22 thoughts on “U.S., Iran to Enter Talks After November Election – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. A great idea from Obama, and now we know why Bibi suddenly went silent (more or less). But I think that the nuclear issue is enough for Obama to deal with; to try to talk Iran out of its alliances is a pipe dream. I would much prefer Obama devote the bulk of his second term (if he gets one) to ending the occupation of Palestine. The Palestinians have waited long enough.

  2. “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” (Theodore Roosevelt)……….but is President Obama carrying a sufficiently big stick and if not why should the Persians listen to him,would not their bargaining position be infinitely stronger after they have a bomb and there appears to be no credible threat to prevent them from having that bomb.
    Indeed and according to their perspective, why should they not have a bomb……is Israel more entitled than Iran?.

    “If the U.S. is to resolve this issue peaceably it will have to part from Israel, since it cannot be made to understand that there is a rational solution that doesn’t involve force or siege unto death”
    ……the Jews of Israel do understand but we just cannot collectively admit to it and the touch of cold gunmetal is so much more reassuring to wary warriors than that fickle and intangible commodity called trust. Perhaps Israel needs to reinvent herself and is just not up to the task right now but we need to remember the burns from that same gunmetal when it gets hot.

    “Imagine for example a plan that offers Iran an end of sanctions, resumption of trade and diplomatic recognition, and a U.S. commitment to recognize a Palestinian state in return for Iranian agreement restricting uranium enrichment above 20% along with a renunciation of meddling in the affairs of Syria and Lebanon”…..and what would prevent Egypt from doing the same thing tomorrow,
    the U.S. might well run out of viable incentives.

    I cannot avoid wondering why is this being revealed now, so close to the elections,is the President concerned that Governor Romney who may be privy to knowledge regarding the negotiations might embarrass him by revealing their existence or perhaps he wants to present himself as the pragmatic statesman seeking a peaceful solutions to avoid another costly war and save lives ( and in light of the dangers inherent in an attack he would be right to do so).

    “We’ll have to see if Obama has the guts to chart an independent course”……to quote Saturday’s Wall Street Journal which questioned the Presidents personal attacks upon Romney in the last debate…….”I couldn’t imagine a JFK doing it,with his cool,or a Jerry Ford with his Midwestern decency,or a Regan,or the Bushes.When you are President,you don’t stand next to an opponent and accuse and attack.You keep a certain almost aesthetic distance.You know the height of the office you hold.You let the debate come to you…”

    But then again President Obama is not JFK or Jerry Ford or Ronald Regan or a Bush and maybe he has the right to do it differently.

    1. Why do so many right wing commenters here quote the WSJ? Why do you even bother reading it? Does it actually cast any real light on any issue? So let me give you a hint: no one here cares about WSJ or what it thinks. So if you want to automatically make people’s eyes glaze over here & ignore what you’re saying–by all means quote it.

  3. The point is perhaps that this time around the Iranians understand that bluffing or stalling will not help them – as they did throughout the previous attempts to negotiate with them. The sanctions are real, the real plunged, the population there is restless and the cyber-war tools a real menace (and they have no effective defense against that given the immense gap with the US and Israel in that area), the Syrian ally is collapsing and Lebanon is going to turn soon far less domicile to Hezbollah`s maneuverings (the Sunnis there support the rebels in Syria) and hence hospitable to Iran -to name a few major aspects in the grand change of fortunes that befell on the Iranian regime recently.
    So, in order to try to save the Islamic Republic, the regime there will swallow hard and bite the bullet and give up their nuke dreams. That is Obama`s hope – they now know that he is not bluffing in his absolute determination (due to a whole range of critical consideration) not to allow them go nuclear. The moment of truth has arrived for them. The drama goes on.

    1. Wow, what a crystal ball. You are making a lot of assumptions, forgetting that the US cannot afford another war, there is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, yet you clearly imply that Iran will be erased unless it knuckles under to Obama’s demands. But I’m also shaking my head because you yourself were clearly beating Netanyahu’s war drums up until now. Perhaps what is also on Obama’s mind is that if Israel were allowed to attack Iran, it would bring on a massive loss of life and possibly WWIII. I think Obama’s purpose is to stop Israeli insanity which would cost the US taxpayers, and the Iranian people, more than either can afford. 85,000 dead people is not spitting in the ocean.

      1. Corrections: (i) I said the Islamic Republic will be gone and by that I meant the present regime – not of course Iran.
        (ii) I did not suggest, or think will happen, an independent military strike by Israel – just perhaps cyber acts.
        It seems to me that the US will run the whole gamut of acts here. They see it as crucial, for a host of reasons, and are already very much into it. Note that until now if they set their minds on a task, be it Libya or Bosnia, it actually happened.Iran will not be different – the signs are all there

      1. Well, what proves or disproves theories or predictions is of course the future. So let`s wait and see. As for Iran, there is nothing interesting to say about them now – they have made their bets and now need to deal with the results. I don`t see how they can disentangle from the mess they created

  4. I can see little point in any discussion that does not raise the issue of Israel’s nuclear arsenal, and of a new intiative, long overdue, for multilateral decommissioning of these weapons of mass incineration of civilian populations.
    Postponing the crisis is long-fingering the inevitable. We need a true post-war culture; which will require a post-imperial, post nationalist, humanism, or we are going dinosaur-flavoured mushroom-shaped.

