This is as good a time as any. ... America remains powerful in the world and in the Middle East. The success of the surge policy in Iraq means that the United States may be establishing a sustainable position in the region - a far cry from a year ago, when it seemed about to be driven out. If Iraq is on the road to recovery, this shifts the balance against Iran, which was already isolated. ...
The next administration, especially if it is Democratic, will probably want to try to talk to Tehran. But it couldn't begin talks before the summer of 2009, at which point, if the NIE is right, Iran could be moving into the final stages of developing a bomb. Better to get negotiations started so that by the time the next administration settles in, it will be able to assess the progress, or lack thereof, after a year of talks. If it decides it must take strong action, it will have an easier time showing that all other options were exhausted.
Speaking of the next administration, the NIE report not only sent shockwaves through the international community, but will also shake up the talking points of several candidates who have taken a hawkish stance against Iran and force them to dial it back a bit. For his part, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) wasted no time slamming Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) for voting in favor of designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, which many Dems regard as being the first step in the march to war. If Hillary has the most to lose politically from the NIE report, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) may have the most to gain. As New York Times columnist Frank Rich points out, "Mr. Obama's much-derided readiness to talk promptly and directly to the leaders of Iran and Syria, for instance, was a clear alternative, agree with it or not, to Mrs. Clinton's same-old Foggy Bottom platitudes on the subject."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).