In one key conflict area-Iran-President Barack Obama appears to be keeping, at
least for the moment, his campaign commitment to engage rather than threaten,
to use diplomacy rather than force.
As talks with Iran go forward, hope continues to rise for serious diplomacy
that could, just maybe, lead us a few steps closer to the "world without
nuclear weapons" that Obama has called for.
TEHRAN - Police clashed with supporters of Iran's opposition leader Mirhossein Mousavi in Tehran on Wednesday when a rally marking the 30th anniversary of the storming of the U.S. embassy turned violent.
Reformist website Mowjcamp said police opened fire on protesters at Haft-e Tir square, but there was no independent confirmation of the report. "Some people were injured," Mowjcamp said, reporting other protests in the cities of Shiraz and Rasht.
Today marks the 30th year since the 444 day Iran Hostage Crisis began in 1979. On
this day the media traditionally offers us images of Iranians burning American flags and effigies
of Uncle Sam. We are reminded of the great chasm of mistrust and
misunderstanding that has marked the last three decades of US-Iranian
relations. But, in the past year both Americans and Iranians have asked for
something new. Americans have elected a
president that promises to pursue diplomacy and Iranians have given birth to a
popular democratic movement.
While the tone of the Obama administration is different from that of its predecessor, and some of its foreign policies diverge from those of George W. Bush, at their core both administrations subscribe to the same doctrine: Whatever the White House perceives as a threat -- whether it be Iran, North Korea, or the proliferation of long-range missiles -- must be viewed as such by Moscow and Beijing.
In addition, by the evidence available, Barack Obama has not drawn the right conclusion from his predecessor's failed Iran policy.
WASHINGTON - The Barack Obama administration claims that construction of a second Iranian uranium enrichment facility at Qom began before Tehran's decision to withdraw from a previous agreement to inform the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in advance of such construction. But the November 2007 U.S. intelligence estimate on Iran's nuclear programme tells a different story.
The Iranian decision to withdraw from the earlier agreement with the IAEA was prompted, moreover, by the campaign of threats to Iran's nuclear facilities mounted by the George W.
The lead-up to the first U.S.-Iran talks in three decades saw a replay of the same modus operandi that induced the U.S. and its allies to invade Iraq in March 2003. Then as now, the invasion of Iran is consistent with a regime change agenda for Greater Israel described in a 1996 strategy document prepared by Jewish-Americans for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Damn the Iranians and full speed ahead. That was the U.S. policy in the Middle East. But the waters have proved treacherous, with torpedoes everywhere. Despite an initial
hopeful sit-down with Iranian negotiators, this won't be the October the White House wanted on the foreign policy front. By now, Barack Obama was supposed to have announced -- with ruffles and flourishes -- the beginning of Middle East peace talks, leading to a final status agreement by 2012.
WASHINGTON - Excerpts of the
internal draft report by the staff of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) published online last week show that the report's claims
about Iranian work on a nuclear weapon is based almost entirely on
intelligence documents which have provoked a serious conflict within
the agency.
The United States and Western "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" crowd -- hysteria running at fever pitch ahead of Thursday's multilateral nuclear talks in Geneva -- could do worse than have a word with Brazilian President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva.
