Search Penny Hill Press

Friday, June 14, 2013

Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses

Kenneth Katzman
Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs

A priority of Obama Administration policy has been to reduce the perceived threat posed to a
broad range of U.S. interests by Iran, in particular by Iran’s advancing nuclear program. Well
before the nuclear issue rose to the forefront of U.S. concerns about Iran, the United States had
seen Iran’s support for militant groups in the Middle East, Iraq, and Afghanistan as efforts to
undermine U.S. interests and allies. U.S. officials also accuse Iran of actively helping Syria’s
leadership try to defeat the armed rebellion there.

The Obama Administration has orchestrated broad international economic pressure on Iran to try
to compel it to verifiably demonstrate to the international community that its nuclear program is
peaceful. Three rounds of multilateral talks with Iran in 2012 yielded no breakthroughs but did
explore a potential compromise under which Iran might cease enriching uranium to 20% purity (a
level not technically far from weapons grade) in exchange for modest sanctions relief. Further
high-level talks took place on February 26-27, 2013, and April 5-6, 2013, both in Almaty,
Kazakhstan. No breakthroughs were achieved in Almaty. Iran’s Supreme Leader has not taken up
U.S. offers to engage in the direct bilateral talks that many experts believe are required to produce
a breakthrough. And, there is an emerging consensus that international sanctions—although
severely harming Iran’s economy—have not pressured the regime to the point at which it is
compelled to compromise.

The government of Israel has asserted that it might take unilateral military action against Iran’s
nuclear facilities if Iran’s program advances to the point where Iran could produce a nuclear
weapon relatively quickly. President Obama Administration says the option of U.S. military
action against Iran’s nuclear facilities remains open, but he has asserted that there is still time—
although increasingly limited—for diplomacy. He reiterated this position during his March 2013
visit to Israel.

Some experts assert that the popularity of Iran’s regime is in decline, in part because of Iran’s
growing international isolation and in part because of its repression, although not to the point
where the regime’s grip on power is threatened. The domestic opposition remains relatively weak
and outwardly inactive. The March 2, 2012, parliamentary elections increased the political
dominance of Supreme Leader Ali Khamene’i, and the major candidates in the presidential
election to be held on June 14, 2013, are Khamene’i loyalists. Two major figures considered a
potential threat to the ruling establishment, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s close
aide and protégé, were barred from running by the ruling clerics.

The 112
th Congress supported additional economic sanctions against Iran, most recently with
enactment of the FY2013 defense authorization bill (H.R. 4310, P.L. 112-239). These laws
expand sanctions against companies that conduct energy, industrial, and financial and precious
metals transactions with Iran. Additional Iran sanctions bills, such as H.R. 850, are in varying
stages of consideration in the 113th Congress. For further information, see CRS Report RS20871,
Iran Sanctions, by Kenneth Katzman; and CRS Report R40094, Iran’s Nuclear Program:
Tehran’s Compliance with International Obligations, by Paul K. Kerr.

Date of Report: May 28, 2013
Number of Pages: 78
Order Number: RL32048
Price: $29.95

To Order:

RL32048.pdf   to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART


Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.