David Billington raises a good point in his response to my earlier post about the Geneva talks. Doesn’t the U.S. get what it wants if the Geneva agreement is actually implemented?

Yes and no. Yes in that the immediate danger of Iranian nuclear proliferation is ended. No in that the infrastructure and know-how remains intact, giving Iran a possible hedge down the road. The U.S. principal intent has always been to deproliferate Iran--with all equipment and facilities dismantled and removed--not to supervise an Iranian nuclear infrastructure.

I talk about the Obama administration facing a “James Baker moment” in this column. What I mean by the term is the extent to which the U.S. limits its own policy preferences in return for getting maximum international support on a key development [e.g. better to have a broad coalition supporting the explusion of Saddam Hussein from Iraq rather than go to Baghdad alone.]

Posted by Nikolas Gvosdev at 10/09/2009 08:42:11 AM |