U.S. Policy Reversal on Iran
One week after military maneuvers raised fears of war and the price of oil, a senior US official will meet with the Iranian nuclear negotiator. A deal may be in the works.
Twenty-two years ago, former National Security Advisor Robert "Bud" McFarlane carried a cake, a bible and pistols to Tehran in a failed Reagan administration effort to trade weapons for Iranian aide to the Nicaraguan contras. Now, another senior official in a Republican administration is hoping for better luck. In a stunning announcement July 16, the White House disclosed that Undersecretary of State William J. Burns will travel to Geneva this weekend to sit face-to-face with Iranian nuclear negotiator Said Jalili.
Tests of missiles have yielded to tests of diplomacy. Burns will meet Jalili with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana serving as interlocutor. The subject will be a proposed "freeze-freeze" deal: Iran would halt further expansion of its uranium enrichment program; in turn, the US and Europe will halt further sanctions on Iran.
This is a dramatic reversal of Bush policy. Just two months ago, President Bush warned that negotiations with Iran would be "appeasement." Bush officials had said they would meet with Iranian representatives only after Iran fully suspended its enrichment program. Iran had said that suspension would be the subject of the negotiations, not a precondition.
Bush blinked. He has dropped the precondition. Suspension might still be possible, but the "freeze-freeze" could be the half-way point that allows serious negotiations to resolve this now five-year stand off.
It mirrors the shift that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice engineered in 2006 that reversed a similar policy towards North Korea. Then China served as mediator, orchestrating a meeting in Beijing between Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill and the North Korean negotiator. This was exactly the face-to-face talks Korea had been asking for and the U.S. had denied. It worked. Twenty months later, North Korea is blowing up its nuclear reactor, not nuclear bombs.
The announcement also comes at the heels of major foreign policy addresses by both Presidential candidates. Sen. Obama laid out his plan for "aggressive, principled and direct diplomacy" with Tehran; Senator John McCain rejected the idea. Both the U.S. and Iran seem to be taking a page out of the Obama play book: Bush by sending Burns and Tehran by heeding Obama's warning to "negotiate now -- by waiting, they will only face mounting pressure."
Conservative hardliners are sure to scream betrayal, as they did on North Korea. But the seeming ascendance of the pragmatist approach within the administration may save President Bush from adding to an already dismal record of foreign policy failure.
Follow Joe Cirincione on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Cirincione
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I don't trust bush. Something is up. Try to talk + they won't talk = all they understand is aggression. Isn't insaney cheney hot on attacking? And what about the government of Israel? Doesn't it have to sign off on this diplomatic move?
The reality is that economic conditions in the US and not foreign policy dogma may have preciptated this if it is for real.
Even the idiots in Washington have to see what the catastrophic effects of their war and economic policies have caused. If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to fail the second great depression would be upon us.
They have bled the public dry with their self imposed fuel tax, aka, Iraqi Freedom.
I know that Obama isnt the Messiah but hopefully he will bring some kind of relief to the American people. 187 days of the moron and his cadre of criminals to go.
God save the Republic.
I think it is all smoke and mirrors and is meant to lull us into complacency and then-whammo! We get plunged in to the hilt. Seriously distressing, and I hope, sincerely hope, that I am wrong.
Impending Success:
The Bush Administration has "insider information" that the EU's talks with Iran are about to bear fruit and they want a piece of it. That's what I think.
Don
Good thought. I agree. It's simply, because there wil still be some GOP-politicians around - trying to make a living from their "profession" of being GOP - in the future, when GWB and his surrogates will all already have disappeared in the mist of history. And they need at least SOME good news in their agenda to move on.
Just think back at how Dubya and his buffoon entourage put Obama down for the idea to try talk instead of just bomb, bomb, bomb.
I would say that this is more in reaction to Israels ceaseless and baseless saber rattling with Iran, which finally has inspired Iran to take a truely defensive reaction, which has sent the price of oil skyrocketing.
