholarships for students, more exchanges, Iranian membership in the World Trade Organization." I can't think of a worse idea.

Iran's belligerency is today at the highest it has been since the Islamic Revolution, and it is now--now!--that Ignatius would have us reward the regime by engaging it, giving Iran the same perks of statehood as we might give to, say, Finland.

And what does the United States get in return? Will Iran verifiably end its uranium enrichment program? Will the rights of religious minorities--such as the oppressed Baha'i--be given more respect? Will Iran stop supporting jihadists in Iraq? No: Rewarding Ahmadi-Nejad's sabre-rattling with concessions will lead to more sabre-rattling, and will probably result in ever more concessions.

Comments

[Tony]

Charles Krauthammer agrees with your take.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501987.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns