Another Iranian "olive branch" goes public

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to President Bush has largely been rejected as unhelpful posturing, but a second and likely far more important letter, one that opens the door a crack to negotiations to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis, has emerged. Here's Time:

[A] second document, written by a top Iranian official and given to TIME just before Ahmadinejad's letter was made public, offers a more concrete foundation for negotiations to resolve the nuclear impasse. In the two-page memorandum, intended for publication in the West, Hassan Rohani, representative of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini, on the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and Iran's former top nuclear negotiator, defends Iran's nuclear posture, decries American bullying, and puts forward a plan to remove the nuclear issue from the U.N. Security Council and return it to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, a long-standing Iranian goal.

The letter also offers some specific Iranian starting points for negotiation. Rohani said Iran would "consider ratifying the Additional Protocol, which provides for intrusive and snap inspections," and that it would also "address the question of preventing 'break-out'" -- or abandonment of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Independent nuclear experts consulted by TIME said these proposals were "hopeful" signs.

However, on the key U.S. demand that Iran forgo uranium enrichment on its own soil, because of international fears the process would permit Tehran to develop weapons-grade fissile material, Rohani said Iran would agree only "to negotiate with the IAEA and states concerned about the scope and timing of its industrial-scale uranium enrichment." And while Rohani promised that "Iran would accept an IAEA verifiable cap on enrichment limit of reactor grade uranium" on Iranian territory, that would not meet the concerns of the U.S. and most of its European allies.

Rohani also pledged that "Iran would accept an IAEA verifiable cap on the production of UF6 -- uranium hexafluoride, which is used for enrichment." Finally, Rohani promised that "Iran and the IAEA would agree on terms of the continuous presence of inspectors in Iran to verify credibly that no diversion takes place."

Rohani, a "moderate," does not necessarily speak for Ahmadinejad, who ousted him last year, but "his views carry weight". Indeed, his letter shows that there are in fact influential Iranian moderates who reject Ahmadinejad's hard-line approach (even if they also reject "American bullying").

More to the point, Rohani's letter shows that there may very well be room for negotiation, for a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to this escalating crisis. Given the potentially disastrous consequences of military action against Iran, not to mention the fact that such action might not even be effective at destroying Iran's nuclear program (let alone thwarting its long-term nuclear ambitions), I have previously argued -- see here and here -- that it's time to talk to Tehran. Military action may indeed be necessary sometime down the road, but such action should only follow good-faith communication and, if possible, negotiation. If such diplomatic efforts fail, then at least the U.S. and its allies would be able to go to the international community having exhausted all options short of military action. Then, and perhaps only then, would U.N. sanctions and, beyond that, U.S.-led military action be considered legitimate responses to the crisis.

If the U.S. only responds to Ahmadinejad's nationalist bluster with its own incendiary rhetoric, or by ignoring Ahmadinejad altogether, all those undesirable outcomes -- an Iranian attack on Israel, Iranian intervention in Iraq, terrorist attacks against U.S. interests around the world, a hardening of relations between the U.S. and various Muslim states, a massive oil crisis, etc. -- will come to look more and more likely.

Talking may not work, but it's worth a shot.