Discussions throughout the one-day conference broached a number of key issues, including internal leadership and societal dynamics within Iran, Iran’s relationship with other regional actors, the implications of a nuclear-armed Iran or a military strike against Iran, and the various policy options available to address key issues such as Iran’s nuclear capabilities, instability in Iraq, and terrorism. Many participants argued at the conference that some degree of both containment and engagement was the best policy approach toward Iran and that a use-of-force option was neither imminent nor desirable. There was a general sense that UN sanctions and economic pressure was working in isolating Iran (even if some desired that it work faster). Furthermore, Ambassador R. Nicholas Burns emphasized that the United States is willing to be patient to allow economic and diplomatic efforts to work and stated that there are no imminent deadlines that would cause the U.S. government to pursue a drastic course in its approach toward Iran.
To follow are several other key themes that emerged from the discussions:
- U.S.-Iranian cooperation is possible, especially on Iraq.
- Iran may be interested in working with the United States and the international community to find a solution to the nuclear issue.
- The UN sanction process and international economic pressure are working.
- Preemption is not imminent.
- Focus is on regime behavior, not regime change.
- A nuclear-armed Iran can be expected to be more dangerous and aggressive than a non—nuclear-armed Iran.
- Engagement and containment options were ultimately preferred to confrontation.
Bookmarks