The Tales from the Zirzameen

http://www.golshirifoundation.org/index.htm

ubject: Memarian Q&A: “Iran Won’t Wait for Obama to Talk to U.S.”

Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Omid Memarian

Q&A: “Iran Won’t Wait for Obama to Talk to U.S.”

Interview with Hooshang Amirahmadi, President of the American Iranian
Council

NEW YORK, Jul 16 (IPS) - Despite opposition from some hardline factions in
Iran, the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has responded
positively to a proposal by the United States that it open a U.S.
Interests Section in Tehran – its first formal diplomatic presence since
the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Hooshang Amirahmadi, who is currently visiting Iran and meeting with
high-ranking officials in Ahmadinejad’s administration to discuss
bilateral relations, told IPS correspondent Omid Memarian by telephone
from Tehran that he has sensed a new willingness to seek a thaw between
the two countries.

“It is not true that they will not negotiate with [George W.] Bush and are
waiting for [Barack] Obama,” said Amirahmadi, president of the American
Iranian Council, a research and policy think-tank devoted to improving
dialogue and understanding between the peoples of Iran and the United
States. “This is not how Tehran is thinking and if they receive a proposal
from the Bush government tomorrow, they are willing to consider it.”

Amirahmadi also heads the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at Rutgers
University, and is well known for his work to normalise U.S.-Iran
relations during the period of Iran’s pragmatic president Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani (1988-1976) and reformist President Mohammad Khatami
(1998-2005).

Because Amirahmadi is highly unpopular among radical conservatives, the
government has provided high security during his stay in Tehran that will
end later this month.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

IPS: Why should the Iranian authorities agree to the proposal for a U.S.
Interests Sections?

HA: It is no longer fashionable in Iran to say we don’t talk or negotiate
with the U.S. or that the U.S. is our enemy. Such an attitude does not
exist in the country anymore. Ever since the topic of a U.S. Interests
Section in Tehran has emerged, I notice a lot of excitement among people.
They feel like something is happening. They become happy when they hear
positive news about any improvement in Iran-U.S. relations. They become
deeply sad when they hear about a war or alienation.

IPS: Is there a will among Iranian conservatives to extensively discuss
the concerns existing between the two countries?

HA: Ahmadinejad is not the most radical Iranian conservative. There are
others more radical and more conservative than him. Those groups may not
be interested in dialogue, but they are not in power at this time. They
can only complain, grumble, insult others, and accuse them. They can’t,
however, stop this movement. In fact, the only group capable of pushing
this idea forward is in power.

IPS: You tried very hard to improve the relations between the U.S. and
Iran during the Rafsanjani and Khatami presidencies. Considering the
animosity the Ahmadinejad cabinet seems to harbour toward both former
presidents, how is it that when you go to Tehran, you are well received
and asked to provide counsel?

HA: Times have changed. The Islamic Republic is turning 30, and has gained
experience over the past three decades: the pragmatic management style of
Hashemi Rafsanjani after the Iran-Iraq War, the reformist movement, and
now the conservatives in power. The regime has reached a point now where
the best thing for it to do is to return to the pragmatic style of
governance. They can see it is no longer possible to chant slogans and
argue and struggle with the rest of the world and the U.S.

IPS: How do you interpret the Iranians’ political rhetoric and their
missile tests, Israel’s military manoeuvres, and U.S. threats alongside
talks about a U.S. Interests Section in Tehran?

HA: Normally, when two countries that have been in disputes and
disagreements for years are preparing to sit at a table to negotiate, they
take steps to show their strengths and power to each other. Neither of the
two sides would be willing to sit at the table when they feel weaker than
the other. The Iranian missile tests should only be evaluated in this
light, not because Iran wishes to act in a militarily offensive way or to
threaten anyone.

IPS: Is the president personally aware of your trip?

HA: Definitely. He was questioned yesterday about what I am doing in
Tehran and he responded that he supports my presence in Tehran. They do
their thing and I do mine.

IPS: Considering the negotiations you had, what do you think the next
steps should be for Iranian conservatives?

AH: Two parallel movements might take shape. One is within the framework
of 5+1 [China, Russia, France, Britain, the United States and Germany]
where Iran has shown its willingness to negotiate. The U.S. will also join
these negotiations. We hope these negotiations would start as soon as
possible, deciding the fate of uranium enrichment within a mutually
acceptable framework. The other movement is the U.S. Interests Section
that is also a mutual activity. If they can reach an agreement with Iran
to establish an American Interests Section in Tehran, they will definitely
reach an agreement over the nuclear negotiations as well. If I were in the
U.S.’s shoes, I would make a formal, balanced, and realistic proposal to
Iranian authorities. Such a move can create a better atmosphere for the
5+1 negotiations.

IPS: What do you think about Mr. Ahmadinejad?

HA: Most people, especially the ones outside Iran, always see the empty
half of the glass. We might say that most of Mr. Ahmadinejad’s glass is
empty – this might be true, but the glass is not entirely empty. The
innovative approach Mr. Ahmadinejad has adopted vis-a-vis Iran’s
relationship with the U.S. is a lot more serious than any actions others
may have suggested.

IPS: Considering the contacts you have had with him and the knowledge you
are gaining through your recent trips, where do you think the root of this
problem lies?

HA: Mr. Ahmadinejad has no knowledge about the economy and has a very weak
way of thinking about it. His staff couldn’t convince him or they couldn’t
take the right actions. In the end, the economy is Mr. Ahmadinejad’s
Achilles’ heel and he hasn’t performed well there. But he has done well
with respect to relations with the U.S. and Iranians abroad.

IPS: What kind of politician is he?

HA: Despite what is being said about him, Mr. Ahmadinejad is a very
intelligent man. He comprehends things very quickly, but his knowledge of
world affairs is somewhat limited. He has not performed on a national
level. Though he knows Iran very well, he doesn’t have a good grasp of
Iran’s strategic issues. On a macro level, he has advisors who are not
very strong. On a small township and village level, street smarts might
work, but on a strategic level, street smarts don’t work. This is an area
where a leader needs knowledge and science and strategy but he didn’t have
good advisors in this area.

IPS: Does it make any difference to Iranian authorities who the next U.S.
president will be?

HA: The issue with relations with Iran is not about the Republican or
Democratic parties. I believe they are even ready to reach agreement with
Mr. Bush’s outgoing cabinet over the next few months. [Although] usually
the incoming governments are more willing to negotiate than outgoing
governments.

IPS: Do you believe that a military attack on Iran would eliminate this
opportunity?

HA: Iran regards the possibility of a military attack very seriously, but
Iran is not living in fear. I am in Tehran right now. People say there is
a probability – but it is more probable there won’t be a war. They are
worried but their daily lives haven’t been disrupted. Nobody is hoarding
rice and eggs. The city is colourful and no signs of preparedness for an
attack are apparent. However, on the other side, I know that the army,
Sepaah, the Basij and the police are on call. Iran opposes a war and will
do its best for this not to happen, saying that if it does happen, we will
defend ourselves.

(END/2008)

(Reuters) - French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said on Thursday big powers were waiting for specific proposals from Iran in new talks over its disputed nuclear work and Iran’s foreign minister said U.S. participation was “positive..

Here are excerpts from an accompanying letter from the foreign ministers of the six powers addressed to Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, followed by key points from the incentives package, called Possible Areas of Cooperation with Iran.

* LETTER FROM SIX POWERS’ FOREIGN MINISTERS TO IRAN:

– “We … are convinced that it is possible to change the present state of affairs. We hope that Iran’s leaders share the same ambition.

– We ask you to consider this letter and our proposals carefully … The proposals we have made offer substantial opportunities for political, security and economic benefits to Iran and the region. There is a sovereign choice for Iran to make. We hope that you will respond positively; this will increase stability and enhance prosperity for all our people.”

* INCENTIVES PACKAGE OFFERED TO IRAN:

– “… the elements below are proposed as topics for negotiations … as long as Iran verifiably suspends its enrichment-related and reprocessing activities …

For their part (the six powers) state their readiness:

– to recognise Iran’s right to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in conformity with its NPT (non-proliferation treaty) obligations.”

The package is then divided into a number of areas:

* NUCLEAR ENERGY:

– Provision of technological and financial assistance necessary for Iran’s peaceful use of nuclear energy, support for the resumption of technical cooperation projects in Iran by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency).

– Support for construction of LWR (Light Water Reactor) based on state-of-the-art technology.

– Support for R&amp in nuclear energy as international confidence is gradually restored.

– Provision of legally binding nuclear fuel supply guarantees.

– Cooperation with regard to management of spent fuel and radioactive waste.”

* POLITICAL:

– Support Iran in playing an important and constructive role in international affairs.

– Work with Iran and others in the region to encourage confidence-building measures and regional security.

– Support for a conference on regional security issues.

– Reaffirmation that a solution to the Iranian nuclear issue would contribute to non-proliferation efforts and to realising the objective of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery.

