Fareed encourages the administration to engage with Iran:
Now of course this could all be camouflage and smoke screen. But there is another possibility. The international sanctions against Iran are hurting the country badly. Tehran’s support for Bashar Assad’s brutal regime in Syria is costing Iran money and arms every month and has tarnished its legitimacy at home. The Arab Spring, for all its problems, has put the spotlight on Iran’s Supreme Leader, who has been in power for 24 years. One of the chants heard in Tehran two years ago was “Mubarak, Ben Ali, now it’s time for Sayyid Ali [Khamenei].” In these circumstances, defusing some tensions, easing the sanctions and reviving the economy would be extremely useful to the regime in Tehran.
At the very least, the Obama Administration should come up with a reasonable offer that would signal to the Iranian people that if the regime is willing to credibly forswear nuclear weapons, ordinary Iranians will have a brighter future. But it is difficult to sound reasonable while you are beating the drums of war.
Relatedly, Fisher analyzes Rouhani’s interview with NBC (snippet above):
As Rouhani-skeptics often point out, the president is not the final authority in Iranian politics. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is ultimately in charge, especially on matters of national security and foreign policy. The best case for skepticism about Rouhani’s peace overtures is that he’s just freelancing and will inevitably be undercut by Khamenei. That’s still possible, but Rouhani told NBC News that Khamenei gave him full authority to cut a deal with the West over Iran’s nuclear program — the single biggest sticking point of any negotiations. If true, then for Khamenei to hand Rouhani that power would be a remarkably positive step just in itself, a sign of institutional weight shifting toward compromise and diplomacy. That Rouhani could actually see it through is even better.
The Dish 