How serious is Iran about talking to the United States?
When I first read that the State Department was sending William Burns, under secretary of state for political affairs, to attend a meeting with the European Unions' policy chief and Iran's nuclear negotiator, I wondered if this might redound to the benefit of Barack Obama who has advocated outreach towards Iran.
The risk was that he cam claim that George Bush was now following the Obama policy. However, as I gave the news more consideration, I realized that Barack Obama might be the one who pays the price, politically speaking, for this meeting.
For years, we have heard liberal critics castigate Bush for refusing to extend diplomatic outreach to Iran (in fact, there has been contact). Barack Obama has made this a plank of his foreign policy program. Others have rebutted this criticism by pointing out that our allies have been meeting with the Iranians for years-to no avail-during which Iran continued to sponsor violence throughout the region and continued on the road to becoming a nuclear armed nation.
Now, by sending a high level State Department official to this meeting, is the Bush Administration putting not just the Iranians to the test but also Barack Obama's judgment?
Scenario: America has listened to its critics and has sent a State Department employee to meet with the Iranians. If Burns is met with the same obfuscation and obstructions as have the Europeans, Obama's plan to defuse the Iranian nuclear threat via American diplomacy, suddenly has less credibility.
Rick Moran adds:
Ed is correct that we have had meeting with the Iranians before, most notably in multi-lateral talks on Iraq security. And Ambassador Crocker has met with Iranian officials several times.
But this is the first time we will be meeting with the Iranians explicitly to discuss their nuclear program. Not only will it be interesting to see about Obama's judgment but also we will discover if there is any give at all in the Iranian position that they will not suspend their enrichment activities prior to direct negotiations with the United States.
This is the redline the Administration has laid down. This is the requirement demanded by the UN Security Council. It is the reason there are sanctions on Iran in the first place. As long as the Iranians continue to defy the will of the United Nations and produce enriched uranium there will be sanctions. And there will be no negotiations with the US at any level higher than this one.
Ad Free / Commenting Login
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The Slush Fund Nobody Voted For
- Hacktivism and the Possibility of WW III
- Illegals Working for Congress?
- Should FBI Agents Learn Martial Arts?
- Deep-State Sabotage in the DoD?
- What DOGE Is Accomplishing
- From Churchill to Vance...Sounding Off About Tyranny
- Globalist Games: They Play, We Pay
- Scorched-Earth Disease Control
- NATO, Ukraine, and the War Hawks’ Pixie Dust Playbook
Blog Posts
- The Obamas' podcast bombs
- Mark Kelly exposes the hypocrisy behind the Democrats’ electric vehicle fixation
- Washington state attorney general is mad at sheriff's office for complying with federal law
- Can Trump and the team really win?
- The Democrat party is in dire need of shock therapy in the form of hard truths
- CNN wants you to know that Biden did not strand the astronauts Musk is rescuing
- Could Rahm Emanuel be the Democrats' great hope for 2028?
- The South African ambassador’s fate shows that America will no longer be bullied
- Nvidia: The Vera and Fritz chips
- A track attack
- Dem violence and manhood
- Ending the Fed
- Hey Chuck, you need a tune-up
- Kari Lake is kickin' it at USAGM and its Voice of America subsidiary
- We’re not living in a Smoot-Hawley world, and smart tariffs will benefit America