– “Reaffirmation of the obligation under the U.N. charter to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.”

* ECONOMIC:

– “Steps towards the normalisation of trade and economic relations, such as improving Iran’s access to the international community, markets and capital through practical support for full integration into international structures, including the World Trade Organisation, and to create the framework for increased direct investment in Iran and trade with Iran.”

* ENVIRONMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE:

– “Civilian projects in the field of environmental protection, infrastructure, science and technology, and high-tech.”

* CIVIL AVIATION:

– “Civil aviation cooperation, including the possible removal of restrictions on manufacturers exporting aircraft to Iran.”

Original article REUTERS 7/17/2008 8:40:29 AM (PST)

——————————————————————————–

I can just see it now, Mr. Bush after racheting up all this tension unnecessarily will now be known as the President who restored diplomatic relations with Iran. Anyway I hope he does it, even if it’s been his game all along…

amoo rasool

Iran and US eye diplomatic opening

After last week’s show of force by Iran , now there are growing signs that both Iran and the United States want to do some serious talking about the nuclear crisis. After the harsh rhetoric and the threats, it is a critical moment for diplomacy.

Washington has shown it means business by sending the Under-Secretary of State, William Burns, to Geneva to join talks between the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili on Saturday.

It is a major shift by the Bush administration…

Earlier this week, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he was interested in direct talks with the US and that he expected “something may happen soon” in US-Iranian relations. He also said Iran was interested in an idea being floated in Washington - to open a US diplomatic mission in Tehran for the first time since the revolution.

Iran’s state TV has quoted the Supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei as saying: ” Iran has decided to take part in negotiations but it will not accept any threat. Iran ’s red lines are very clear.” Certainly, Ayatollah Khamenei’s views are of central importance.

The Bush administration had previously ruled out joining the nuclear talks until Iran suspended uranium enrichment, so sending an envoy to Geneva is a big turnaround.

While Mr Solana is delegated to negotiate on behalf of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - the US, China, Russia, France, Britain - and Germany, there would always be doubts in Tehran about how much he speaks for the Bush administration.

On his last visit to Tehran , Mr Solana brought with him a letter signed for the first time by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, as well as the foreign ministers of the five other countries he represents.

This sudden shift in position may well be the result of the economic pressures both within Iran and the U.S. The inflation in food prices here is approaching 50%. In Tehran , there are daily power cuts, water shortages, and huge queues at the petrol stations.

Officials here would die rather than admit it, but Israel ’s recent military rehearsal for an attack on Iran was a wake-up call. Just as significant, the fact that Israel is now talking with Syria , Hezbollah and the Palestinians, must also be worrying Tehran .

Time is running out for President George W Bush. The presidential election is in less than four months away and Mr Bush will leave office before the end of January. By opening the door to Tehran , he could do his successor an enormous favor. It is a political gamble he can take at relatively little cost.

It is not just that Mr Obama has promised to open unconditional talks with Tehran . Iranians are also encouraged by the fact that his middle name is Hussein - that of one of the most revered Shia Muslim imams. And bizarrely, Obama, in Persian, literally means “he - with - us".

Original article BBC 7/16/2008 8:25:45 AM (PST)

——————————————————————————–

Sign the Petition Now-
Tell Congress & President Bush: Stop War on Iran!

Recent news makes it clear why it is more important than ever that we take to the streets on August 2. According to press reports, President Bush has given the Israeli military the go-ahead to prepare for an imminent attack on Iran . Israel is also using U.S. bases in Iraq to prepare for the attack.

The British Sunday Times of July 13, 2008 reported:

“Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread skepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran , the president has given an “amber light” to an Israeli plan to attack Iran ’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.

“Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you’re ready,” the official said.

The Jerusalem Post of July 13, 2008 reported:

“On Friday, sources in the Iraqi Defense Ministry told a local news network that IAF war planes were practicing in Iraqi airspace were landing on US airbases in the country as a preparation for a potential strike on Iran .”

Once again the most powerful forces of US corporate power – the military-industrial-petroleum complex -are using Israel as their proxy to threaten war on surrounding countries in the region. Israel is armed, financed, and politically and diplomatically supported by Washington . It can not act on its own or without explicit permission from Washington . U.S. tax dollars finance Israel wars against surrounding nations, and Israeli repression of the Palestinians, to keep the area “safe” for U.S. oil companies.

This is why it is vital to link the struggle against the war in Iraq and a potential war against Iran with the struggle of the Palestinian people for the right to return.

