Biden’s Blink on Iran
By Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School (THE WASHINGTON POST, 26/08/08):
In selecting Joseph Biden as his running mate, Barack Obama acknowledged the importance of foreign affairs to this year’s election. His Web site trumpeted Biden as “an expert on foreign policy” and a man “who has stared down dictators.”
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden is well versed in policy debates and carefully choreographed trips. But his record on the Islamic Republic of Iran — perhaps the chief national security threat facing the next president — suggests a persistent and dangerous judgment deficit. Biden’s unyielding pursuit of “engagement” with Iran for more than a decade has made…
David Ignatius’s Updates about Iran
By David Ignatius (THE WASHINGTON POST, 07/08/08):
Two brief updates concerning past columns on Iran:
In my Aug. 3 column, I said that a Washington Institute for Near East Policy task force “advocated ‘preventive military action’ ” to keep Iran from building a nuclear bomb. That shorthand truncated the report’s conclusions. According to the group’s executive director, Robert Satloff, “the report endorses a strategy of prevention, as opposed to deterrence, to deal with the issue and urges the president to engage in high-level discussions with Israel to assess the entire range of policy options, which includes preventive military action.”
In Iran, searching for common ground
In a column that appeared Sept. 6, 2006, I highlighted the work of Dr. Arash Alaei,…
Negotiating with Iran is maddening, but bombing would be a catastrophe
By Max Hastings (THE GUARDIAN, 04/08/08):
The favoured season for launching wars used to come when the harvest had been gathered. This year, there is talk of an Israeli strike against Iran in November or December, when it would no longer embarrass the US election process but George Bush will still be in the White House during the presidential transition.
Last year, following a US intelligence submission which stated that Iran was not actively pursuing the creation of atomic weapons, a direct American attack on the country’s nuclear facilities became implausible - and remains so. But Jerusalem and Washington are talking seriously about a possible Israeli strike, for which American collusion would be indispensable.
In Washington at the weekend, Shaul Mofaz, Israel’s deputy defence…
‘Bomb Bomb Iran’? Not Likely.
By David Ignatius (THE WASHINGTON POST, 03/08/08):
Analysts speculate about the danger of a U.S. or Israeli military attack on Iran before the Bush administration departs office next January. But if you read the tea leaves carefully, the evidence is actually pointing in the opposite direction.
One sign that the diplomatic track is dominant for now is that the administration plans to announce late this month that it will open an interest section in Tehran, a senior official disclosed Thursday. This will be an important symbol, as it will be the first American diplomatic mission in Iran since the U.S. Embassy there was seized in 1979. The official described it as an effort to “reach out to the Iranian people.” The Iranian government…
Using Bombs to Stave Off War
By Benny Morris, a professor of Middle Eastern history at Ben-Gurion University and the author, most recently, of 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War (THE NEW YORK TIMES, 18/07/08):
Israel will almost surely attack Iran’s nuclear sites in the next four to seven months — and the leaders in Washington and even Tehran should hope that the attack will be successful enough to cause at least a significant delay in the Iranian production schedule, if not complete destruction, of that country’s nuclear program. Because if the attack fails, the Middle East will almost certainly face a nuclear war — either through a subsequent pre-emptive Israeli nuclear strike or a nuclear exchange shortly after Iran gets the bomb.
It is in the…
Keep watch on the hawks
By Abbas Edalat, the founder of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (THE GUARDIAN, 18/07/08):
President Bush’s decision to send William Burns, his third-ranking diplomat, to observe nuclear negotiations in Geneva with Iran, represents a long-overdue shift in American policy - underlined by plans revealed in yesterday’s Guardian to re-establish a diplomatic presence in Tehran. Hitherto, the US had demanded that Iran must concede the main point of negotiations, namely suspension of its uranium enrichment programme, before talks begin. Iran has responded positively to negotiations, but ruled out the US precondition of suspension. The US still states that it will only enter into dialogue with Iran if it halts its enrichment programme.
Iran’s nuclear plants are all under the…
Taming the hawk
By Simon Tisdall (THE GUARDIAN, 17/07/08):
It may be too early to proclaim an end to the “Cheney era”, but Washington’s decision to participate in Saturday’s nuclear talks with Iran and send diplomats back to Tehran is a very significant shift. It marks a nadir for the gun-toting neoconservatives who dominated the first Bush term and for their unofficial champion, vice-president Dick Cheney, the stealthy advice-giver also known as “whispering grass”.
Noisy sabre-rattling and a crescendo of shouted threats exchanged by Iran and Israel in recent weeks convinced many observers that the Middle East was on the brink of a new conflagration. They feared a “second Iraq” was in the making, again triggered by worries about real or imagined weapons of mass destruction.
