What to do with Iran?

Though Europe is eager to test a "carrot and a stick" strategy with Iran, it seems to have forgotten about the stick. In fact, it seems that Europe has ruled out a use of force, and thus making threats impotent. The EU's inability to take a stand is illustrated in Fidel Castro's "forgiving" of Europe and allowing them to trade with him again.

The US has the power to launch another war within the next few months, but it doesn't have the global influence and goodwill to get away with it. Thus, we cannot launch another war.

I am considering the potential of CIA or military intelligence agents. Assassinations and sabotage should be last resorts, but they should be feasible. However, the US's actions must be public and agreeable to much of the world; this is a chance to recover our global influence, not to spend it. The main goal, however, should be to spread liberty throughout the mid-east, and prevent a crystallization that might separate Iraq and its newfound freedom from Iraq's neighbors. I have a hunch that mid-eastern leaders are not skilled at handling a dynamic country, so an ability to quickly change the mid-east might be a powerful weapon, assuming the US can wield it. Hopefully, the US can knock Iran, and possibly Saudi Arabia or Syria, off its balance of power.

Should the US try to create its own type of insurgency, a pro-democracy insurgency, in Iran? Sounds interesting, and it wouldn't hinder the US's public diplomacy efforts. On the other hand, the government might be thrown into chaos if a settlement with the US galvanizes pro-democracy groups that already are in Iran. Plus, a few agents in Iran can greatly improve the US's potential power and influence. These two ideas would take more than a year to develop and implement, and both have risks. Insurgencies can look like proxy wars, and the capture of a US agent has dire consequences for the US – in terms of bargaining power and world opinion.