Now is the time. Can they do it?
Now is the time: for Iran and the U.S. to stop all the bullshit, stop all the posturing, all the grandstanding. On both sides. Time for the pragmatists on both sides to step forward, to put their cards on the table, to go “all in.” There will be no other time.
The last time an Iranian pragmatist was in power was in 2003. That was Mohammed Khatami. He too suggested a Grand Bargain to the Americans. He essentially offered to suspend Iran’s nuclear program in return for ending sanctions and normalizing relations. Bush wasn’t interested. He was listening to Dick “Svengali” Cheney, who told him he had bigger fish to fry in Iraq and Afghanistan and with the rest of the Axis of Evil. That his job was to bring democracy and freedom to the Middle East.
That was an opportunity lost. Another one didn’t come for another decade. Now is that time.
Iran has a new president. He has, to quote Grace Paley’s wonderful story, made “enormous changes at the last minute.” He offered Rosh Hashana greetings to the world’s Jews. He’s freed political prisoners. He’s written Pres. Obama telling him he’s serious about-face to face, high level talks. He’s penned this op-ed in the Washington Post. He intimated he might be willing to mothball Iran’s top nuclear facility, Fordo, if the west makes an attractive enough counter-offer. He’s said that Iran could accept any leader democratically elected by the people of Syria. The only other thing he can do is draw in big letters with magic marker on a poster saying: “I’m here and ready to talk” and hold it up in front of the White House.
The question isn’t whether Obama is listening. He is. The question is what he’s hearing. Does he understand that this is the moment? There will be no other. He either grasps this opportunity, and does it now, or he loses another chance for at least another decade. But unlike the past decade, during which war has barely been averted between Iran and Israel and the rest of the west, the next decade will virtually guarantee war. Not the puny wars Israel fights against Lebanon and Gaza in which it is both David AND Goliath, and its opponents are a blade of grass in the field. But wars in which Israel will face a far more formidable enemy. Perhaps not an enemy fully its match. But one that can inflict great pain. Pain Israel hasn’t suffered since 1973 when it lost an unimaginable 3,000 dead soldiers.
Israeli leaders like Ehud Barak boast that only 500 will die, as if that’s not an almost unbearable tragedy in a population of only 7-million. Israelis are full of braggadocio on such matters. It is only after they’ve committed to such lunacy and suffered the consequences that they realize precisely what they’ve done. By the time Iran’s missiles rain down on Tel Aviv, Haifa and Beersheva, (after Israel has pummeled Iranian targets) it will be too late.
Does Obama want that on his head? That he could’ve resolved a conflict that has evaded presidents since Jimmy Carter, and lost the chance because he was too timid; or wasn’t willing to take the political risk? This is one of those moments when a politician has to ask himself: why am I doing this job? I have a chance to make a major contribution to stabilizing one of the most volatile regions in the world. World leaders wait all their lives for such an opportunity. Some don’t ever get the chance. If you don’t step up now, you might as well go home and teach constitutional law to first-year law students.
Here’s what not to do: don’t have Ben Rhodes go to the NY Times and boast about how your tough policies were what forced Iran to the table. Don’t let loose racist bullshit claiming that Iranians like all Middle Easterners only understand the language of force; and that you showed that steely resolve that speaks their language:
“The common thread is that you don’t achieve diplomatic progress in the Middle East without significant pressure,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, said Thursday. “In Syria, it was the serious threat of a military strike; in Iran it was a sanctions regime built up over five years.”
That’s horseshit. It makes you look puny and petty. Stop trying for political advantage. Stop trying to work the angles to insulate yourself from attacks from your right-flank. If you have to, go to the people and explain what you’re doing and why. They’ll understand.
If you think thumping your chest and telling the world how you bested the Ayatollahs at their own game and brought them to heel is the way to go, then you simply don’t understand that there are guys just as tough as you in Iran just itching to prove you wrong. You don’t understand that the pragmatists on both sides are holding on by a very thin thread. That thread can snap at any moment. And that will bring the fire and brimstone crowd on both sides back to power. And we all know where that will lead.
Watch out for Aipac and the Lobby. Their Boss Bibi is livid and feels you sold him out. He’s gonna scream and holler about how the Jews are always sold out throughout their history. He’s gonna call you a wimp and betrayer of Israel. But you need to stand tall and say that what you’re doing you’re doing for Israel. But even more for America.
It’s time for the mainstream media to stop pandering, stop sloganeering about Iran. For example, three NY Times reporters in a single 24 hour period called Iran’s overtures to the west a “charm offensive.” This sort of condescension is itself offensive. It’s time for reporters to stop telling their readers what Iran will have to give up in order to achieve an agreement:
…There is talk of finding a way for it to maintain a face-saving capacity to produce a very limited amount of nuclear fuel…
This sort of grandstanding prejudges the results of the negotiations. It’s akin to poisoning the jury pool with prejudicial comments about the accused. It’s the job of negotiators to come up with a reasonable compromise both sides can accept. There is no provision in the NPT that calls for nations to have only a “limited amount of nuclear fuel.” Treating Iran as if it was any different from any other signatory of NPT in that regard is unfair and downright, well, offensive.
