Kroc Institute Policy Brief No. 11: The smarter U.S. option: A full summit with Iran, by George A. Lopez and David Cortright

The United States should negotiate directly with Iran over nuclear disarmament issues, argue Lopez and Cortright in The smarter U.S. option. They contend that the dispute between the two countries belongs on the bi-lateral summit table, not at the United Nations Security Council. They write: “The issues facing Iran and the United States extend far beyond this enrichment controversy. They include support for terrorism, a stable future for Iraq, trade, energy needs, peace and security in the wider Middle East, and the prospect of normalized diplomatic relations. This constellation of concerns provides the classic conditions for a meaningful and potentially far-reaching summit.”
      Lopez, a senior fellow, and Cortright, a research fellow, are experts on the use of economic and political sanctions. They also explain why sanctions, isolation, and punishment won’t work when it comes to influencing Iran in this case.
      Kroc Institute Policy Briefs are based on pioneering research by peace experts at the Kroc Institute and their affiliates. The authors analyze policy briefs analyze current issues in international affairs and propose innovative strategies for peace. “The smarter U.S. option” was the first brief to be sent primarily via e-mail to policy makers, the media, alumni and others.

Kroc Institute Occasional Paper No. 27:OP:1: The Right to Religious Conversion: Between Apostasy and Proselytization by A. Rashied Omar

In spring 2006, an Afghan citizen who converted from Islam to Christianity was arrested under local shari`a law, which mandates the death penalty for apostasy. As a result of international pressure Abdul Rahman was released and given asylum in Italy. The widely publicized incident highlighted the urgent need for Muslims to seriously re-examine the restrictive traditional shari`a laws on apostasy, writes Omar, who is visiting professor of Islamic studies and peacebuilding. He notes that the case took place in the war-ravaged context of Afghanistan where relief aid for the victims of war is dispensed by Christian agencies, some with a primarily evangelistic agenda. That raises the question: Is it ethical for philanthropic activities and humanitarian service to be undertaken with the primary intent to proselytize? No, Omar contends. He challenges Christians and Muslims committed to inter-religious dialogue to not only affirm the right of any individual to change his or her religion, and to decry the use of inappropriate means to entice the person to switch faiths.

All policy briefs and occasional papers can be found via the “Publications” link on the Kroc web site, http://kroc.nd.edu.