More

Obama Scoffs At Ahmadinejad's Demand For Apology

JENNIFER LOVEN   06/26/09 11:05 PM ET   AP

Obama Ahmadinejad

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's criticism of Iran escalated Friday into an unusually personal war of words. To Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's demand he apologize for meddling, Obama shot back that the regime should "think carefully" about answers owed to protesters it has arrested, bludgeoned and killed.

"The violence perpetrated against them is outrageous," Obama said. "We see it and we condemn it."

The president spoke at an East Room news conference capping his third set of meetings with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, one of several European leaders who spoke out more forcefully, more quickly than Obama on the unrest in Iran that followed the disputed June 12 elections.

"We will not forget," Merkel said.

Turning to Iraq, where a deadline for U.S. combat troops to leave all cities was just four days away, Obama offered no support for allowing a spate of recent violence to push back the withdrawal. "If you look at the overall trend, despite some of these high-profile bombings, Iraq's security situation has continued to dramatically improve," Obama said.

Of bigger concern than the violence, Obama said, is the lack of movement on laws to share oil revenues and other matters that keep Iraq deeply fractured along sectarian lines. He called on Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to step up his leadership.

Merkel's visit happened to coincide with the day that a sweeping global warming bill came up for a vote in the House amid contentious partisan sniping about its effect on jobs and consumer costs. With the vote still hours away and the outcome in doubt, Obama and Merkel, who has made climate change a top priority, presented the rare sight of an American president and a visiting foreign leader together urging the U.S. Congress to act.

Obama said he had been "very blunt and frank" with Merkel that it will take significant time to turn the U.S. into a world leader on climate change but that the "critical" bill before the House was a good start.

Merkel sympathized with the difficulty of approving such legislation, which would impose the first-ever limits on greenhouse gas pollution and force a shift to cleaner energy sources. "I know what's at stake, when you talk about reduction targets, how tricky that is," Merkel said.

In Iran, the government proclaimed the incumbent hardline president, Ahmadinejad, the landslide winner of the June 12 voting over opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, prompting widespread protests followed by a brutal state-led crackdown.

Ahmadinejad told Obama Thursday to "show your repentance" for criticizing Tehran's response.

"I don't take Mr. Ahmadinejad's statements seriously about apologies, particularly given the fact that the United States has gone out of its way not to interfere with the election process in Iran," Obama responded sternly.

"I would suggest that Mr. Ahmadinejad think carefully about the obligations he owes to his own people," he added. "And he might want to consider looking at the families of those who've been beaten or shot or detained. And, you know, that's where I think Mr. Ahmadinejad and others need to answer their questions."

It was Obama's first direct criticism of any of Iran's leaders. Even more, it was coupled with his first specific boost for Mousavi. "Mousavi has shown to have captured the imagination or the spirit of forces within Iran that were interested in opening up," Obama said.

The remark sought to clarify what many view as Obama's biggest misstep _ saying last week in a television interview that there may not be much difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. But it appeared to swing over to an outright endorsement of Mousavi, though White House press secretary Robert Gibbs denied it was meant that way.

Obama also said for the first time that his offer to loosen the decades-old U.S. diplomatic freeze with Iran through direct talks is now in question.

"There is no doubt that any direct dialogue or diplomacy with Iran is going to be affected by the events of the last several weeks," Obama said, without elaborating.

Gibbs said Obama was "more stating the obvious" that no talks are possible while developments are still unfolding. And Obama said that an existing system of multilateral talks with Iran over its suspected goal of building a nuclear bomb, involving nations including the U.S., Europe, China and Russia, must continue.

"The clock is ticking. Iran is developing a nuclear capacity at a fairly rapid clip," he said.

Merkel agreed there must be no letup among nations trying to stop Iran's nuclear development, which Tehran insists is aimed at providing only electric power, not weapons. She said "we have to bring Russia and China alongside," referring to the two nations most historically unwilling to get tough with Iran over the nuclear standoff.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's criticism of Iran escalated Friday into an unusually personal war of words. To Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's demand he apologize for meddling, Oba...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's criticism of Iran escalated Friday into an unusually personal war of words. To Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's demand he apologize for meddling, Oba...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 372
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:47 AM on 06/28/2009
America and Main Stream Media need to not criticize the Iranian Goverment about what is happening since we did the same thing to our-non-violent demonstrators at the Democratic Convention and Republican Convention.

MSM never showed anything about the demonstrators outside, There thousand and thousand of policemen, they had arested thousand of demonstrators including Amy Goodman from Democracy now.
Enough with hypocracy.

Lets clean our house before we call somebody elses dirty.
05:29 PM on 06/28/2009
The US govt. legacy of backing tyrants in Mideast when it suits its needs is indeed disgusting. As an American who cares about human rights I'm embarrassed with much of our history and feel compelled to offer solidarity with the protesters who are dying for freedom and who might just topple the theocracy of IRI.
10:00 AM on 06/28/2009
Obama looks damn weak.
photo
dfranz
With Liberty and Justice for all
05:30 PM on 06/28/2009
It's hard to look strong when you have no moral validity. The actions of the United States in the last 50 years created the atmosphere for the Islamic Revolution in Iran to begin with. It started when we reimposed the Shah after democratic elections in the 50's and it was followed up by the Nixon/Rumsfield/Cheney support of Sadam Hussein during their border war in which over 2 million were killed. It doesn't matter who is president because we have no validity there. Don't forget the genius of GW Bush who called them the Axis of evil and only increased their paranoia.

If Obama is so weak, why is the Revolutionary Council so worried about him that they are makeing up things he said.
07:50 AM on 06/28/2009
No apology necessary since America complaining about another country violating human rights is laughable. There isn't any moral authority left in the United States and common sense would be to just mind your own business.

It doesn't matter what party you belong to or what your world views are the facts everyone knows is what the Iranian leadership is doing is limited and confined to their own country in comparison to America who did far worse in countries other than their own.
06:27 AM on 06/28/2009
Obama shot back that the regime should "think carefully" about answers owed to protesters it has arrested, bludgeoned and killed.
"The violence perpetrated against them is outrageous," Obama said. "We see it and we condemn it."
DISGUSTING. But then what else can we expect from the man who did not *see* and did not *condemn* the slaughter of 1,400 Gazans and the wounding of at least 5,000 Palestinians just before his inauguration - Conveniently stopped just days before the inauguration. Not to mention the act of war the Israeli siege/apartheid has been perpetrating on the Palestinian people. Nope. Didn't *see* that did you Mr. O? Nope. That violence is not "outrageous" is it Mr. O?
and what else can we expect from the warmonger who is sending unmanned drones to kill civilians at the Afghan/Pakistan border? Sending millions of refugees from that area?
Does he *see* and *condemn* this violence?
I read that when the soldier who has an 8 hr shift at a video console in Las Vegas, Nevada, which controls these obscene attacks on these defenseless civilians -- this soldier (as if playing a video game) can *see* the victims' FACE and EXPRESSION on his console just before the missile impacts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:38 AM on 06/28/2009
He's already condemned the violence and the settlements and a few other things in the Gaza strip and is at odds with Isreal about it. Do you read at all or just rant aimlessly?
photo
GiveUsFree
Teapublicans are destroying America.
03:29 AM on 06/28/2009
We can't police the damn world. We don't have the money. As a matter of fact, we need to start closing some bases around the world. We spend way too much money on defense. And maybe I wasn't paying attention as much, but I can't remember in my lifetime a President scrutinized as much as O. People are so damn demanding after 8 years of lunacy. It's simply amazing that people woke up and found their pair, because Bush was such a failure.
DoTheMath
We're outspent, but they're outnumbered
11:35 PM on 06/27/2009
Oh, for Pete's sake. When I saw the headline for this article, I thought the president must have said something new. If you want to make the case that the president "appeared to swing over to an outright endorsement of Mousavi," why not just quote Ahmadinejad? President Obama said what he said. It meant what it meant. He didn't say he backs Mousavi. Saying that "the United States has gone out of its way not to interfere with the election process in Iran" is the hardly "scoffing" at Ahmadinejad or siding with Mousavi.
photo
Whinger
I'm Just Me!
08:18 PM on 06/27/2009
Apologize now, or the dictator will squeam and squeam and squeam!
07:54 PM on 06/27/2009
Ahmadinejad has to lash out at the US because he needs to go back to his favorite whipping boy as he can't openly criticize the majority of his nation. What he doesn't get is that the old western hate rhetoric does not work and it is what got him in trouble with his fellow Iranians in the first place. Iran wants to be a part of the world, Ahmadinejad and the clerics can't stop popular will in the long run.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Pupadup4oBama
01:03 AM on 06/28/2009
he knows if he says anything directly to Obama, he'll get his @$$ kicked...(not really, but...ya know)
07:52 PM on 06/27/2009
President Obama started making stronger reactions to Ahmadinejad because when he was saying nothing harsh he was still being acused of meddling. It would not look right to us or the world if Obama didn't give a strong response to questions about Human Rights.
08:19 PM on 06/27/2009
Might I ask what has your current administration done FOR YOU lately?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
sviolette
Cops Pepper Spraying the Constitution!!!
08:30 PM on 06/27/2009
We don't have a moral leg to stand on when it comes to human rights. That's what torture does to a country. You can't complain about another's garbage if your house is a dump.
04:30 PM on 06/28/2009
Yes, we do have a moral leg to stand on. The torturing at Gitmo was wrong and hurt us in the eyes of the world, but America voted for someone new and many Americans have voiced strong opposition to what went on under Bush. I am very proud to be an American, voted for Obama, strongly disagreed with Bush and the neocons, but I think it's complete B.S. to say that American doesn't stand for the same values it did simply because a widely reviled administration chose to act against our values.
07:46 PM on 06/27/2009
Once again, the world is looking down on the US because Obama acts like he is too important to apologize making Americans look like we think we're better. Oh wait, that would be Bush. I guess Good job, Barack!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
sviolette
Cops Pepper Spraying the Constitution!!!
08:32 PM on 06/27/2009
No the world looks down on us because of torture. I look down on us for the same reason.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
iktomi
06:24 PM on 06/27/2009
For a Democracy to work, the Government must fear the people. Too bad though, our government hasn't feared the people since the '70s. Iran's people must carry this through, by themselves for it to work.
04:58 PM on 06/27/2009
He'll send a private note apologizing so as to not upset the sweet little dictator
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Michigan-Woman
06:04 PM on 06/27/2009
You're confused.

