What can Obama do about Iran?
The US ambassador to the United Nations, Susan E. Rice, said that Iran must:
“prove to our satisfaction that their program is, as they claim, for peaceful purposes and open up their facilities to inspections, freeze their uranium enrichment program, commit, as they have done, and follow through on that commitment to provide fuel for enrichment outside of the country or face real pressure and consequences.”
But if they don’t, what can Obama do about it?
Short of a military attack, not much; and with America needing Iranian support in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and with Obama gambling his economic policies on an economic recovery, like a degenerate betting his kids college fund on a 2 of hearts and 7 of spades in a poker game, that is about as likely as George Bush winning a noble prize for literature or West Ham winning the premiership.
Mohamed ElBaradei, might say “that we are shifting from confrontation into transparency and cooperation,” but the truth is Iran’s offer to allow the IAEA access to the Fordo nuclear enrichment facility on 25 October and enter talks earlier about temporarily exporting low-enriched uranium to be converted into nuclear reactor fuel is a take it or leave offer, and Obama cant afford to leave it. Bush has already overplayed America’s hand, there are no more unilateral sanctions that America can impose — America has sanctioned everything it realistically can and there are no buyers internationally for more sanctions on Iran.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told RTL radio and LCI television, “We are ready to no longer speak about sanctions”, as well he might, because there isn’t even EU wide support for them and Russia and China have made it clear they wouldn’t agree to further sanctions — not that they would have any intention of biding by any sanctions, even if they did eventually agree to them. So where does that leave Obama?
He doesn’t have much to offer Iran as an incentive for discontinuing its nuclear enrichment programme. So assuming that it’s going to happen whatever position America adopts, he might as well actively support it. There is an irresponsible assumption that Iran going nuclear is dangerous but if history had proved anything, it is that MAD works, and that nuclear states will not enter into direct warfare with one and other. Iran is a far greater threat to both US geopolitical interests and Israel, without a nuclear weapons deterrent than it ever would be with one.
steph
amica
rob
@ Benjamin
Thank you. I’ll check it out.
Dear Steph,
you are a very impressive lot, all three of you, but you Steph seem to top all expectations : beautiful,intelligent, open-minded, progressive, knowledgeable…I can go on and on. I invite you to visit my above blog and to comment on it. I have many more blogs on a variety of subjects, and when I get your reply I would email to you the links to them. Please keep in touch.
Looking forward to your early reply, Benjamin
@Ben,
And how many times has Israel entered the airspace of Lebanon? Or attacked the villages of Hezbollah in the South of Lebanon?
And what do you mean a country to remain silent? So by that token how long do you expect the Palestinians to remain silent when their homes are destroyed? Their lands are being usurped? You are talking as if Israel is the victim here and that every call is against them and they are justified in every action they do.
And as for Hezbollah and Iran, listen to the speeches of Nasrullah, he clearly stated in his speech during the 33 day war that the fighters that are fighting against the Israeli war machine are all Lebanese, there are no foreign fighters and there is no armoury that is sent from out of Lebanon. Why? Because Hezbollah were using thier own missiles or rockets which are manufactured in Lebanon in the war factories there.
As for the missiles and nuclear factory, there is no issue in that. All the countries have such missiles are you conveniently forgetting Israel having such arms? Or how about the likes of Pakistan and India?
The secrecy regarding the nuclear plant is different. First off, the nuclear plant is not fully completed and it was discovered beforehand hence one cannot say whether it would have been disclosed or not by Iran. Assumptions can go either way and are useless and do nothing but add fear mongering which US did in their reports. And it is quite funny that you state that UN and IAEA inspectors are left out while forgetting that back a year or so ago when IAEA submitted a report clearly defining that the Iranian nuclear program poses no threat, Washington rejected that report which was laughable since IAEA are experts in the field and know better than anyone if Iran is moving towards making a bomb or not.
Oh and here is a thing that probably you did not know, in Islamic Jurisprudence having nuclear warheads, or nuclear armoury of any kind is considered forbidden and the Supreme Leader has an edict [fatwa] stating such a thing hence regardless of all the scenarios etc Iran cannot move towards attaining a nuclear bomb unless that edict is reversed or countered with credible arguements.
@Kevin,
Iran has very good ties with Hamas, Hizbollah and other personnels as well as organisations in other countries such as Iraq and Afghanisation.
The issue Iran has in terms of the Israel-Palestine is that Iran believes in two things:
- Israel as a nation that exists today is illegal because of the nature it has been set up. It does not mean that the people of Israel should relocate or be removed rather it is believes that the Israel as a Government, State whatever you wish to call it should not exist.
- The Palestinian people should have the right to call a referendum regarding the occupied land and if the two state solution is the way forward then it should be so however on the terms of Palestinians not vice versa. If you recall upon the election of Hamas, Iran supported that move because that is what Iran wants. In return though US labelled Hamas as a terrorist org and froze their assests simply because their puppy Fatah lost out.
