let us see what love can do

Air Force Think Tank: Don't Attack Iran!
8/5/2008
"Tone down U.S. policy statements advocating regime change in Iran," recommended a major study prepared for the US Air Force on how the US should redefine its relationship with Iran.

On July 10, 2008, RAND Project Air Force (RAND PAF)--a division of the defense think tank the RAND Corporation--released a major study recommending alternatives to military conflict with Iran.

The study concludes that an attack on Iran is "likely to have negative effects for the United States". As the majority of Iranians support Iran's uranium enrichment program, "if Iran�s facilities were to be bombed, public support for retaliation would likely be widespread." While fomenting instability and risking a great loss of lives, such "an attack would be unlikely to stop the Iranian [nuclear] program."

The 156 report entitled, "Iran's Political, Demographic, and Economic Vulnerabilities," warns that threats for regime change are counterproductive, concluding that in today's context of Iranian politics:

"[...] U.S. policy statements calling for regime change are more likely to serve the interests of Iranian government agencies interested in cracking down on those who advocate expanding civil liberties rather than to advance U.S. policy interests."

The RAND Project Air Force's proposals are intended to address short term security concerns but additionally "designed to create conditions for effective relations [with Tehran] over the long haul." The study notes that there is great untapped potential in a more constructive US-Iran relationship. "Long-term trends suggest that Iran is likely to become more democratic and less obdurate," RAND PAF concludes.

However, such democratic trends would be jeopardized by a US attack on Iran, as would a more positive future for US-Iran relations. "If U.S. forces were to be involved, the current positive view in Iran of the United States would take a decided turn for the worse," RAND PAF warns. An argues that an attack on Iran would be unlikely to severely set back Iran's nuclear program since at current oil prices, "the government would be able to finance the reconstruction of the facility and continue the current program without major budgetary consequences."

The report opposes covert funding for violent opposition groups, even recommending that the US "discourage Iranian ethnic groups from revolting against the current regime." RAND PAF's approach is comprehensive, advising educational and other 'people to people' exchange between Iranians and Americans.

RAND PAF endorses certain sanctions against Iran and encouraging US allies to bar selected Iranian officials from traveling to those nations. However, it argues that a blockade would, like a military attack, be counterproductive. At a minimum it would "probably do more to solidify public support for the regime than weaken it" and at worst it could lead to Iran retaliating by attacking oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.