|
Supports range of options, including military option
Although we must not rule out using military force, we should not hesitate to talk directly to Iran. Our diplomacy should aim to raise the cost for Iran of continuing its nuclear program by applying tougher sanctions and increasing pressure from its key trading partners. The world must work to stop Iran's uranium-enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. At the same time, we must show Iran -- and especially the Iranian people -- what could be gained from fundamental change: economic engagement, security assurances, and diplomatic relations.
-Barack Obama, Renewing American Leadership, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007
--
I don't think we should be talking about attacking Iran at this point…what we should be doing is… talking to Iran directly about the potential carrots that we can provide, in terms of them being involved in the World Trade Organization, or beginning to look at the possibilities of diplomatic relations being normalized…. there may come a point where those measures have been exhausted and Iran is on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon, where we have to consider other options, but we shouldn't talk about those options now…
-Barack Obama, Democratic Presidential Debate, October 30, 2007
--
We shouldn't allow Iran to have nuclear weapons, period. I have consistently said that I will do everything in my power to prevent them from having it, and I have not ruled out military force as an option.
-Barack Obama, quoted by Mike Shuster, Presidential Candidates Come Out Strong on Iran, NPR, May 8, 2008
Supports direct negotiations with countries with Iran and other countries, without preconditions
Question: In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
Obama: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.
-Barack Obama, Democratic Presidential Debate, July 23, 2007
--
You can’t engage in diplomacy in isolation. There’s got to be a broader strategic context to it...I would meet directly with Iranian leaders…We would engage in a level of aggressive personal diplomacy in which a whole host of issues are on the table…I think it is important for us to send a signal that we are not hell bent on regime change, just for the sake of regime change, but expect changes in behavior and there are both carrots and there are sticks available to them for those changes in behavior.
-Barack Obama quoted by Michael Gordon and Jeff Zeleny, Interview with Barack Obama, TheNew York Times, November 1, 2007
--
By reporting that Iran halted its nuclear weapon development program four years ago because of international pressure, the new National Intelligence Estimate makes a compelling case for less saber-rattling and more direct diplomacy. The juxtaposition of this NIE with the president’s suggestion of World War III serves as an important reminder of what we learned with the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq: members of Congress must carefully read the intelligence before giving the President any justification to use military force.
-Barack Obama, quoted by Scholars and Rogues Blog, Clinton statement on NIE report is an exercise in double-dealing misdirection, December 4, 2007
--
Demanding that a country meets all your conditions before you meet with them -- that is not a strategy. It is just naïve, wishful thinking.
-Barack Obama, quoted by Mark Murray, Obama Fires Back at McCain, MSNBC’s First Read, May 19, 2008
--
There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad before we know that he was actually in power…He's not the most powerful person in Iran.
-Barack Obama, quoted by Ben Smith, Obama’s Meetings, Politico’s Ben Smith Blog, May 27, 2008
--
There will be careful preparation. We will open up lines of communication, build an agenda, coordinate closely with our allies, and evaluate the potential for progress. Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing – if, and only if – it can advance the interests of the United States.
-Barack Obama, Remarks to American Israel Political Action Committee, June 4, 2008
Supports direct diplomacy in response to Iran’s missile tests
These missile tests demonstrate once again that we need to change our policy to deal aggressively with the threat posed by the Iranian regime. Through its nuclear program, missile capability, meddling in Iraq, support for terrorism, and threats against Israel, Iran now poses the greatest strategic challenge to the United States in the region in a generation. Now is the time to work with our friends and allies, and to pursue direct and aggressive diplomacy with the Iranian regime backed by tougher unilateral and multilateral sanctions. It’s time to offer the Iranians a clear choice between increased costs for continuing their troubling behavior, and concrete incentives that would come if they change course.
-Barack Obama, Obama Camp Statement on Iran Missile Test, Time’s The Page, July 9, 2008
Opposed Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, but supports declaring Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization
Why is this so dangerous? The Bush administration could use language like this to justify a continued troop presence in Iraq as long as it perceives a threat from Iran. Even worse, the Bush administration could use the language in Lieberman-Kyl to justify an attack on Iran as a part of the ongoing war in Iraq.
-Barack Obama, Five Years After Iraq War Vote, We're Still Foolishly Rattling Our Sabers, New Hampshire Union-Leader, October 11, 2007
--
Obama cosponsored an earlier bill that also called for designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization; The Kyl-Lieberman amendment did more than just label the IRGC terrorists. Obama stated at the time that he opposed the bill on the grounds that it constituted “saber-rattling.”
-FactCheck.org, Soft on Iran, June 5, 2008
|