@ Buffoon,
Iran is very vital to the stablisation in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you look previously back a few years you will find that US had to compromise alot from their policies to that extend that they had to accept that Iran is essential in the aftermath of the occuaption of Iraq.
However, there is dirty politics involved on both sides. MKO, PEJAK etc are being sheltered by the likes of US and will continue to be in existence in these regions causing problems. I remember sometime back I wrote an article where I mentioned how PEJAK are bringing instability and the Kurds attacked me for that. A lesson learnt but at the same time a saddening fact learnt that people are very nationalistic and would use that to continue their agenda further.
@Steph,
I am not so sure Obama is going to be that influencial. You see the foreign policy is dictated not by Obama but others in US as to speak. While Obama might try his best to bring a temporary solution to the table with Iran there are many aspects which require some examination. The next few years will definitely be interesting to watch. Obama fell out of favour over the Iranian Elections and his approach to the results. Not just that but when Hilary Clinton went on record and said that we were aiding certain personnels in Iran did not help either so it is at this moment a make or break for the Obama Administration in relation with Iran because the Iranian people are losing faith in him fast.
@ buffoon
Why not? Neither of them are going America’s way. Iran is doing a lot to hold off all-out civil war in both theatres. Obama would be in much more influence with Iran if America and Iran were trading and restored full diplomatic relations.
Damnit, you were supposed to tell me when you wrote on this subject…
I fail to see how we need Iranian support in the Iraqi and Afghan theaters though…..
@ George
I think the Saudi regime is a vile, regressive, western backed dictatorship and I would love to see it overthrown by the people who live in that part of Arabia but if they develop nuclear weapons, or more likely, are given nuclear weapons by the US, I don’t think they would be any more likely to use them than Israel, which is a far more aggressive regime, and hasn’t used their nuclear arsenal.
Wouldn’t a Saudi Arabia with nuclear weapons be a nightmare? Unlike Iran, Saudi Arabia (along with some other Gulf Arab states, such as Kuwait) is a totally one-product economy. Might such countries actually use nuclear weapons if they had them when the oil ran out — after all being nuked is quicker than starving to death, and at least that way they’d take some kafir bastards with them…
BTW I ignored the primary reason I started a comment – distracted by the thread. Read a synopsis of the NPT to understand why Iran would have signed it in the first place : and why rewards for compliance, responsibility of those who would support programs against the proliferation of nuclear weaponry, have been flagrantly turned into penalties for compliance.
That makes sale of nuke tech to India against all terms of the agreement more understandable : the USA is against controls.
Iranian nuclear threat ? You mean the one howled about by nuclear armed nations against one who has signed off on not having them ?
And Russia is to have have provided the means of generating a strategic concern on its doorstep. Those couldn’t have been the same people of Cold War fame who sent the USA into a spin of fright over the Cuban Missile Crisis then!
There are about 1 billion people in line for starvation worldwide at the present time : a good number of whom are in Afghanistan.
If you want to look at water as a prime concern – and I most certainly do, as demonstrated by Turkey cutting off flow to Iraq and killing its agriculture during a drought or North Korea letting loose a deluge of water from dams – then you will understand why I follow the group headed by JanforGore at Current TV who seek out water related items – featured Aug 14 – as I do on RSS searches on my blogs. Then there is http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/07/water-wealth-power.html where I’ve put together a number of articles from different sources – plus blogs dedicated to the topic.
For sheer clarity, though, Home – by the Home Project is hard to beat. It’s the lead article in http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/08/environment-sickening-practices.html and shows why we have a number of problems hitting us together.
@ George
These posts explain the difference.
Anarchism and the State
Anarchy
democracy and anarchism
Neither Democrats, nor Dictators: Anarchists
What’s the difference?
I am far from being convinced of Iran’s innocence but that is no reason to disrespect the people and culture of Iran and Palestine. There is always going to be a past, and every nation will have its faults, I think it is dangerous to claim moral superiority.
Correct me if I am wrong but it does seem that the Iranian government supports the Palestinian armed resistance? The Israel government might have been unethically established but there are now third and fourth generation families there, who are native to the land and Palestine is certainly a part of their heritage. A child born to the land belongs to the land and is innocent? We are certainly not going to relocate the citizens of Israel? Tehran seems to insist that Israel has no right to exist? If that is true fine, but unless Tehran intends to fight Israel in a war with absolute aims then it is ultimately pointless and detrimental. Of course I a presuming that Iran does indeed see Israel as an enemy?
@ Roberto
I completely agree. It doesn’t surprise me that people would react like that to you viewing Press TV in America. It’s actually a great alternative news source. I like to take from varied sources.
@ Roberto
Thanks
He wants everyone to think his is an American. And EU is more to his way of life.
That’s all I’m saying. I corcur with your being armed at all times.
Obama does not believe in personal firearm ownership. He thinks that only the Govt. should be armed.
Another great reason for the EU to have him.
Cheers!
@ Donger
He’s American. Why does Europe need him?
@ Roberto
Exactly.