The Bush administration rope-a-dope game with Iran continued under Obama. So Iran explicity says that it is willing to allow an exchange of its uranium, but wants guarantees that it will receive reactor fuel -- and the US flatly refuses, proving that the US never intended to live up to its own end of the bargain, and that the US offer was simply meant to be rejected by the Iranians. This is part of long series of Iranian compromise offers that would have addressed any real concern of nuclear weapons proliferation -- such as Iran's offer to open its nuclear program to multinational participation, and to place additional limits on its centrifuges -- but which have been simply ignored. El Baradei himself said this too:
I have seen the Iranians ready to accept putting a cap on their enrichment [program] in terms of tens of centrifuges, and then in terms of hundreds of centrifuges. But nobody even tried to engage them on these offers. Now Iran has 5,000 centrifuges. The line was, "Iran will buckle under pressure." But this issue has become so ingrained in the Iranian soul as a matter of national pride.
So basically: same old story as the Paris Agreement tactic, repeated again. And as usual the NY Times, acting as the propaganda mouthpiece it has repeatedly proven to be, speculates (via a spkesperson for the Wisconsin Project for Arms Control, which has proven itself to be a pro-war front) that Iran has only made this compromise offer because it wants to "divide" the powers against Iran. The NY Times naturally doesn't similarly speculate on why this offer (as well as all the other Iranian compromise offers) has been so summarily rejected -- no, everything the US says is taken as the absolute truth automatically, everything Iran says is subjected cast with suspicion. But like I said, the whole US offer was a scam and a farce -- it was an offer that was intended to be refused, so as to paint Iran as the "intransigent" one, part of the Dennis Ross plan to make a war more palatable.
Here's the bottom line: Israel wants to dominate the Mideast, and Iran stands in the way. This is a zero-sum game. If the US and Iran get along, who needs Israel? If Israel cannot continue to expand and dominate the region, it will remain a small, weak state constantly riven by internal and external strife. It has to dominate and expand and create external enemies to survive - typical of a fascist state. Israel does not want to see a strong Iran that gets along with the US and certainly not one that has any economic power (of the sort that comes from having 15 nuclear reactors and strong international relations) and so no amount of Iranian concessions on the nuclear issue will ever suffice until Iran becomes an impovrished vassal state to Israel, much like Egypt and Jordan are now. So anyone who thinks that any of these talks are ever going to resolve anything, are simply naive. Sorry but this isnt going to be resolved until the underlying conflict is resolved, one way or another, no matter how many IAEA inspections Iran allows or even if Iran gives up its nuclear program entirely (some new excuse will be cooked up then.) Until then the rope-a-dope game with Iran will continue.
why do you call this site "iran affairs" when it should really be "iran nuclear affairs". over 6 months of brutality in iran and the only passing reference you make to it here is to some silly post on wrist bands on the football players, and some quotes from lefties who don't know anything about iran. sad rahmat be hamid dabashi, at least he doesn't twist or brush aside the truth in iran just because he's standing up to US duplicity and injustice,
[This is a personal blog, not a news agency. I'm under no obligation to cover material other than what I want. You're entirely free to go visit Dr Dabashi's blog, or any other blog. My readers are sophisticated enough, and no one is forcing them to visit my blog. There are lots of other people who are in better positions to talk about what's going on inside Iran -- I am not inside Iran and don't presume to do so.]
Posted by: s. | December 14, 2009 at 10:57 PM