At the same time Washington is giving the Israeli military a go-ahead to bomb Iran , the U.S. Congress is moving ahead to escalate tensions in the region and possibly provoke an incident that would justify U.S. military action. House Resolution 362 and Senate Resolution 580 both require that the President begin blockade of Iran .

The House Resolution “demands” that the President impose “stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran .” Enforcing this would require a U.S. Naval blockade of the Straits of Hormuz, which is an act of war according to international law. Approximately one-fourth of the world’s oil, including that from Iran , Iraq , Saudi Arabia , Kuwait , Qatar and Bahrain , pass through the Straits of Hormuz, which is 21 miles across at its narrowest point (the shipping channel is less than 2 miles wide).

These two resolutions have received widespread bipartisan support from members of both Houses, and are expected to pass without debate or vote. A staffer in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office said that once the Resolution hits the floor, it will “pass like a hot knife through butter.” Some have speculated that the bill will be put on the floor under suspension — meaning that it will pass without even a vote.

Both resolutions accuse Iran of developing nuclear weapons, despite the fact that Washington ’s National Intelligence Estimate report last December that made it clear that every major U.S. intelligence agency believes that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program.

Nor do the resolutions refer to the real nuclear threat in the region – the U.S. , which is the only country that has used nuclear weapons and currently has a massive nuclear-armed naval armada in the region. It also does not mention the apartheid settler state of Israel , which is thought to have more than 200 nuclear weapons.

At the same time, two leading Senators announced on Tuesday, July 15, that they had reached a bipartisan agreement to expand economic sanctions targeting Iran . Sens. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and Richard Shelby, R-Ala., called Iran “a threat to U.S. interests.” Dodd, a former candidate for the Democratic nomination for President, said, “This bipartisan bill strengthens economic sanctions against Iran , and authorizes divestment from companies that do business with Iran ’s key oil sector.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. is involved in “covert operations” – acts of terrorism – inside Iran . In the July 7 New Yorker, Seymour Hersh revealed that Congress has approved $400 million to fund covert operations in Iran . These operations include: providing support to armed groups opposed to the Iranian government, kidnapping members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and taking them across the border to Iraq for interrogation, the manipulation of Iran ’s currency, and other acts intended to destabilize the regime. Hersh reports that these types of operations have been ongoing at least since last year, but the recent Congressional appropriation signals a significant expansion of these actions.

It is clear that the Bush Administration is determined to push forward with its agenda of endless war to control the oil reserves of the Middle East . It is equally clear that members of Congress – both Democrats and Republicans – are collaborating with the Administration, just as they collaborated in authorizing and funding the invasion and occupation of Iraq .

It is imperative that progressive activists and organizations, particularly in the U.S. , mobilize to stop another brutal war, and to demand an end to the illegal sanctions and covert operations targeting Iran .

Stop War on Iran , an international grassroots campaign, issued an Emergency Call to for protests, marches, and other actions on the weekend of August 2. Response to the call has been enthusiastic, and local organizers are planning events in more than 50 cities, including Los Angeles, Tucson , San Diego, San Francisco, Denver, Atlanta, Chicago, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, Jersey City, Albuquerque, Buffalo, New York City , Charlotte , Raleigh/Durham, Cleveland , Oklahoma City, Philadelphia , Houston, Salt Lake City , Virginia Beach, Washington DC , and more – an updated list is available at www.StopWarOnIran.org.

Now is the time to take to the streets, because only a massive grassroots mobilization can stop another bloody and illegal war.

In the next few days and weeks, we need to do everything we can to take to the streets to Stop a War on Iran. We have a real opportunity to help build a massive grassroots movement to oppose the warmongers in Washington.

If you haven’t done so, please consider organizing a local action on August 2 - or if there is already one in your area, contact local organizers to find out how you can help.

Also, please sign the online petition at http://stopwaroniran.org/petition.shtml and help us spread the word. Signing the petition will send messages to President Bush, Vice President Cheney, the Board of Directors of Halliburton, and the media.

In the next few days, we will be preparing placards and banners, printing leaflets and educational materials, and holding organizing meetings to prepare for the August 2 protests. Please consider making a donation at http://stopwaroniran.org/donate.shtml to help us with the enormous expenses of mobilizing a national response to Bush’s war threats.

If you have a website, blog, MySpace, or other site, you can help us get the word out by linking to us. Graphics are available at http://stopwaroniran.org/link.html.

Above all, join us in the streets on August 2 -for more information and updates, see StopWarOnIran.org.