Another Counterpunch piece on the clenched fist saga
Notable is its even fuller historical take than the piece I
cited Wednesday. Plus, the activities of the conniving Dennis Ross are laid out in detail. But most important is the title,
The Fourth Round of Sanctions on Iran
The End of "Tough Diplomacy"?
By SASAN FAYAZMANESH...On June 9, 2010?after much delay caused by such unforeseen events as Brazil and Turkey resisting the repetition of the Iraq scenario--the fourth UN sanction resolution against Iran was passed by the Security Council, with Brazil and Turkey voting 'no' and Lebanon abstaining. The passage of the resolution officially ends the 'tough diplomacy' phase of the Obama Administration's Iran policy. So far, the policy has followed closely the script written by Dennis Ross and his associates in the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. If the script is followed all the way through, we should expect the next phases to consist of more severe unilateral sanctions, a naval blockade, and, ultimately, military actions against Iran. The last phase would complete the US-Israeli policy of dual containment of Iran and Iraq.
This is the big kahuna. Just like prior to the 1st Gulf War, or the Iraq War, no amount of diplomacy or concession or "confidence building" measure can be accepted. The Bush/Obama program includes an already-written script that says Iran will be neutralized by force.
And why should they think it won't work? The Iraq War is a SUCCESS in this regard. The Israelis have demonstrated in Lebanon & Gaza as the U.S. has in Iraq that extreme aggression is met with but a whimper from the "international community," at least the tiny part of it not either dominated or managed by the U.S.
But still, Iran is the biggest bite yet. China & Russia have gone along because they get what they want out of the deals (missile sales, eg) and the sanctions basically will not affect
their dealings with Iran. That whole calculus could change if an aggression is launched by U.S./Israel. We'll see...my guess is before Obama leaves office.
Posted by The Owl on Jun 11 at 12:38. Filed under: Iran
1 comment • Permalink
Obama shows his clenched fist to Iran
So the 15-member U.N. Security Council has at U.S. behest
approved a fourth round of mild sanctions against Iran to keep on the pressure over nuclear issues. The vote was 12 to 2 with one abstention.
Interestingly, the resolution was opposed by Turkey and Brazil. I had read the news over the last month or so that these two countries and their leaders had brokered a potential solution satisfactory to Iran. Iran would give up substantial capacity to produce nuclear reactor fuel and move a significant amount of existing enriched uranium out of the country. These new sanctions, then, are slaps to the faces of Lula and Erdogan, Brazil's president and Turkey's prime minister respectively.
The importance to the U.S. of continuing tension is made clear by the observed reaction of President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when the threat of diplomatic success of the Brazil/Turkey/Iran negotiations emerged.
I was not made aware of just how extreme this reaction was until I read the entire story as told in an
excellent piece by Esam Al-Amin posted on Counterpunch June 9. Obama stabbed his Brazilian and Turkish allies in the back:
Obama's Doublespeak on IranOn April 12, 2010, President Barack Obama hosted a forty-seven nation Nuclear Security Summit in Washington. He met with dozens of heads of state making his case for a fourth set of crippling sanctions on Iran because of its intransigence on the nuclear issue. His main argument was the refusal of Iran to accept the proposal by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of transferring the bulk of Iran?s low enriched uranium outside the country in exchange for medical nuclear isotopes.
The following day Obama met with President Luiz Lula Da Silva of Brazil and Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan of Turkey ... Obama not only encouraged them to pursue a diplomatic breakthrough, but he also vowed to be constructive and flexible, as well as promising to send them in writing the parameters of any deal deemed acceptable to the US. ...
The piece goes on to describe the conditions Obama laid out in an April letter, conditions the Iranians apparently were ready to accept. However,
On May 17, an agreement based on the American and IAEA proposals was signed by the foreign ministers of all three countries. A week later Iran submitted an official letter to the IAEA acknowledging the pact and stating its intention to transfer its LEU to Turkey within one month once the plan was accepted.
To the complete surprise of Brazil and Turkey, the White House and the State Department dismissed the deal out of hand within 24 hours, rejecting the same principles outlined in Obama?s letter. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even called it ?a ploy? before a hearing in the Senate?s Committee on Foreign Relations on May 18, declaring that a sanctions resolution against Iran in the Security Council is imminent.
Secretary Clinton now has her sanctions, the fist firmly is clenched, and Obama has revealed himself to be a backstabber. Evidently the U.S. leaders did not believe the Iranians actually would go for the quite rigid deal. So it was necessary to revoke it against the threat of success.
Evidently the U.S. prefers to coddle the one real nuclear power in the Mideast -- Israel -- while playing a game of threats, sanctions, and false diplomacy. How much stock should we put in Obama's now oft-repeated desire to rid the world of nuclear weapons when he won't stand behind his own diplomatic positions?
Posted by The Owl on Jun 10 at 01:33. Filed under: Iran
2 comments • Permalink