Because you've witnessed the Conservatives apologizing to Rush, you think that's what will happen here.

Won't happen.
04:35 PM on 06/27/2009
The most telling thing about all of this is, people are discrediting the power of the people in Iran who are protesting. Their persistence is what will eventually make their leadership address their concerns. Yes, there is violence and their leaders will be held accountable by their own people. Most of the Iranian pundits and political spokespersons have said the president is going the right thing. But, no one seems to respect what they have to say. The Iranian protesters have not called for President Obama to come into Iran and help them. If the Iranian people are constantly seeing white men commenting on their situation and demanding they have a greater involvement. The Iranian people need to run like h$ll away from any help. These white male commentators and instigators mean no good to these people. They have never been known to be trustworthy and they speak with a forked tongue.
05:02 PM on 06/27/2009
You got that right. It's the one thing neoconservatives will never understand. How destructive heir blind, manichean idealism really is.

Obama's full embrace of Moussavi would be the kiss of death to the protest movement. So far, his approach can be regarded as pretty balanced. Stronger statements than made before must be contingent upon further developments in Iran. Let's hope none be necessary.
04:03 PM on 06/27/2009
Ahmadinejad's problem is he's jealous of President Obama. The Iranian people are responding to our president's hope and change. That's why Ahmadinejad keeps referring to every word and lack of involvement to Iran. Ahmadinejad wants a scapegoat and is having trouble making President Obama Irans scapegoat. Ahmadinejad's constant yapping about our president shows his own insecurity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
squatmunkie
06:40 PM on 06/27/2009
I think you're exactly right
08:42 PM on 06/27/2009
Well said.
02:55 PM on 06/27/2009
Do like 90% of the trolls here wake up, pick a random article to comment on, and then write something more relevant to the Sunday morning cartoons than any article on huff's main page? (sighpt

Obama is doing a great job so far, and even while his first response to the Iranian uprising was met with heavy critics(mostly GOP), his second dialogue definitely puts to rest the claim hes leaving them out to dry. And oh yah, bush was in office for 8 YEARS, and yet we judge Obama daily, over the past few months as if hes even had time to sit in office for a full MLB season.(as an example)

flamers, trolls, palin supporters..... your extreme idiocy makes my days :]
03:45 PM on 06/27/2009
Hey, let em squwak. It's just the d e a t h rattle of their "party"
04:02 PM on 06/27/2009
I wish Obama didn't feel he had to answer Ahmadinejad's a$$hattery with such a response.

We don't have resources to meddle in Iran's internal problems, and Obama shouldn't say anything that could be interpreted as a threat that the U.S. will get involved. If it spurs the Iran protestors on in their efforts because they think we will back them up, that would be a bloody disaster. Also, the Iranian government knows we don't have the resources. If they chose to call our bluff, we would, once again, be humiliated before the international community.

Obama was far more in control of the situation when he stuck to using words like "unjust," "justice," and "fair." These words reverberate not only with Iranians, but with people of all cultures. Every human knows what's fair and unfair...even toddlers know what's fair and unfair, and will likely pitch a fit if they are treated in a manner they see as unfair.

I fear Obama's retort to Ahmadinejad has actually empowered Ahmadinejad. By Ahmadinejad being able to get Obama to deliver such a testy response, it shows that Ahmadinejad has the power to motivate Obama.

We need to stay out of Iran's internal affairs. Their problems are Iranian problems and, therefore, need Iranian answers. It would be wrong for us to go stomping in and offering American answers to Iranian problems. It might force protesters to cave in to the government so they could create a united front against the American intruders.
04:17 PM on 06/27/2009
Your basic thrust is right. But nobody at this point is talking about backing the movement up in a way that would involve "resources". What might those resources be...?

Obama's approach up to this point cannot honestly be regarded as meddling. And I don't see how it might empower Ahmadinejad, if he stays on message (respect human rights, no violence etc.). So far, everything's pretty ok.