There is a long term conflict being played out within the Bush administration, and "moderates"....sane American diplomats who believe in exploring alternatives to war....do not...IMO....stand any chance of prevailing in their attempts to engage Iran in peaceful dialogue and possible compromise. The same BS plays out...again and again....but direct talks between the U.S. and Iran will not occur. The folks in the Bush administration affiliated with JINSA, and corporatist interests like the Carlysle group and <a href="http://www.vinnell.com/">Northrop Grumman</a> (read next post for background...) will see to it that "lip service" is paid to diplomacy.....and then the bombing starts.
First....there are news reports like this one:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/27/wo...rtner=homepage
U.S. Is Debating Talks With Iran on Nuclear Issue
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: May 27, 2006
WASHINGTON, May 26 — The Bush administration is beginning to debate whether to set aside a longstanding policy taboo and open direct talks with Iran, to help avert a crisis over Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons program, European officials and Americans close to the administration said Friday.......
.....European leaders make no secret of their desire for the United States to join in the talks with Iran, if only to show that the Americans have gone the extra mile to avoid a confrontation that could spiral into a fight over sanctions or even military action.
But since the Iranian revolution of 1979 and the crisis over the seizure of American hostages in November that year, the United States has avoided direct talks with Iran. There were sporadic contacts during the war in Afghanistan, in the early stages of the Iraq war and in the days after the earthquake in Bam, Iran, at the end of 2003.
European officials say Ms. Rice has begun discussing the issue with top aides at the State Department. Her belief, they say, is that ultimately the matter will have to be addressed by the administration's national security officials, whether talks with Iran remain at an impasse or even if there is some progress.
But others who know her well say she is resisting on the ground that signaling a willingness to talk would show weakness and disrupt the delicate negotiations with Europe. <b>Ms. Rice is also said to fear that the administration might end up making too many concessions to Iran.
Administration officials said President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld have opposed direct talks, even through informal back channels.</b> As a result, many European officials say they doubt that a decision to talk is likely soon.
The prospect of direct talks between the United States and Iran is so politically delicate within the Bush administration that the officials who described the emerging debate would discuss it only after being granted anonymity.
Those officials included representatives of several European countries, as well as Americans who said they had discussed the issue recently with people inside the Bush administration. Some of the officials made clear that they favored direct talks between the United States and Iran.
State Department officials refused to talk about the issue, even anonymously. But over the last week, administration spokesmen have been careful not to rule out talks. ........
.....Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in a recent column in The Washington Post, <b>raised the possibility that the recent rambling letter from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to President Bush</b> — dismissed by Ms. Rice as an offensive tirade— could be seen as an opportunity to open contacts.
Both Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a former top aide to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, and Richard L. Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state under Mr. Powell, have also advocated talks with Iran.
"Diplomacy is much more than just talking to your friends," Mr. Armitage said in a telephone interview. "You've got to talk to people who aren't our friends, and even people you dislike. Some people in the administration think that diplomacy is a sign of weakness. In fact, it can show that you're strong."
Mr. Armitage held the last high-level discussions with Iran, after the Bam earthquake. In November 2004, Mr. Powell sat next to the Iranian foreign minister at a dinner during a conference in Egypt on Iraq, but he said they engaged only in small talk.....
|
The only thing that CON-doleeza "fears" is that actual diplomacy, could remove the excuses intended to escalate the Iran confrontation into a limited and successful series of military attacks to coincide with the November congressional elections.
Is my view, too partisan....too unreasonable? I don't think so....here's why: