Condi's coup: how the neo-cons lost the argument over Iran
I said yesterday that I thought the decision for the US to open diplomatic negotiations with Iran, including stationing diplomats there for the first time since the seventies, represented a stunning victory for Condaleezza Rice over Dick Cheney and the neo-con nutbags.
Well, the nutbags are making their displeasure known.
"This is a complete capitulation on the whole idea of suspending enrichment," said Mr Bush's former UN envoy, John Bolton. "Just when the administration has no more U-turns to pull, it does another."It always brings me deep pleasure to know that John Bolton is displeased, as it's usually an indication that someone somewhere is doing something sensible.
Now Rice has been as guilty as any other member of this administration in pushing a policy of preventive wars and has been every bit as bellicose as the others in her public condemnations of Iran. And she doesn't have the power to reverse more than thirty years of US policy on her own, so how did she do it?
Well, apparently the first thing she did, was use her own signature on the offer to the Iranians.
Rice had to first persuade Cheney to agree to this, which is why so much is being made about this being a "one time only" offer.The breakthrough, if that is what it turns out to be, that persuaded Mr Bush that it was time to end the 30-year boycott of high-level diplomatic contacts with Iran, came from the simple act of Ms Rice signing her name to a joint letter offering sweeter terms to Tehran than it had seen before.
The very act of putting her name to a package of incentives presented in Tehran last month persuaded the Iranian authorities that there was movement that would allow them to proclaim victory over the US, while ending their nuclear programme.
When he saw Ms Rice's signature on the document, Iran's Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, was visibly stunned, according to those present at the meeting. He formally responded to the offer with a letter addressed to Ms Rice and the EU's foreign policy envoy, Javier Solana, as well as foreign ministers of the five other countries at the talks.
His letter skirted around the hot-button issue of Iran's uranium enrichment programme, but it contained an olive branch of an offer to "find common ground through logical and constructive actions", according to reports.
Hearing of Mr Mottaki's reaction and then receiving a formal response persuaded Ms Rice that Iran was finally willing to have meaningful talks with the US that could avoid a war.
But the Iranians appear to have taken the offer seriously and it is causing much relief throughout Europe where the fear of another steep rise in oil prices caused by an attack on Iran was a source of worry for the markets.
Iran welcomed the American change of attitude yesterday, but with governments from France to China also welcoming the shift, Tehran also signalled that there was a long way to go before the diplomats break out the champagne. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that there are still "clearly defined red lines", meaning that Iran is insisting that it has the right to peaceful nuclear energy. This is a position that Israel and the American conservatives still find unacceptable.There's still time for it all to go pear shaped as the Americans and the Israelis are still insisting that it is unacceptable for Iran to follow the rules of the NNPT. They are demanding that Iran give up it's right under the NNPT to enrich uranium for civilian purposes, which is a bit rich coming from a nuclear power like Israel who has never even bothered to sign up to the NNPT.
But, for the moment, Teflon Condi continues to prove that no matter how many times she fucks things up, she still manages to come out smelling of roses.
Click title for full article.
7 comments:
I'm more sceptical of this development. The U.S. is under a lot of pressure by our allies to use diplomacy over military threats. This could very well last three weeks or so and be abandoned with a shrug and the words "we tried". This will be spun as the "one last chance" that Iran "spurned".
Meanwhile, Turkey is doing an 'end run' around us and becoming a major regional diplomatic force, while distancing themselves from Washington on almost every issue. Israel risks being frozen out of negotiations if they stick with the Administration, and the Gulf States are now being offered an alternative to Bush's "vision" at long last.
This is a desperate attempt for Rice to remain in the game, but she has nothing to offer except for a chance for Iran to unconditionally capitulate on everything.
This could very well last three weeks or so and be abandoned with a shrug and the words "we tried". This will be spun as the "one last chance" that Iran "spurned".
I agree Todd, which is why I said it might all go pear shaped.
I'm not up to speed on Turkey though, in what way are they doing an "end run" around the US?
Turkey has been the primary mediator (and sponsor) in the Israel-Syria talks, and is also deeply involved in the talks with Iran.
Turkey does not agree with the U.S. line on Iran. They are deeply opposed to any military intervention, and they appear to be galvanising the Gulf States against such action.
Perhaps coincidentally, Turkey is building several nuclear plants of their own.
Turkey is also taking a larger role (or speaking with a louder voice, at least) on the Palestinian issue, and criticising Israel's undermining of the talks. There are also major new diplomatic initiatives with Armenia, and the Gulf States are conferring with the Turkish FM frequently.
They are becoming a diplomatic powerhouse in the region; a broker independent of Washington.
That's what I meant.
Thanks for that Doug. My instinct is still that the Israelis will stick with the Americans at all times though, no matter what the regional consequences.
Sorry Todd, I'm obviously having a senior moment. Why do I keep calling you Doug?
It's the surname, undoubtedly. It's pretty common.
The Israelis will stick with the Americans, of course. But they are drawing a line which they won't cross.
The Administration sees Israel (and Britain, for that matter) as little more than a military reserve under their command. Britain has realised the consequences of this, and Israel is very mindful of the disastrous effort in Lebanon that Cheney pushed them into. Israel also was repudiated by everyone except the U.S. for the air strike on Syria, and has been under pressure by Cheney to carry out further attacks against Syria.
Now Turkey is offering an alternative, and Cheney is on the way out. Removing a threat on Israel's northern border would be perhaps Olmert's only achievement. So while Israel will "stick with" the U.S. on the broader level, there is an increasing chance that it will reject the Administration's pressure and move toward diplomacy with Syria.
The region is desperate for an alternative to Bush's "vision", which is why Turkey is seizing the opportunity and doing an end run around the Administration. Turkey is too important of an ally for Bush to denounce and condemn.
Of course it's the surname! Thank God, I thought I was losing it.
And I'm actually full of quiet admiration of the Turks for seizing the moment. It's ironic that Bush's big plan - according to Scott McClellan's book - was to transform the Middle East by establishing democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan, therefore bringing about the democratization of the region.
He's actually done more harm to the region, and done more to radicalise it, than any previous US president.
And it's a further irony that, had he pushed ahead with his stated aim of establishing a Palestinian state, he might have done the opposite.
Post a Comment