The entire bogus vilification of Iran, which has gone on for months, has been one of the primary catalysts that have allowed oil to go up so dramatically. I wonder what would happen to the price of oil if we simply offered Iran the same protection that we offered Israel; ie we would protect Iran from any preemptive strike by Israel. This policy seems to make sense, since our entire intelligence community has determined that there is no nuclear weapons program in Iran, and is therefore no threat whatsoever at all to Israel, while on the other hand, an Israeli strike on Iran would send the price of oil up to about 500 dollars a barrel and the stock market to a lower level of hell we can barely imagine. We should consider Israels threats towards Iran to be threats towards vital US interests and act accordingly.
This is yet another example of Barack Obama demonstrating superior judgment! Two months ago George Bush calls Obama an appeaser for wanting to talk to the Iran and here he is adopting that position! Obama preaches for months that we need more troops in Afghanistan and his opponent John McCain attacks him for saying that until yesterday when he adopts that position. Barack Obama opts out of public financing out of fear that will leave cash strapped against right-wing 527, he gets called a flip-flopper. A few days later exactly what he said would happened has happened, a half dozen 527 pop up saying they are going to spend millions of dollars running adds against him! The most notable of these groups is the one backed by the NRA! Doesn't this country need a POTUS who gets it right on the first try, wouldn't that be refreshing for a change! This guy will make a great prez!
Perhaps it's a cover for a prisoner exchange parlay?
This is what Ayatollah Kahmenie said today this should sober some criminal heads around this town.
Leader Warns West to Drop Aggressive Approach in Talks with Iran
"This is a wrong conception that some say the US president can take an action (against Iran) in the last few months of his responsibility and leave the problems for the next administration. Because if anyone takes an action (against Iran), the Iranian nation will prosecute and punish him even when he is not in charge anymore."
Interesting, how a few test-fired iranian Shahab-3-missiles could change a political perception and reaction so quickly:
"Hey, Boss, those little, brown, hook-nosed Iranians DO have missiles, those missiles DO work - and they are going to shoot BACK at us, if we bomb them!" "Bugger!"
I'd love to see, how much pressure the arabs and the oil-industry coerced on Bush and Cheney behind the scenes, to make them stop shuffeling their feet on Iran.
War on Iran in the Persian Gulf = no more oil = no more revenues = no more friends.
"Money makes the World go around...!
And it can hinder bombs from falling, too.
Bush blinked. Oh the horror, oh the shame. How will the GOP survive this?
the same way they survived it all the other times.
The timing of this seems to be political. Just in time for the election. Either that or they will make a half hearted attempt before bombing in October.
Not to be a killjoy, and I'm not one who tends to think the worst of people, but I get nervous when Bush does something "right."
It makes me think that the administration will [intentionally?] totally bungle these negotiations, piss of Iran and ensure a larger conflict that makes McCain's stance seem the only national security choice and Obama's seem naive.
The Iranians are LAUGHING at Bush. Iran has 5000 years of history. The richness of it's culture can only be compared to ancient China, Greece and, Rome - with the one difference that, it still exists uninterruptedly until today, while the others suffered mayor collapses and breakdowns in the meantime.
For the Iranians, Bush is nothing but a spoiled brat - a parvenu to get over with. Once he is out of office, they will dust off their clothes and walk on, just as if nothing had ever happened.
Sorry, but doesn't anyone remember the day that Colin Powell sacrificed his national (and international) reputation in order to grease the skids for an invasion of Iraq? The "We tried to settle this peacefully" scenario is like living through "Ground Hog Day!" I considered that, perhaps, Bush was making a final-desperate attempt to repair his hopeless legacy, but I think he's convinced that history will judge him as not only one of America's greatest presidents, but perhaps he will be sainted. So, it's not his legacy. The gang is prepping to hit Iran. Just a guess, but he's proven that he's incapable of logic.
Hmmm. Looks to me like this. Burns will go, put in a half assed effort and stretch it out as long as possible. Just in time before the election so the Occupiers can say to their adoring public, "See, we tried diplomacy and it didn't work. Now it's time to bomb 'em! And only McCain knows how to win a war!"
Sure hope I'm wrong. But, these people have proven to be quite predictable.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