That dreaded spectre…
Our Man in Iran?
By James P. Rubin, a teacher at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs and an assistant secretary of state for public affairs during the Clinton administration (THE NEW YORK TIMES, 14/07/08):
Iran’s latest missile tests occurred just as there have been glimmers of progress in nuclear negotiations between Tehran and the Western powers. Whether or not those talks succeed, it’s time for Washington to open a diplomatic post in Tehran.
A high-level official has told me that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is seeking President Bush’s approval to establish a United States Interests Section in the Iranian capital. This is a smart idea that Democrats and Republicans should support.
Iran is an anomaly in the Middle East. In Iran, unlike in…
Believing Is Seeing
By Errol Morris, a filmmaker who writes the Zoom column for The Times online (THE NEW YORK TIMES, 13/07/08):
Newspapers and blogs are once again filled with a story about a digitally altered photograph. A picture of missiles launched by Iran. A picture that purports to show four missiles being fired rather than the three shown in other photographs of the launching. Are we to infer that no missiles were launched? Or just three? Or maybe only two? Take several steps back. Are we being tricked into thinking that Iran is a bigger threat than it is?
Oddly enough, the effect of all this publicity — including this essay — is to draw further attention to the missiles. If the casual reader passed over them…
Encrucijada nuclear en Oriente Próximo
Por José María Ridao (EL PAÍS, 10/07/08):
A lo largo de las últimas semanas ha ido tomando cuerpo uno de los episodios más delicados para la paz y la seguridad mundiales desde el final de la Guerra Fría. El viceprimer ministro israelí, Shaul Mofaz, declaraba el 6 de junio que “será inevitable atacar a Irán para detener su programa atómico”. Otros miembros del Gabinete de Ehud Olmert lo desmintieron de inmediato, señalando que las declaraciones de Mofaz no reflejaban la posición oficial del Gobierno israelí y situándolas en el contexto de una lucha electoral que se considera inminente. Pero el momento escogido por el viceprimer ministro no fue casual: el día anterior habían concluido unas maniobras militares israelíes que, aunque secretas, se…
Tehran’s Definite ‘Maybe’
By David Ignatius (THE WASHINGTON POST, 10/07/08):
Even in midsummer, Iran’s foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, wears the three-piece suit of a traditional diplomat. But faithful to the dress code of the Iranian revolution, he doesn’t wear a necktie. That mix of symbols is a good snapshot of Iran’s hard-and-soft foreign policy these days.
The Iranians are signaling that they want talks with the West — and hinting that they are ready for a serious dialogue with the Great Satan in Washington. But while they discuss engagement, they remain wary of it. The Iranians are almost coquettish: They like being wooed, and they enjoy being the center of attention, but they aren’t quite ready to say yes.
And even as they talk of diplomacy, the…
Cyanide on the table
By Martin Woolalacott (THE GUARDIAN, 10/07/08):
If you wanted to draft a scenario for the end of the relatively orderly and prosperous world we live in, you might well begin it with an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. After the battering that the experts say would be necessary to suppress Iran’s nuclear programme, oil at $200 a barrel would soon be a distant dream as Iran’s reserves were compromised and other Middle Eastern oilfields disrupted by Iranian retaliation.
Trade would shrivel, economies would cease to function, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon would slip back into chaos, Pakistan would be rocked, Iran would be broken, and extremism would flourish in the vacuum. Floundering amid the wreckage like lost boys would be the US army, much…
Pay heed to Pyongyang
By Lawrence Korb, assistant secretary of defence under Reagan and a senior fellow at the Centre for American Progress and Sean Duggan, a research associate at the Centre for American Progress (THE GUARDIAN, 09/07/08):
The Bush administration is to be commended for completing a deal with North Korea that persuaded the reclusive regime to disclose details of its nuclear power and nuclear weapons capabilities. But, had George Bush been willing to negotiate six years earlier, the US and its partners would have got a better deal and the world would be more secure.
In the summer of 2002, long before Pyongyang had the bargaining chip of having tested a nuclear device, the Bush administration had an opportunity to strike a deal. At…
Irán se prepara para la guerra
Por Nazanin Amirian, escritora iraní exiliada, autora de 40 respuestas al conflicto de Oriente Próximo (LA VANGUARDIA, 08/07/08):
Un último tanteo, para ganar tiempo el uno y el otro. De nuevo, el paquete de incentivos ofrecido a Irán por los miembros permanentes del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas y Alemania (5+ 1) a cambio de suspender su enriquecimiento de uranio no incluye las garantías de seguridad - la principal exigencia de Irán- y deja libres las manos de Estados Unidos e Israel para atacarlo aunque ponga fin a su plan nuclear. La trampa tendida a Irán es la misma que atrapó a Iraq: Occidente, en vez de presentar pruebas de que Sadam Husein tenía las armas de destrucción masiva, optó por…
Don’t discount Iran’s internal debates
By Simon Tisdall (THE GUARDIAN, 07/07/08):
Iran refused again at the weekend to give a straight answer to the west’s offer of incentives in return for halting its uranium enrichment programme. But its call for a swift resumption of negotiations, and its assertion that a “new environment” conducive to progress now exists, will make it all the more difficult for Israeli and US hawks to press the alternative case for tougher sanctions or military action.
Tehran’s apparent attempt to divide western counsels while counting on Russian and Chinese sympathy at the UN looks familiar. The question of how to maintain a united front and a coherent policy is becoming a hardy perennial as the nuclear dispute drags on. The west’s next move will be…
La guerra de Oriente Medio
Por Walter Laqueur, director del Instituto de Estudios Estratégicos de Washington (LA VANGUARDIA, 06/07/08):
El Departamento de Estado de EE. UU. ha manifestado que resulta estúpido dar por supuesto que hay otra guerra en Oriente Medio a la vuelta de la esquina. Probablemente tiene razón por lo que al mes que viene se refiere, pero yo no apostaría que siga siendo cierto durante un periodo más largo, digamos que hasta finales de año.
Las cuestiones en liza son de todos conocidas. El presidente iraní ha amenazado con borrar a Israel del mapa. Algunos sostienen que se le tradujo mal, pero lo ha dicho más de una vez y en cualquier caso la traducción procedía de Teherán, no de Tel Aviv. Los israelíes…
Apuntando a Irán
Por Mateo Madridejos, periodista e historiador (EL PERIÓDICO, 30/06/08):
El único resultado tangible de la visita de despedida de George Bush a Europa fue la decisión de la Unión Europea (UE) de aumentar las sanciones económicas contra la República Islámica de Irán por su negativa a aceptar la conminación de la ONU para que detenga la producción de uranio enriquecido, materia prima para fabricar la bomba atómica. Por iniciativa del primer ministro británico, Gordon Brown, los europeos lanzaron una nueva reprimenda económica contra los clérigos de Teherán, mientras Javier Solana les presentaba una oferta negociadora, exhibición del palo y la zanahoria.
“Todas las opciones siguen abiertas”, proclamó Bush en Berlín. “Un bombardeo israelí contra Irán sigue en el orden del día”, escribe…
Talking to Iran Is Our Best Option
By Ivo Daalder and Philip Gordon, senior fellows at the Brookings Institution. They are unpaid, outside advisers to the Obama campaign, writing here in a personal capacity (THE WASHINGTON POST, 29/06/08):
When it comes to engaging Iran — a signature theme of his foreign policy — Barack Obama is taking his share of criticism. Republican rival John McCain predictably denounces Obama’s call for direct talks with Iran, while his foreign policy aide Randy Scheunemann labels that approach nothing less than “unilateral cowboy summitry.”
More surprisingly, some Europeans also seem wary of Obama’s proposed change in U.S. policy. They argue that the international community must not abandon its official line that no negotiations with Iran may take place unless Tehran suspends its uranium enrichment program. This…
Toehold in Tehran?
By Fred Hiatt (THE WASHINGTON POST, 23/06/08):
A smart idea to shake up U.S. policy and reach out to the Iranian people is being debated in Washington, but the debate isn’t taking place within or between the presidential campaigns. It’s going on inside the Bush administration.
Senior officials at the State Department and beyond are mulling a proposal to open an interest section in Tehran, similar to the one the United States has operated in Havana since 1977. This would fall short of full diplomatic recognition, but it would open a channel to the Iranian people and, maybe, eventually, to the regime as well.
The idea has been under discussion for close to two years and could be adopted within weeks — though officials continue…
Missing a Father in Iran
By Daniel Levinson, a graduate student from Coral Springs, Fla (THE WASHINGTON POST, 22/06/08):
It has been 471 days since my father, Robert “Bob” Levinson, went missing in Iran — more than the 444 days that 52 American diplomats were held hostage after they were seized in Iran in 1979.
These past 15 months have brought my mother, four sisters, two brothers and me nothing but grief and sadness. We are no closer to finding answers than we were when our father disappeared March 9, 2007, on Kish Island, Iran. He was on a private business trip, and I emphasize “private” because, although he worked for the FBI years ago, he has been retired for more than a decade.
When he disappeared, my father…
