Front page
XML Feed
Read Our
"Love your site" -- Dan Savage
"A great read" -- Fareed Zakaria
"I enjoy OxBlog very much" -- Michael Barone
OxBlog: Trying to live up to the hype since April 23, 2002!
David Adesnik, a research analyst in Washington DC, received his doctorate in international relations from Oxford.
Email David
![[Powered by Blogger]](http://buttons.blogger.com/bloggerbutton1.gif){kind=small}
The Media:
NYT
WaPo
OpinionJournal
TNR
Weekly Standard
NRO
Slate
Commentary
BBC
Other Blogs We Like:
George Washington:
InstaPundit
James Wilson:
Brett Marston
Alexis de Tocqueville:
American Scene
Crescat Sententia
Crooked Timber
Galley Slaves
Eve Tushnet
Christopher Hitchens
Theodore Roosevelt:
Amygdala
Belgravia Dispatch
Phil Carter
Joyful Christian
Joe Gandelman
Adrianne Truett
Winds of Change
Pejman Yousefzadeh
Global Guerrillas
Calvin Coolidge:
ScrappleFace
Winston Churchill:
Sasha Castel
Andrew Sullivan
Tim Blair
Franklin Roosevelt:
Kevin Drum
Josh Marshall
Matt Yglesias
Democracy Arsenal
Dan Nexon
David Ben Gurion:
GedankenPundit
Kesher Talk
Friedrich Hayek:
Jane Galt
Virginia Postrel
Natalie Solent
VodkaPundit
Matt Welch
Ronald Reagan:
Power Line
RealClearPolitics
Worldwide Standard
RedState
Liz Mair
Daniel Patrick Moynihan:
Daniel Drezner
How Appealing
# Posted 1:58 PM by Patrick Porter 
Depending on your stance, it illustrates the need to apply pressure after failed diplomatic gestures; that diplomacy is all we have; that pragmatic conciliatory engagement (UK style) is the only effective way to deal with Iran; even that it reveals the weakness of toothless multilateralist dialogue.
Personally, I can see the case for two conflicting approaches:
on one hand. the need to apply sanctions, deny materials and deter the Iranian regime from 'going nuclear' while hoping for internal change;
on the other, the potential benefits of a bold new policy: detente, Bush goes to Tehran, offers aid and economic assistance in return for strategic partnership against Al Qaeda and restraint on nuclear proliferation. Most of all, we divide our enemies.
Maybe its time to drop the rock in the pond, so to speak, and change the whole configuration in the Gulf. Or is this just naive speculation? (2) opinions -- Add your opinion
One possibility is that their original intention was only to hold the hostages briefly. Another is the commonly suggested hypothesis that one Iranian faction authorized the detention, but couldn't persuade the others to go along with it. A third hypothesis, also noted elsewhere, is that an overly aggressive local commander created a problem the leadership never wanted.
