in the media

U.S. Response to the Crisis in Iran

Violence in the aftermath of Iran’s election has raised questions about the future of the regime, and about the way the Obama administration should respond to this controversial situation.

by Robert KaganDavid IgnatiusDavid Sanger, and David Brooks
published by
Charlie Rose
 on June 19, 2009

Source: Charlie Rose

With widespread mass protests and escalating violence following the contested Iranian election, many experts are questioning the future of the regime. Meanwhile, critics have accused the Obama Administration of taking an overly passive stance, failing to use its influence to discourage the Iranian regime’s violent crackdown.

Carnegie’s Robert Kagan joined David Ignatius, David Sanger, and David Brooks to discuss the U.S. role in the situation. Kagan highlighted the fact that the Obama administration is at a transition point, where it may have to rethink its commitment to negotiations and its acceptance of the legitimacy of the Iranian regime. At this point, he said, Obama should do whatever he can to try to prevent the regime from using mass violence—before it’s too late. Obama should use his international popularity as a tool and should try to rally other world leaders to join him in condemning the use of mass violence by the Iranian regime.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.