Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Obama With Iran

Time magazine's Scott MacLeod reports that Sergei Barseghian, a columnist for the Iranian reformist newspaper Etemad Meli (National Confidence), notes that in Farsi, the words Oo ba ma would translate as "He's with us."



Iranians are following the American presidential race. In part, because they wish to be rid of President Bush, who branded Iran part of an "Axis of Evil," and because they are taken in by Obama's false hope. According to MacLeod, Iranians favor Obama's hope rhetoric and see a President Obama repairing the U.S.-Iranian relationship:

It's not only the policy expectations that account for Obama's popularity: his Third World ethnic background and the Muslim faith of his father's Kenyan family — even his middle name, Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad and a revered figure in the Shi'ite Islam practiced in Iran — offer points of affinity that some analysts believe could give Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the political cover to make a gesture of reconciliation to the country long decried in Tehran as "the Great Satan."




But it's Obama's declared willingness to engage in "aggressive personal diplomacy" with the Iranian leadership that has generated the most interest among senior officials in Tehran, since this would mark a sea-change in Washington's approach. "Obama is a man of engagement, a man of negotiations," one Iranian official told TIME. Amir Mohebbian, an analyst close to Iranian conservative politicians, argues that "the mentality of Iranian decision makers is ready for that." He adds: "I think that the coming of Obama — maybe, maybe — helps to solve this problem, but it needs bravery, from both sides."



MacLeod, fails to mention that the U.S./Iran "30-year Cold War" is the result of Iran's seizure of the U.S. embassy and the subsequent holding of 52 U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days -- the remainder of Jimmy Carter's presidency. Like Carter's failure to free the hostages, Obama's proposed "aggressive personal diplomacy" will also be seen as a sign of weakness that will only encourage this state sponsor of terrorism.



Senator McCain, on the other hand, with his more "Realistic Idealism," is less likely to make nice to the Iranians merely for the sake of making nice.



The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) — the nation’s largest association of Muslim organizations — tried to persuade McCain to drop the adjective “Islamic” when describing terrorists and extremists:

We’ve tried to contact his office, contact his spokesperson to have them rethink word usage that is more acceptable to the Muslim community. If it’s not our intent to paint everyone with the same brush, then certainly we should think seriously about just characterizing them as criminals, because that is what they are.



Remembering how ineffective our former policy of treating terrorists as mere criminals was in preventing terror attacks against America Senator McCain has rejected ISNA's plea:

Steve Schmidt, a former Bush White House aide who is now a McCain media strategist, told The Times that the use of the word is appropriate and that the candidate will continue to define the enemy that way.





"Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda represent a perverted strain of Islam at odds with the great many peaceful Muslims who practice their great faith peacefully," Mr. Schmidt said. "But the reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is."

Realistic Idealism indeed.





The failed policy of merely criminalizing terrorism brought us to 9/11. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because the organization thought we didn't have the stomach to fight. Following many attacks on Americans in Lebanon in the 1970s and '80s culminating in the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, America withdrew. Our response to attacks during Bill Clinton's presidency -- withdrawal, angry words occasionally accompanied by a few cruise missiles resulted in attack after attack. Mogadishu in 1993, the 1993 attack on World Trade Center, the attack on the U.S. military office in Riyadh in 1995, the attacks American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, and the near sinking of the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000.



I prefer the current approach to fighting the war the Islamic extremists continue to wage against us and McCain's "Realistic Idealism" to the false hope of Obama's "aggressive personal diplomacy."

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Colin Powell On The Olympics, Iraq, Iran, Race And 2008

Diane Sawyer interviewed Colin Powell on "Good Morning America" and discussed the Olympics, Iraq, and Iran, race and the 2008 election.

Presidential Election

Powell insists he hasn't yet decided whom he'll back in the 2008 presidential election:

"I'm looking at all three candidates," Powell said in an exclusive interview with Diane Sawyer for Thursday's "Good Morning America" on ABC. "I know them all very, very well. I consider myself a friend of each and every one of them. And I have not decided who I will vote for yet."


Rejects Olympic Boycott

Powell rejects a boycott of the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in China:
"That's a judgment the president will have to make. I would not boycott the opening ceremony," Powell told Sawyer.
Powell insists that a boycott will not accomplish its objective:
"We always are aware and have been aware of Chinese human rights problems. And I think if you start to take this kind of action, it doesn't really serve the purpose of human rights," Powell told "Good Morning America."

"What is accomplished by boycotting the opening ceremony?" Powell asked rhetorically. "I don't think that makes the situation any better. It probably makes the situation a little more difficult for the Chinese because they will pull back even more."

Powell encouraged China to begin a dialogue with the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet.

"I think we ought (to) recognize that these protests are legitimate, recognize that the Chinese ought to move forward and start having a dialogue with the Dalai Lama, and not just say, 'We're not going to talk to you.' (The) Dalai Lama has indicated flexibility. And I think that's what the Chinese should do," he said. "But I don't think that these kinds of actions, such as boycotting an opening ceremony, or even perhaps thinking twice about sending your team to the Olympics, has the desired effect."

"I very much supported in 2001, when I was secretary of state, that we give the Olympics to the Chinese because I thought it would put them under a spotlight. And they have responded to that spotlight," he said. "But they haven't with respect to Tibet. And these demonstrations show the Chinese leadership that the world is watching this."


Iraq

Powell expressed concern about the burden Iraq puts on the country's military:
"I'll tell you what they're all going to face -- whichever one of them becomes president on Jan. 21 of 2009 -- they will face a military force, a United States military force, that cannot sustain, continue to sustain, 140,000 people deployed in Iraq, and the 20 (to) 25,000 people we have deployed in Afghanistan, and our other deployments," Powell said.

[. . .]

"I think it's time to begin an orderly process of withdrawing our troops, start rebuilding our military and focusing on the challenges posed by Afghanistan," Clinton said during a Senate Armed Services hearing on Tuesday.


Iran

Powell, as a soldier, says while military options are always on the table, Iran would be a very tough target.

Race

Powell condemned controversial remarks by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor of 20 years, as "deplorable" but complimented Obama for his speech on race:
"Rev. Wright is also somebody who has made enormous contributions in his community and has turned a lot of lives around," Powell said, "And so, I have to put that in context with these very offensive comments that he made, which I reject out of hand."

[. . .]

"I think that Sen. Obama handled the issue well . . . he didn't look the other way. He didn't wait for the, for the, you know, for the storm to go over. He went on television, and I thought, gave a very, very thoughtful, direct speech. And he didn't abandon the minister who brought him closer to his faith," Powell told Sawyer.


You can watch the interview in the following video.



Powell was impressive in his ability to weave answers around tough questions and not offend any of the potential powers to be. Very diplomatic and thoughtful.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Kissinger Endorses McCain

Henry Kissinger, who served as secretary of state under Presidents Ford and Nixon, says Senator McCain is the best person to serve as president at a dangerous time for America and the world:

"I tremendously admire his service to the nation," Mr. Kissinger said. "I believe that he's the best candidate to serve our nation in an extremely difficult and complicated period." He added that he was "doing something that I am not comfortable with" in making an endorsement, but that Mr. McCain and the nation deserved it.

In what may have been a criticism of Mr. Romney, Senator Clinton, Mayor Giuliani, or a number of the candidates running in the 2008 race, Mr. Kissinger stressed the strength and depth of Mr. McCain's commitment to his belief in America and freedom. "This is not a question of a focus group advising what to say on a talk show," he said.




Kissinger also took the opportunity to criticize the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran:
"They had a footnote that said a weapons program is the production of warheads," Mr. Kissinger said. "In fact, there are three elements to a weapons program, the production of fissionable material, the production of missiles, and the production of warheads. …We cannot dismiss it by defining it into one category, and this is a problem that will be with us for the rest of this administration and into the beginning of the next administration."

Kissinger had an important article in the Washington Post about misreading the Iran report and the recent tendency of the intelligence community to turn itself into a kind of check on the executive branch.

Related:
Changing Our View Of Iran
Iran Strengthened By NIE

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Iran Strengthened By NIE

Meir Javedanfar writes that hope of a strong united international front against Iran is gone, after the NIE gave state sponsor of terrorism a clean bill of health regarding nuclear weapons:

It is one thing when the IAEA gives Iran positive points for being “generally truthful about its past.” After all, many argue that the IAEA is a toothless bureaucratic organization, at the mercy of different governments and their political agendas.

But when the multi-billion dollar US intelligence machine declares Iran halted its nuclear weapons program back in 2003, then as far as many Middle Eastern countries are concerned, the “danger” label has been taken off Iran’s nuclear program.

Although many Sunni countries are worried about Tehran’s activities in Iraq and Lebanon, they were more worried about the prospects of war between Washington and Tehran. Now that this danger has dissipated, it is likely that even more countries in the region will decide to engage Iran, as means of influencing its strategy and behavior in the Middle East. This will make the job of imposing sanctions against Iran much more difficult than before.

It will also enable Iran to come out of regional isolation, thus ruining all the celebration that took place in Washington and Jerusalem following the Annapolis show of solidarity.
In just one document, in which incendiary conclusions are misrepresented and not supported by the substance of the report and which some suggest was artfully written to damage President Bush, the writers have managed to undo years and years of effort to contain the world's leading state sponsor of terror and its nuclear ambitions.

This will only embolden Iran. A more confident and less vilified Iran is more likely to continue to engage in activities which will make war more likely.

Related:
Changing Our View Of Iran
Spying and Policymaking Don't Mix

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Obama Wins Debate

Senator Barack Obama outperformed six other Democratic presidential wannabes at last night's debate at Drexel University in Philadelphia.

An unscientific OpenVote poll found Drexel students selected Obama as the debate winner:

Currently, with over 600 votes cast, Obama has sustained the lead with 46 percent.
I didn't see it quite that way. I thought Hillary took a lot of damage from Dodd, Edwards and Obama. I think Edwards came out on top.

Regardless of who won, the loser was Hillary. She was pounded for her vote for a resolution supporting the designation of Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, and comparisons to her vote to authorize military action against Iraq. Hillary also took a hit for her inconsistency on Social Security:
Earlier, when Clinton was asked whether she had made one statement on Social Security publicly and a conflicting answer privately, she ducked the question, saying she believed in “fiscal responsibility.”
She came across as devious, insincere and waffling on access to records about her activities while First Lady. Hillary similarly refused to give a straight answer regarding New York Governor Eliott Spitzer's very unpopular plan to issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens.

Saturday, September 29, 2007

McCain On Bomb Bomb Iran Video

John McCain talks to WNYC's Brian Lehrer about his "Bomb Iran" remark.



If you haven't seen it, here is the video of McCain's "Bomb Iran" remark.