    We need a restoration of commitment to preserving the attempt at civilisation these instruments prove we have yet to achieve.
    In short, we need to evolve beyond our animal territorialties and mega-tribalisms.

  5. “though this prospect recedes ever farther into the distance with each outrage perpetrated by the Alawite regime, the latest being the assassination of Lebanon’s intelligence chief yesterday”

    I doubt it. As the Angry Arab wisely points out, Wissam al-Hassan was responsible for the arrest of a large number of Israeli spies in Lebanon. I think that it is obvious who is likely to have carried out the assassination.

  6. Tehran has denied pro-Israel daily The New York Times report that both the US and Iran have agreed to hold ‘one-to-one’ talks on Iran’s nuclear program after the November elections.

    “We don’t have any discussions or negotiations with America,” Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said in a news conference on Sunday. “The (nuclear) talks are ongoing with the P5+1 group of nations. Other than that, we have no discussions with the United States,” Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said in a news conference today.

    The news has upset the Obama campaign lead by pro-Israel Jews and Israeli ambassador Michael Oren. Oren said that no such agreement could be possible as Obama administration had not informed Israel, reported the NYT.

  7. Iranian reconciliation with America does not mean Israeli neutrality. Iran’s stance on Israel is that the Zionist project is in its final death throes and that a unified Palestinian state will emerge as a natural result. Thus, while Israel aggressively advances against Iran, Iran’s only necessary strategy is to bat away the annoyances and never let Israel get what it really wants — i.e., to ignore the noise while Israel cannot do the same about the Palestinians that have defied odds (massive human loss and suffering caused and covered up by Israel) for 64 years and emerged the demographic victors.

    Iran can stand to be removed from SWIFT, it can withstand 30 years of ostracism built on the same lies from the same liars who are bringing us yet another war today, it can withstand a Saddam armed to the teeth by the world to invade Iran during the vulnerable period immediately following the Iranian revolution of 1979 (and send him back), and it can certainly withstand the libels of Hollywood (a powerful medium) that make it okay for Americans to vent anger (with actual murderous intent) against innocents across the world without feeling guilty. Israel as a country without a superpower to enable it to continue its crimes would simply die. In fact, if Israel does not pursue a unified solution, as apartheid South Africa went through, the Zionist project has no chance or corridor to survive under its current trajectory. Simply put, the factions that make up Israeli decisionmakers today include a criminal bunch and no one is there anymore, according to even a former Israeli spymaster, to stop the Titanic from hitting the iceberg.

    Thus, Israel needs a solution as well. The solution was stated clearly to the Netanyahu administration four years ago: “deal with your Palestinian problem first.” The two-state solution is long-gone and Abbas’ only effective purpose in moving for any status as an entity before the UN is to gain proper venue to file complaint and sue Israel for nearly every crime imaginable under the legal lexicon.

  8. RE: “Doubtless, Netanyahu will be exerting fierce pressure to make this initiative fail. You can expect Romney to denounce it even before it happens, as a capitulation to the mad mullahs.” ~ R.S.


    Tony Karon ‏@TonyKaron 15h
    A closer read suggests purpose of this leak is to embarrass Obama pre debate, push him to commit to harder line re Iran talks.
    6:44 AM – 21 Oct 12

    SOURCE – https://twitter.com/TonyKaron/status/260013620031795200

  9. Persian Advocate, I always find your posts most interesting. About Israel’s plans – I maintain that it is Jordan who has the most to fear from the strategic directions which will be used to “solve the Palestinian problem.” Despite all their attempts to appease Israel, the Jordanians are still faced with non-recognition – they are often referred to by members of the Israeli cabinet as “the Palestinian state” – and they are a tempting target for adventurism. They are not big, not independent, and not far away – they are not like Iran.

  10. RE: “‘We do not think Iran should be rewarded with direct talks,’ Mr. Oren said, ‘rather that sanctions and all other possible pressures on Iran must be increased.’ ~ NYT article

    MY COMMENT: Israel’s notion that direct talks are tantamount to a “reward” is the crux of many problems. It is indicative of how very, very far the Likudniks have their heads up their Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s . . . um . . . er . . . Iron Wall! ! !

