Unilateral Lecturing

Matt Duss--responding to news that the Iran Sanctions Act has been hotlined in the Senate--writes:

It’s hard to see how “crippling” unilateral sanctions like those contained in IRPSA would enhance the Green movement’s recruitment efforts.

I agree with those like [Karim] Sadjadpour and Trita Parsi and Dokhi Fassihian of the National Iranian-American Council, and Abbas Milani who say that time is right for President Obama to make a more clear and forthright statement of solidarity with the Iranian people against human rights abuses. But the sanctions currently being considered by the U.S. Congress would do nothing to help that cause — as written, they would in fact be harmful.

I'm struggling to understand why the so-called Green Movement should be of any immediate concern to the Obama administration. There are several disconcerting things about Iranian behavior, but first and foremost must be the regime's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

And if unilateral sanctions make for bad policy, how then does unilateral lecturing from Washington result in a nuclear deal with Iran?

Do those advocating solidarity with the protesters seriously expect key negotiating partners, such as China, to support the prioritization of human rights in Iran? And if sanctions are a poor measure of toughness, how might more empty rhetoric and hollow threats be perceived in Tehran?

These are questions in need of answering before we get caught up if the Green "Wave." The protests in Iran are promising, but they are not paramount. We mustn't confuse the two.

(AP Photos)