“Just as George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the neocons used 9/11 to get into Iraq five years ago, they’re trying to use Iraq today to get into Iran. And we have to stop them. We owe our American heroes—the men and women in our armed services who are fighting so bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan today—no less. . . . This is a critical moment. As a nation, we stand today at a fork in the road with Iran. We have a real choice about the direction we’ll take. One path will replay the last seven years. It leads toward a dark future of belligerence, aggression, and war. We need a new direction—onethat will defuse the Iran threat, rather than aggravate it, and that will make America safer, not make the world more dangerous.”

- Senator John Edwards

There’s no doubt that Iran is an extremely dangerous country. Iran supports terrorist and insurgent activity, threatens Israel, rejects U.N. Security Council resolutions, and appears to be trying to produce fuel for a nuclear bomb. We should take Iran very seriously. As commander-in-chief, if John Edwards ever learned that any nation, including Iran, is threatening an imminent attack, he will do what’s necessary to protect America. But there is one thing Edwards believes must not be done—and that is to make America less safe by launching another so-called “preventive war,” when the U.S. and the community of nations possess a strong arsenal of diplomatic andeconomic options that have not yet been used.

George Bush’s “preventive war” doctrine was crafted by a radical group of neoconservative Bush administration aides. The doctrine holds that America should shoot first and only ask questions later. It rejects the historic grounding principle of America’s national security policy, which is that military force should always be an option of last resort. This radical doctrine was a stunning departure from the policy that kept America safe during both World Wars and during the Cold War. The doctrine led directly to the disastrous war in Iraq and is driving the Bush-Cheney approach today to Iran, including Senator Joe Lieberman’s resolution declaring Iran’sRevolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

As president, Edwards will get rid of the dangerous “preventive war” doctrine and instead rely on proven national security strategies including overwhelming deterrent strength and retaining every option to address imminent attacks. Unlike Senator Hillary Clinton, Edwards strongly opposed the Lieberman resolution, which will ratchet up tensions and provide Bush and Cheney with the excuse they need to attack Iran. Edwards instead believes that a new multilateral strategy of tough new sanctions and new incentives will defuse Iran and force President Ahmadinejad, the Ayatollah Khameini, and the mullahs to realize their nuclear ambitions and support of terrorism will only put the Iraniannation on a fast track to isolation. Senator Edwards’ plan for Iran has five principles:

#1: End the “preventive war” doctrine: We need to ensure that the preventive war doctrine goes where it belongs—the trash-heap of history. As commander-in-chief, John Edwards will reinstitute a national security policy based on building overwhelming deterrent strength and always retaining and planning for the option of using military force whenever we have actionable intelligence of an imminent attack that cannot be deterred through other means—in short, the use of force as a last resort. As president, Edwards will ask his National Security Advisor to remove President Bush’s explicit endorsement of“preventive war” from his National Security Strategies. And he will ask his Joint Chiefs of Staff to form military plans in accordance with the national security strategies that we know can keep us and our allies safe—not discredited and dangerous ideological fancies. This strategy will retain every option for keeping America and our allies safe, while showing the world we are once again a strong country that can always win war, but that prefers peace over war.

#2: Use bolder and more targeted economic sanctions: Edwards believes we must use diplomatic “sticks” to force Iran’s leaders to understand that they cannot continue to buck the will of the international community without destroying their ability to be the modern, advanced nation they so desperately want to become. First, we must fully enforce the Iran Sanctions Act, a law Congress passed to let the president punish companies that do business with Iran’s extremist regime. Second, we must work multilaterally—most importantly, with our Western European allies—to strengthen economic sanctions onIran. Third, we must completely shut down all Iranian access to the American financial system.

#3: Use incentives: Edwards believes we should also use “carrots”—diplomatic measures to convince Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions and support of terrorism. Iran, which right now cannot even process its own oil and imports the majority of its fuel, needs greater energy resources. We should draw Iran into compliance through incentives including increased refinery capacity. We should also lead a multilateral effort to create a regional fuel bank that Iran could use for peaceful purposes. Finally, we should use the possibility of bringing Iran into multilateral economic organizations, including theWTO, to draw Iran’s elites into pressuring the regime to change course and abandon its nuclear ambitions.

#4: Reengage with Iran: We should chart a new course for diplomatic relations with Iran by expanding low-level talks between government officials on both sides in a neutral country. The goal of these talks should be to find a path out of the log-jam created by the Bush administration and, ultimately, to achieve full diplomatic relations. But Edwards believes we must always negotiate from a position of strength. Any higher-level meeting should only happen if we verify that the meetings will promote America’s national security interests and will not be used for propaganda or other improper purposes.

#5: Reengage with other major nations on the challenge of Iran: We must work with China and Russia on the problem of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Both nations have economic relationships with Iran on trade and energy. But both nations also have a strong interest in stability in the Middle East. And neither nation wants the nuclear club to expand. In place of the wayward and ad hoc diplomacy of the Bush Administration, we need more effective and strategic reengagement with both China and Russia. We need to make Iran a top-level priority in our bilateral relationships with both countries. We must work withboth Russia and China on how they can achieve their economic goals through alternatives that will not assist Iran’s military nuclear capability. In the first year of his administration, Edwards will convene a conference with his Secretary of State and representatives from the “E.U. 3”—Great Britain, France, and Germany—Russia, China—and Iran. At this conference, we should discuss a way out of the stalemate caused by the Bush administration.