    ALSO SEE: “Is There a Way Beyond Israeli Madness?” [Will the Chosen People and the Exceptional People Go Down Together?] ~ by John Grant, Counterpunch, 8/31/12


    “The patient, by the name of Israel, walks into the room and instantly bursts into a tirade of arguments conclusively proving his credentials, and says that he is better than everyone else.” ~ Ofer Grosbard, ‘Israel On The Couch: The Psychology of the Peace Process’

    Americans have an Israel problem. . .
    . . . The problem Americans have with Israel is that the region it exists in is in the midst of a major political sea change, while Israel is frozen in time and holding on to its militarist, right-wing policies of extending settlements in the West Bank. It’s a policy that harks back to the ideas of the British-trained militarist Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall, which is based on the idea a live-and-let-live policy between Jews and Arabs is impossible and, thus, Jews must militarily control and repress Palestinians . . .

    . . . How does a people turn back a racially-oriented demonization program with roots that extend back many decades? How do you ratchet down a nation’s narcissism so people are able to simply see the other as a human being? . . .
    . . . On our part, Americans and the United States need to stop being a permissive yes-man [i.e. a habitual “enabler” ~ J.L.D.] and begin to show Israel some tough love. We need more US criticism of Israel. No doubt this approach will be received with gales of cynical laughter from hardliners . . . but so what?
    In my mind, the Israeli narcissistic and arrogant mindset would benefit from a little Buddhist detachment, more of the posture that sees the world not of separate individual selves and egos but of human beings as part of a larger flow of life. The Buddhists call the self-obsessed, separatist state-of-mind [i.e. the “pale” of Israel surrounded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall – J.L.D.] that Israel thrives on and defends with weapons as “the illusory self.”
    “Once one identifies with a permanent self-concept, the pride and craving adhering to this become the pivot from which an egocentric world arises,” writes Gay Watson, a psychotherapist attuned to Buddhism.

    David Loy puts it this way: “To become completely groundless is also to become completely grounded, not in some particular, but in the whole network of interdependent relations that constitute the world.”
    I’m not suggesting Israel become a Buddhist nation. The point is for Israelis, and more important Americans, to figure a way out of the worsening condition of “us versus them” to avoid the need to obliterate them and set off a war that no one really wants. The point is to re-shape our minds to make “the other” less threatening to permit talking.
    I’m not holding my breath that Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman are going to become peace activists. But I’m done as an American being a silent stooge while Israeli militarist madness fuels hatred and sets the stage for war.

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/31/is-there-a-way-beyond-israeli-madness/795200

  11. No rational Israeli leader believes that a future nuclear Iran would pose an “existential threat” to Israel – which itself has stockpile of 240-400 nuclear bombs. What really bothers the Israeli hawks – is that someday, American might wake-up to the real world and find out that America needs Iran more than Israel to consolidate its strategic interests in the region. And when it happens – Zionist leaders fear they will lose the “hen which gave Israel $3 trillion worth eggs”. Last month, Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi admitted that the US taxpayers pays more to maintain Israeli Army than the Israeli taxpayers.

    Another Israeli fear is that a nuclear capable Iran will make it impossible to defeat Hamas and Hizballah. The later has proved its muscles by defeating the Jewish army in 2006. On January 17, 2012 – Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel, head of the Israel Occupation Force (IOF) planning department, told reporters in Jerusalem that once Iran poseses nuclear arsenal, it will make hard for Israel to defeat Hamas and Hizbullah.

    ”If we are forced to do things in Gaza or in Lebanon – under the Iranian nuclear umbrella it might be different,” said Amir Eshel.


    1. I don’t know whether Israeli leaders are “rational” or not but a good number DO believe Iran is an existential threat.

      As for whether the U.S. prefers to make alliances with Israel or Iran–I’d say that any nation that makes overly cozy relationships with America could be in for a lot of trouble. Look at the Arab strongmen felled during the Arab Spring. I’d prefer Middle Eastern nations to pursue their own interests whether they are in synch with or diverge from U.S. interests. It’s great to have friends. But not every nation needs to be our friend all the time. Interests can diverge. SO let’s not make too much of who’s our best friend in the ME.

  12. In reality – an American-Iranian alliance is far, far more important than an dysfunctional relationship with an Israeli Apartheid state

    America needs to drop it’s dysfunctional relationship with Israel – at least as war as initiating wars of aggression at it’s request

    Here’s a quick reality check on Iran vs Israel:

    Can we buy oil from Iran? – yes.

    Do we have an Iranian Lobby in the US who buys, bribes, or pressures our politicians to send Iran billions and billions of ‘foreign aid’ and hoax us into wars against Iraq and other ME states? – NO

    1. Isn’t it better to be friendly with a country possibly interested in developing a nuclear weapon (but is a signatory of the NNPT) than to be friendly with one who won’t even admit it has a nuclear arsenal of 200 or more warheads?

      Doesn’t it make sense to be on good terms with the most influential country in the region (let’s face it, Iran has influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and may be forging new ties with Egypt) than with one who is looked down on as a bully and a loose cannon?

      And this whole Islamophobic war on terror idea has generated too much blowback. It’s time for the US to stop badmouthing the Muslim world, killing Muslims, and recognizing the fact that friends in the Islamic world are much more beneficial than enemies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *