Weekly roundup

Additional articles and reports from the past week
“Brazil, Turkey opposing UNSC sanctions against Iran”
UNSC members such as Brazil, Lebanon and Turkey are not supporting additional sanctions against Iran, creating the possibility of a sharply divided vote (Turtle Bay, Wall Street Journal). Matias Spektor believes Brazil is opposing sanctions in a bid to preempt an “intervention” in Iran, avoid toughening Iran’s stance, and highlight broader inconsistencies in the non-proliferation regime (Council on Foreign Relations).
Michael Jacobson urges the US to also focus on closing loopholes in existing sanctions against Iran (Washington Institute for Near East Policy).

“Arguments against US, Israeli military strike”
Steven A. Cook argues that Israel is not likely to risk an “unprecedented” breach with the US by launching a military strike against Iran (Foreign Policy). Michael O’Hanlon and Bruce Riedel argue against military action by the US, calling instead for sanctions, deterrence and containment (Financial Times). Roger Cohen also offers strong arguments against a military attack, positing that engagement over the past year has been more productive than 7 years of “axis-of-evil US grandstanding” (New York Times).

“Iran game stimulates policy discussions with sobering ‘what ifs’” (Belfer Center)
Participants from last year’s Harvard simulation game of diplomacy over Iran offer their brief impressions of the results.
(See also “Serious play: war games explore options on Iran”)