This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
2 Launch immediate negotiations by top Iranian and American naval officers to conclude an incidents-at-sea protocol.
A
communications
link has historically proven its merit during times of high tension.
The
Cuban missile crisis of 1962 underscored the need for instantaneous
communications at senior levels, and a "hot line" between Washington
and Moscow was established the following year. That direct link played a
crucial role, for example, in preventing the spread of war in the Middle
East
during the six-day war in early June 1967.
Another useful precedent is the "Incidents-at-Sea" agreement between
the U.S. and the Soviet Union, signed in Moscow in May 1972. That
period
was another time of considerable tension between the two countries,
including
several inadvertent naval encounters that could well have escalated.
The
agreement sharply reduced the likelihood of such incidents.
It might be difficult for American and Iranian leaders alike to oppose
measures
that make such good sense. Press reports show that top U.S. commanders
in
the Persian Gulf have favored such steps. And, as indicated above, Adm.
Mullen has already appealed for military-to-military dialogue.
In the present circumstances, it has become increasingly urgent to
discuss
seriously how our two countries might avoid a conflict started by
accident,
miscalculation, or provocation. Neither the U.S. nor Iran can afford to
allow an avoidable incident at sea to spin out of control.
this article first appeared on consortiumnews.com
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
2