Speaking of offensive, this NY Times article originally contained a highly inflammatory and offensive quotation from Iran “analyst” Meir Javedanfar:
“As a result of the sanctions, the regime in Iran is under real pressure, and Rouhani comes to save the regime” Mr. Javedanfar told Israel Radio. “If Rouhani does the work, this is good for Israel. If the Iranians do the job, our pilots and soldiers don’t have to.”
It implied that Iran’s president was little more than a stooge for Israel, something that surely would ingratiate him with Iran’s hardliners. Since Javedanfar spoke these words in an Israeli radio interview he was clearly pandering to his Israeli audience and not considering how it might damage Rouhani. The quotation is now gone (you can read the original here) from the NYT. There are two ways of interpreting such comments: either Javendafar is stupid and didn’t realize how such a view would play in Iran (in which case why is he an analyst?); or Javedanfar slyly and consciously wants to undermine Iranian moderates because he doesn’t trust them or the regime and thinks, like Netanyahu, that they’re “wolves in sheep’s clothing.” In any case, where did the quotation go and why?
We’ve had a hostage crisis. We’ve shot down an Iranian airliner. Our ally Israel has murdered Iranian scientists. We’ve infected them with computer viruses. We’ve spewed hate and bile back and forth for decades. It’s time to end it once and for all.
Iran too has its radicals. Fundamentalists and hard-liners who think compromise is weakness. The ones who are ready to die for their principles and take everyone else along with them: their Samsons. We have such people on both sides.
The window is small. It’s open for a short time. Ayatollah Khamenei never supported Pres. Khatami’s overtures the west. When they failed, he could say I told you so. That left an opening for the hardliners to rush in and take over. That lead to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and everything he represented. Ten years of slogans, goading, and insults. Perhaps Khamenei learned something from that. At any rate, he’s thrown his support to Rouhani. He’s given him a certain period of time and told him to produce or else. The Supreme Leader has warned the hardliners not to interfere or subvert this initiative. He’s told the IRG to stay out of politics (for now). There has never been such a time before.
I give it six months, a year at most. After that, Khamenei will give up and let the dogs of war loose on his side. Obama has to see this. He has to. Or we’re all doomed. To war.
If the US really wants peace, then what you say is correct. However, if what it wants is a subservient client state (and wishes to promote Israel’s hegemony) then little will happen.
Thanks Richard.
How right you are.
How to get Pres. Obama to cut through the angling and get to what matters is the question. Time is of
the essence.
I would have him read your post, signed by thousands, if it were possible. I can just hope that he sees the light and acts from strength, not weakness.
I saw early Friday morning on the BBC word of ceasefire talk in Syria – nothing on local news. I googled to find reports last night, there are several.
On Aljazeera and BBC this morning I found 2 reports:
“Syria deputy PM says war has reached stalemate, cease-fire an option.” Sept 19, 2013
http://america.aljazeera.com/article/2013/9/19/syria
“Syrian government says war has reached stalemate. Exclusive: Deputy PM says neither side is strong enough to win and government may call for ceasefire at Geneva talks.” 19 Sept, 2013
http://www.the guardian.com/world/2013/sept/19/syria
RE: “Time to Cut a Deal with Iran” ~ R.S.
TAKE ACTION! ! ! TAKE ACTION! ! ! TAKE ACTION! ! !
FROM AMERICANS FOR PEACE NOW
Tell your Senators TODAY: Sign the Feinstein letter on diplomacy with Iran
Last time it was the House; now it’s the Senate.
Last time thousands of APN activists responded to our call to contact their elected members of the House of Representatives and urge them to sign onto a letter supporting reinvigorated U.S. diplomacy with Iran. The result was an historic letter to President Obama, signed by a bipartisan group of 131 members of Congress. Now we are reaching out to you, APN’s activists, once again. This time, we need you to contact your senators and urge them to sign the letter being circulated by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Like its House counterpart, Senator Feinstein’s letter boils down to a simple message to President Obama, summarized in the letter’s opening paragraph: “We urge you to seize the opportunity presented by the inauguration of Iran’s new president, Dr. Hassan Rouhani, by reinvigorating diplomatic efforts to secure a verifiable agreement that ensures that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons.” We couldn’t agree more.
Tell your Senators to support diplomacy.
TO EMAIL YOUR SENATORS – http://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/8682/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=9354
P.S. FROM Avaaz.org
To US President Obama and President Rouhani of Iran:
As citizens around the world horrified by the slaughter of innocents in Syria, we call on you to put aside your differences and meet to find a diplomatic path forward that brings all parties to the table to negotiate a ceasefire and peace. You are in a unique position to help broker such a solution. There must be a bold diplomatic breakthrough.
We are calling on you to create one and start saving lives.
