Depressurize Iran?

In late July and for the first part of this month, I had the honor of sailing aboard the USS Harry S. Truman as it crossed the Atlantic Ocean. Every time I step foot on an aircraft carrier—and the Truman was the eighth carrier on which I have had the honor to spend time—it is a truly humbling experience, and I learn much about the reality of life in and around the Persian Gulf that I would not otherwise pick up from the American or foreign press.

There was one major difference between the Truman and previous carriers. There was a distinct sense on board that the policy of the United States is to “de-pressurize” Iran. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Navy (IRGC-N) remains as aggressive as ever toward the United States Navy and other international shipping in international waters. Not only does IRGC-N commander Ali Fadavi brag openly about probing U.S. vessels, but increasingly Iranian UAVs are becoming a factor in the skies over and surrounding U.S. shipping in the region.

So what does it mean to depressurize Iran? Whenever an incident does occur—and there have been several—it now seems to be the policy of the United States ordered by the White House and Chuck Hagel at the Pentagon to downplay it. That may seem like sound diplomacy for President Obama’s team, but it ignores the Iranian perception of such reaction. As IRGC Ground Forces Commander Brig. General Mohammad Jafar-Asadi concluded after diplomatic talks began several years ago, this shows that “the U.S. has no choice but to leave the region beaten and humiliated.”

Alas, ignoring Iranian provocation does not make the region or the world safer, but simply convinces Iranian leaders that they should push harder. Nor is downplaying Iranian activities responsible: it is politicization of intelligence pure and simple. It is bad enough not to have a coherent Iran strategy. It is worse to pursue actions that hemorrhage U.S. credibility further.