Washington is signaling Tehran
It is hard to believe that the following series of events, all of which took place within a short period, occurred by chance, without a guiding reason. Suddenly, despite the harsh threats voiced by the White House against Iran for trying to produce nuclear weapons, the world learned that Iran's former president, Mohammad Khatami, received a tourist visa to visit the United States. He was not invited to official meetings, but President George Bush himself approved the visa request.
Afterward, the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, received a visa for the United Nations General Assembly, and also an invitation to appear in New York before the Council on Foreign Relations. Shortly before this, the prime minister of Iraq, Nuri al-Maliki, visited Iran and held talks with its leaders. It is hard to believe that this visit by the Iraqi leader could have been made without coordination with Washington.
As though by chance, in the same week when Khatami was in the U.S., Bush invited a well-known correspondent for the Washington Post, David Ignatius, to interview him in the White House. The interview dealt with one subject alone: Iran. And it indicated a substantive shift in Bush's approach. He did not threaten military action against Iran, he did not even mention sanctions. He made do with saying that deep concern exists in view of the desire by some of Iran's leaders to develop nuclear weapons and the possibility of their attempting to make good on their declarations about attacking Israel and threatening the U.S.
It is worth reading Bush's remarks closely in order to understand the singularity of this interview. America recognizes Iran's role "as an important nation in the Middle East," Ignatius noted on the basis of the interview, and went on to quote Bush: "I would say to the Iranian people: We respect your history. We respect your culture ... I recognize the importance of your sovereignty that you're a proud nation ... I understand that you believe it is in your interest your sovereign interest, and your sovereign right to have nuclear power ... I would want to work for a solution to meeting your rightful desires to have civilian nuclear power. I would tell the Iranian people that we have no desire for conflict." Bush added that he would like to see programs for "cultural exchanges" and "university exchanges" between the U.S. and Iran.
It is not surprising that Ignatius concluded that the Bush administration is seeking a diplomatic solution to its clash with Iran over the nuclear issue. Concurrently, reports have been published about cracks that have appeared in the "iron triangle" of Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The latter is apparently skeptical that a military option exists against Iran, should it go on developing nuclear weapons.
The conclusion from all these developments is that the current tendency in the U.S. administration is to support an attempt at dialogue with Tehran. Can we conclude from this that Washington has dropped its demand that Iran forsake its nuclear weapons program and stop backing terrorist organizations? The answer is negative. Washington is saying, effectively, that it will help Iran to develop into a regional power with economic capability if Iran is willing to forgo nuclear weapons.
Tehran, for its part, is hesitating. Some there believe that the country needs nuclear weapons to deterWashington, which is liable to use aggression against it. Iran wants to be a regional power with nuclear weapons.
These developments will occupy several countries in the region. Egypt and Saudi Arabia, for example, will be extremely perturbed if they discover that Iran, a Shi'ite country, is acquiring a leading status in the region
as a result of cooperation with Washington. This competition exists even without Iran's having nuclear weapons.
These latest developments should also occupy Israel intensively. If an American-Iranian dialogue ensues, Israel will not be invited to take part in such talks, as it was not invited to contribute to the agreement that Washington and London worked out with Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi.
Therefore, Israel should initiate coordination talks with Washington, based on the assumption that the Israeli issue will come up in possible secret talks between Washington and Tehran. Israel has red lines of its own on this sensitive strategic subject. Instead of being one of the participants in the dialogue, it is liable to find itself the subject of the dialogue, as Tehran will certainly have demands of its own. This is a salient example of strategic cooperation between Jerusalem and Washington. Israel's goal is not to push for a regional confrontation, but to calm the situation, provided that its security is not adversely affected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
link
I don't know who Bush has been listening to, but it sure isn't any of the neocons within his vicinity. I guess he's FINALLY realized that tough talk won't get you anywhere, only diplomacy. Unfortunately, I thin the Iranians have realized this and will play him like a settar.
It is hard to believe that the following series of events, all of which took place within a short period, occurred by chance, without a guiding reason. Suddenly, despite the harsh threats voiced by the White House against Iran for trying to produce nuclear weapons, the world learned that Iran's former president, Mohammad Khatami, received a tourist visa to visit the United States. He was not invited to official meetings, but President George Bush himself approved the visa request.
Afterward, the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, received a visa for the United Nations General Assembly, and also an invitation to appear in New York before the Council on Foreign Relations. Shortly before this, the prime minister of Iraq, Nuri al-Maliki, visited Iran and held talks with its leaders. It is hard to believe that this visit by the Iraqi leader could have been made without coordination with Washington.
As though by chance, in the same week when Khatami was in the U.S., Bush invited a well-known correspondent for the Washington Post, David Ignatius, to interview him in the White House. The interview dealt with one subject alone: Iran. And it indicated a substantive shift in Bush's approach. He did not threaten military action against Iran, he did not even mention sanctions. He made do with saying that deep concern exists in view of the desire by some of Iran's leaders to develop nuclear weapons and the possibility of their attempting to make good on their declarations about attacking Israel and threatening the U.S.
It is worth reading Bush's remarks closely in order to understand the singularity of this interview. America recognizes Iran's role "as an important nation in the Middle East," Ignatius noted on the basis of the interview, and went on to quote Bush: "I would say to the Iranian people: We respect your history. We respect your culture ... I recognize the importance of your sovereignty that you're a proud nation ... I understand that you believe it is in your interest your sovereign interest, and your sovereign right to have nuclear power ... I would want to work for a solution to meeting your rightful desires to have civilian nuclear power. I would tell the Iranian people that we have no desire for conflict." Bush added that he would like to see programs for "cultural exchanges" and "university exchanges" between the U.S. and Iran.
It is not surprising that Ignatius concluded that the Bush administration is seeking a diplomatic solution to its clash with Iran over the nuclear issue. Concurrently, reports have been published about cracks that have appeared in the "iron triangle" of Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The latter is apparently skeptical that a military option exists against Iran, should it go on developing nuclear weapons.
The conclusion from all these developments is that the current tendency in the U.S. administration is to support an attempt at dialogue with Tehran. Can we conclude from this that Washington has dropped its demand that Iran forsake its nuclear weapons program and stop backing terrorist organizations? The answer is negative. Washington is saying, effectively, that it will help Iran to develop into a regional power with economic capability if Iran is willing to forgo nuclear weapons.
Tehran, for its part, is hesitating. Some there believe that the country needs nuclear weapons to deterWashington, which is liable to use aggression against it. Iran wants to be a regional power with nuclear weapons.
These developments will occupy several countries in the region. Egypt and Saudi Arabia, for example, will be extremely perturbed if they discover that Iran, a Shi'ite country, is acquiring a leading status in the region
as a result of cooperation with Washington. This competition exists even without Iran's having nuclear weapons.
These latest developments should also occupy Israel intensively. If an American-Iranian dialogue ensues, Israel will not be invited to take part in such talks, as it was not invited to contribute to the agreement that Washington and London worked out with Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi.
Therefore, Israel should initiate coordination talks with Washington, based on the assumption that the Israeli issue will come up in possible secret talks between Washington and Tehran. Israel has red lines of its own on this sensitive strategic subject. Instead of being one of the participants in the dialogue, it is liable to find itself the subject of the dialogue, as Tehran will certainly have demands of its own. This is a salient example of strategic cooperation between Jerusalem and Washington. Israel's goal is not to push for a regional confrontation, but to calm the situation, provided that its security is not adversely affected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
link
I don't know who Bush has been listening to, but it sure isn't any of the neocons within his vicinity. I guess he's FINALLY realized that tough talk won't get you anywhere, only diplomacy. Unfortunately, I thin the Iranians have realized this and will play him like a settar.
Facebook
Twitter