TO SIGN THE PETITION – http://www.avaaz.org/en/solution_for_syria_loc/?slideshow
EMAIL TO SENATORS: — DONE
SIGN THE PETITION — DONE
thanks Dickerson – wouldn’t it be wonderful if the American people out-avalanched the AIPAC-organized calls, like with stopping the Syria Strike?
What very, VERY coincidental timing!
Obama gyps Israel out of a war with Syria (and Iran) which it thought was a foregone conclusion – then immediately and deftly sticks the knife in AIPAC/Israel with a historic deal with Iran, before the Israeli Lobby has time to recover. Wow…
Beautiful timing and it has played Israel and her Neocons for more than a fool, it has sealed the fate on Israeli Apartheid.
Was the Syria Strike really just a very well-timed manipulation by Israel/Neocons designed to destroy the backchannel Iran negotiations which Israel knew were on the point of a breakthrough? Better believe it…
All Israel has in it’s future now is a few years twisting in the wind at the ICC and under ever intensifying BDS
The Lobby/Netanyahu stood Obama up last year by forcing him to set down a ‘red line’ in the first place (probably by blackmail threat to attack Iran or more intrusively bomb all of Syrian chemical sites repeatedly), then proceeded to fix and fabricate violations of his ‘red line’, and then demanded he attack
Stood up, set up, knocked down – and then – the bowling pin punted to Congress. Was Obama just a puppet of the Lobby the whole time – until that fateful last moment?
And then we have this near-immediate exploitation of the vacuum created by the war with Syria having been precipitously called off, to stick the stake in AIPAC’s heart with an historic deal with Iran…
Could the Israel/Neocon near-successful war with Syria be just their last desperate gasp to PREVENT the coming historic Iran deal? Obama knowing all that and dodging that Israeli/AIPAC bullet, then immediately consummating the deal with Iran before the Israelis recover from their state of shock
What timing!
Perfect execution!
The use of “gyp” here is pretty offensive.
Does anyone have a history of Bob Mann’s posts here? I find it odd that someone would read the prior comment and then only take away “using ‘gyp’ as a term is pretty offensive”.
@ Kyle: Bob has quite a history here. I’d say he’s a relatively innocent commenter who needs a bit of hand-holding to understand certain things. He has a certain predisposition to be defensive regarding Israel or anti-Semitism. OThers here have a stronger reaction to him. But I try to take a patient approach.
Dickerson,
Thanks for the links.
signed both
The question is, what would the parameters of such a deal be? I have no hatred of the Iranian people and ending sanctions would be a great thing for them. But would mothballing Iran’s nuclear ambitions be enough to bring much needed stability to the region? Could the US and the International community possibly end sanctions while Iran continues to support Hezbollah and the Alawi dictatorship in Syria? I for one am going to be watching these developments with great anticipation.
So, you’re saying that you’re in favour of continuing sanctions that affect regular people more then anything because Iran won’t drop absolutely everything?
The primary sources of instability in the region are from Zionism and the Wahhabi-panderers and latent supporters of takfiri jihadism “but not directed at us” in places like Saudi Arabia.
Great piece Richard.
Couldn’t agree more that time is now for a workable peace with Iran.
I particularly enjoyed Bluto’s take on the DC situation….I reckon AIPAC must be working the phones to near meltdown.
I’m all for dialogue, but dialogue should be predicated on clear understandings of what the end game should be. In the case of Iran, that end game should be the abandonment of nuclear weapons. If Iran wants nuclear power for peaceful uses, it has to submit to inspection and buy fuel rods and not enrich its own. Iran also needs to clean up its human rights record and halt the barbaric practice of public hangings, as well as reopen dissident news media and release political and religious prisoners. Iran also needs to halt its foreign adventures in supporting terror groups and smuggling arms in places like Syria. Dialogue is great, but it means to be meaningful, otherwise it’s like North Korea; a delaying tactic or bargaining chip. Iran has too long a history of saying one thing and doing another and Rouhani is as practiced at it as anyone. You can see it for yourself at http://www.hassan-rouhani.info. Only regime change is going to really change Iran while the mullahs and Khamenei hang onto control for dear life
@ Ajax: How can Iran “abandon nuclear weapons” when it doesn’t have them? As for submitting to inspections it, unlike Israel IS an NPT signatory & DOES submit to inspections. As for not enriching, that’s a right offered under NPT so I’m afraid you can’t take it away unless you want to create your own NPT & get the rest of the world to sign on.
As for halting its “foreign adventures,” I’m all for it as long as Israel & the U.S. will do the same.
As for supporting regime change, I’m afraid that’s a No-no here. Supporting violence against any country, whether Israel or Iran is a clear comment rule violation. Read the rules.
Obama Reaches Out While Netanyahu Mocks Iranian President Rouhani
○ Netanyahu instructs Israeli delegates to walk out during Rouhani’s UNGA speech
○ Terra Incognita: It’s time to define [Sunni] Islamism as a crime against humanity
I have a bad feeling somebody will fumble the ball and we (America and Iran) will still be at odds. It would do the US good to stop listening to it’s frenemy Israel and begin talking with Iran.