Speaking to reporters at his Texas ranch, Bush said the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had indicated a willingness to continue discussions with European nations.
Bush and his advisors are dropping the ball on this.
A common tactic for advantage in political diplomacy and warfare is the old stall, regroup, rearm, and reinforce method. And, that is exactly what we have here with the new Iranian president.
By prolonging discussions, they can continue to work on specific objectives in the development process without fear of consequences. The longer this discussion process lasts, the more valuable work towards their ultimate goal can be completed. (The President would be wise to consider this, in his Presidential ponderings.)
Who among us really believes that Iran is bargaining in good faith?
It makes no difference whether they take ten years or five (as they first believed). The point is, they are working overtime while stalling talks. And, they will reach their goal at somepoint, sooner or later, if we (and the rest of the free world) do not respond.
This is similar to the Palestinians' periodic, cease-fire strategy of call a cease fire, rearm, replan, then refight. Iran calls for a halt in research, to allow for negotiations, long enough for some purpose that is yet unclear; and then announces their intention of restarting the process. Neither Iran nor the Palestinians have demonstrated any sincere intention of acting in good faith.
The President would also be wise to consider the speediness (or lack thereof) of anything that gets introduced into the UN. By delaying and allowing Iran to continue without formal protest, not only reinforces their behavior. It will just make it that much harder for when they finally decide that the EU 3, is not going to get the job done, and must act.
I actually doubt the UN will do much better, but it won't hurt to start the paperwork, now. We can always withdraw it later, should I be wrong.
5 comments:
noticing a common theme here? Islmaic country (well, them and N. Korea) scares everybod, stops the infraction, "talks", restarts.... stops, "talks", restarts......
Honesty LA, after all the crap we have taken over Iraq, which bottom line really was nothing more than proactive action before they became another N. Korea, I say let it ride.
Let world handel this one since their arm-chair quarter backing was so outstanding with Iraq.
Iran is not an immediate threat to us. They are to Isreal. Lets see how well the UN and Europe's "diplomacy" works here.
I would like to see Bush sit on it, watch it unfold, and then when it falls through, and they cray out for our help, and ask where we are in the proccessp; We could tell them they got EXACTLY what they asked for.
I agree. Let's start the paper work. Let's position ourselves, take the proper stance, and rattle some saber.
I feel like Michael Ledeen, who ends his articles on Iran with the phrase "Faster Please."
just popping through with a diferent view point for you
Iran is not “violating” the treaty by moving ahead with a program for “enriching uranium”. They don’t even have the centrifuges for conducting such a process. The re-opening of their facility at Isfahan signals that they will continue the “conversion” process to produce the nuclear fuel that is required in nuclear power plants. This is all permitted under the terms of the NPT
Why should Iran forgo the processing of nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes if it is written right into the treaty? Would Israel or Pakistan accept a similar proposal?
Of course, not. Both countries ignored the treaty altogether and built their own nuclear weapons behind the back of the international community. Only Iran has been singled out and punished for COMPLYING with the treaty. This demonstrates the power of Washington to dictate the international
Mohammed el-Baradei the respected chief of the IAEA has conducted a thorough and nearly-continuous investigation on all suspected sites in iran for the last two years and has come up with the very same result every time; nothing.
If we can’t trust the findings of these comprehensive investigations by nuclear experts than the agency should be shut down and the NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty) should be abandoned. It is just that simple.
you have two countries that didnt bother to even side up to the NPT with israel and pakistan and they both built Nuclear weapons behind the worlds back
israel has been punished with yet more american support and dollars
pakistan has been punished by just getting a new delivery of american fighter planes
it seems iran is so bad because it complies with the treaty
if you dont even bother to join the treaty then your weapons of mass destruction are just fine
double standards ?
G,
The UN and the EU aren't handling it. I am not advocating military action at this time, but before we get to the point that military action becomes necessary, the world (including us) needs to pressure them politically and economically. If China, Russia, India, Europe, and the U.S. would all get behind it, they may be persuaded.
They may not be an immediate threat to the US now, but just let them slip a nuke to a terrorist cell and see what happens. I don't want it to get to the point where we have to guess.
Jason,
I knew you'd be with me.
H,
I knew you wouldn't.
LA,
This was really more of a frustration fantasy statement then reality. That is the problem with reality, and our nation. No matter what happens, we cannot drop the ball on our duty to the world and our own people. We will take it on the chin ever time, and still play world police. But hey, if we dont, who will?
H,
I know you like the role of "devil's advocate", but really, peaceful use? Yeah, that is one reason... but with their long history of Israel Abolishment doctrin, I think it is a fair assumption that their goals are not all benign.
Post a Comment