<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[The Iran Debate,&nbsp;Ctd]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p><em><span style="font-size:12px;">by Patrick Appel</span></em></p><p>I <a href="http://www.realclearworld.com/blog/2010/03/iran_divide_that_matters.html">wrote</a>:</p><blockquote><p>The strongest argument against engagement with Iran is not that any individual political actor in Iran is irrational, but that the country&#039;s leadership is divided against itself and that the warring political fractions are incapable of committing to any sort of international agreement. The green movement added to this disunity.</p></blockquote><p>Kevin Sulivan <a href="http://www.realclearworld.com/blog/2010/03/iran_divide_that_matters.html">makes</a> a convincing rebuttal. His whole post is worth reading, but here are the first few paragraphs:]]></html></oembed>