In another resolution apparently designed to prepare for war against Iran, the U.S. House of Representatives, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan 401–11 vote, has passed a resolution (HR 568) urging the president to oppose any policy toward Iran “that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.”
As with nuclear weapons, cyber-defense lags behind cyberwarfare.
The recently concluded negotiations between Iran and the world powers, the so-called P5+1, was perhaps the first serious attempt at resolving the Iranian nuclear impasse since the 2009 botched negotiations. Both sides entered the talks with a strong sense of cautious optimism, thinking maybe this time would be different. Even former top American diplomats joined the euphoric run up to the Baghdad talks. According to the former lead U.S. negotiator on Iran, Nicholas Burns, “for the first time in 32 years, since the Iranian revolution, there is the possibility of serious, substantive and sustained talks with Iran.”
Iran may or may not have the ability to mount cyberattacks of its own.
As at least two days of talks on the future of Iran’s nuclear program got underway in Baghdad on Wednesday, neo-conservatives and other hawks escalated their campaign against any compromise agreement, particularly one that would permit Tehran to continue enriching uranium on its territory.
Removing the Mujahedin-e Khalq from the U.S. Department Terrorism list doesn’t bring the Iranian scientists it killed back to life.
A new and perhaps surprising country took center stage recently in the ongoing row over Iran’s nuclear program – Azerbaijan. Citing anonymous “high-level sources” from U.S. diplomatic and intelligence circles, a controversial article in Foreign Policy at the end of March suggested the possibility that Israel might have been proffered the use of Azerbaijani airstrips for any strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The United States sides with a state with an illegal nuclear weapons program over one without one.
Foreign Affairs contributor Patrick Clawson clings to the hoary old myth of democracy promotion as a means to regime change in Iran.
Still, the Obama administration has shown little inclination to reduce pressure — and the threat of military action — on Tehran.