Andrew:

And next week, we will see their latest battle, against a regime whose legitimacy has gone, whose isolation around the world is deeper than at any time in its history, and whose fate is as sealed as those tyrants in Moscow two decades ago [bold mine-DL].

The courage of Iranian opposition protests is undeniable and extremely impressive. It is all the more so when we realize that these last two claims are not true. The world is not isolating Iran, and the Iranian regime is not obviously doomed. As the Mousavizadeh article from the other day made clear, Iran’s international isolation is not only not deep, but it is also far less effective than it once might have been. As far as I know, no government that had diplomatic relations with Tehran before June 12 has severed them since the crackdown began. To date, there have been no additional sanctions imposed on Iran by any of its trading partners. As Laura Rozen reported yesterday, Japanese mediation efforts on the nuclear issue may be making some progress, and at present Japan remains committed to negotiating a compromise that will avoid sanctions. Neither Iran’s internal repression nor its nuclear program has led to deteriorating relations with new, increasingly assertive powers such as Brazil and Turkey. On the contrary, Brazil and Turkey have forged closer relations with Iran since the crackdown began. Virtually none of Iran’s regional neighbors disputes Ahmadinejad’s election, and none of them has tied the quality of bilateral relations to the regime’s internal behavior.

Despite all that, it could be that the regime could lose control, but this is far from certain. Indeed, it seems to be getting more improbable every day. So how can we say that the fate of the current Iranian leadership is “sealed”? The tyrants in Moscow accepted that their fate was to lose power. On the whole, to the extent that they gave up power, they went quietly. The Chinese and Burmese governments have offered different examples to follow. Following these examples, Iran’s leadership apparently believes it can outlast the protests and remain in power. So far, the opposition has given them and the rest of us little reason to think otherwise.

Why do I bother writing this? It is certainly not because I like the way things are. It is not simply to be contrary. Neither am I interested in assuming the worst about the situation just to do it. The danger in thinking that the regime’s fate is “sealed” and believing, contrary to evidence, that Tehran is isolated in the world is that it encourages misguided policy decisions. If one believes that Tehran is extremely isolated, pursuing sanctions of one kind or another might seem much more practical. It is only when we recognize that Tehran is not isolated and has many partners and allies around the world that we see the futility of going the sanctions route. If one assumes that the regime’s fate is “sealed,” and we just need to wait and watch the collapse happen, that militates against negotiations and engagement, and it encourages hawks to lobby for increased pressure and confrontation to try to push the regime over the edge. Such policies will not only work to the detriment of the people risking their lives protesting against the regime, but they will almost certainly not achieve anything that Washington wants. If we fail to see what is actually happening in Iran because we would prefer to see something else, our government is going to pursue the wrong policy options that will not serve U.S. interests or the interests of the Iranian people.