| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Rice defends Bush policy on Iran as 'successful' |
| 2008-05-22 |
| ??? Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday defended as "successful" the US administration's policy on Iran after Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama criticized its approach. Though she sought to stay out of the presidential campaign, Rice told reporters that the United States and other powers agreed on what she considers a common, effective approach to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. "I will note that the Iranian problem is not just America's problem, it is an international issue, and it is an issue on which the international community is united in confronting Iran with choices before it," Rice said. Flanked by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, a US ally on Iran and other issues, Rice recalled that Tehran must either halt its enrichment of uranium in return for economic benefits or face international isolation. With its continued defiance, she said, the UN Security Council has adopted three sanctions resolutions against Iran while the United States has taken punitive measures of its own. And Iran has paid an economic price with the "drying up" of international investment in its oil industry, economic infrastructure and export credits, the secretary of state said. "I think this is called a successful multilateral coalition of states that have the same view" that Iran should be rewarded for its cooperation or isolated for its defiance, Rice said. She added: "I would like to see what other options there are for the international community, given that this policy is one that I think is the best course for us." Obama has been taking aim at Republican presidential candidate John McCain over his and President George W. Bush's policy toward Iran, including their stated refusals to engage Washington in high-level negotiations with Tehran. "Thanks to George Bush's policy, Iran is the greatest threat to the United States and Israel and the Middle East for a generation. John McCain wants to double down on that failed policy," Obama said. Rice refused to comment for now on Iran's offer to the United Nations to enter "serious and targeted" negotiations with world powers on a wide range of issues, including nuclear energy. She said she needed to talk first with the other countries involved in the negotiations to encourage Iran to halt nuclear enrichment. Those countries are China, Russia, France, Britain, and Germany. Miliband echoed her remarks. "We don't want to get into a verbal rhetorical volleyball with these issues. They are too serious for that," Miliband said before traveling with Rice on Thursday to California to visit high-tech companies. "We will all be looking very carefully obviously at the Iranian letter, but we will also be very clear that our own package needs to be addressed very very carefully by the Iranian regime," he said. Miliband declined to say when and where the "refreshed" package of proposals -- which the six powers announced earlier this month in London -- would be presented to Iran. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #11 What about this? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2008-05-22 21:42 |
| #10 might be time to get rid of the crabs, Hugo. Just saying. Nevermind |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-05-22 20:37 |
| #9 Even Boris knows to be wary of moose and squirrel. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2008-05-22 20:03 |
| #8 Which is amusing (the hysteria) because it means they haven't come to terms with the insect-sized listening robots we've got. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-05-22 19:48 |
| #7 You make me blush, eltoreverde. Especially since what you wrote as a putative follow up is so much more useful than my glittering generalities -- especially the squirrels. I'm still coming to terms with the hysteria over the squirrels. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-05-22 15:56 |
| #6 TW, as usual I find much to agree with in your post. It is easy to cast off Bush's Iran policy as a failure and in many ways, it certainly appears as a failure on the surface. Yet below the surface, Iran is in the midst of a brewing economic crisis. This could easily domino into civil unrest of an order the powers that be Iran will find difficult to control. This could very will result in regime change on it's own. Furthermore, Iran has gone to great lengths to stymie our efforts in Iraq and the efforts of the Iraqis themselves. This is a fact that has already come to light but few have paid much attention. It will continue to come to light as things in Iraq improve and Iraq gains the confidence to confront Iran's duplicity. That is why I think the true measure of Bush's Iran policy has much to do with Iraq. Should we succeed in leaving a thriving democratic ally in place of Saddam's tyranny, it will surely prove to be a major strategic victory for the US vis-a-vis Iran. It's little wonder that Iran is doing everything it can, outside of invading Iraq themselves, to prevent that from happening. When we prevail in Iraq, and the path to victory is now before us, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised that Iran starts whistling a different tune entirely. |
| Posted by: eltoroverde 2008-05-22 13:53 |
| #5 Or not, as the case may be. Miniaturization proceeds apace in the American and Israeli technical establishments. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-05-22 12:48 |
| #4 and an excess of squirrels Especially the ones that whirr and beep. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-05-22 12:06 |
| #3 I will give them this: somehow they've put enuff asschewing and arm twisting on China to temporarily stem their appetite for Iranian crude. Japan probably taking delivery also. How long can they hold with oil in short supply ? Anyway, working now with Iran stockpiling oil in offshore tankers. Sure would be a shame if one of these sunk, wouldn't it ? Course the enviros would flip out, but maybe they'd forget Global Warming for a month or two. |
| Posted by: Woozle Elmeter 2700 2008-05-22 09:51 |
| #2 The success or failure of Bush's Iran policy hinges on only one issue, their successful development of nuclear weapons. I'll wait till December to reach a conclusion |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-05-22 09:46 |
| #1 The president has forced Britain, France and Germany to stay on-side, since after all only their successful negotiations with Iran for denuclearization will keep him from doing another American Cowboy thing; the quietly demanded bank boycott of Iranian government and private accounts has severely hobbled Iranian efforts to buy stuff or sell oil to most of the world; the Iranian armed forces have been living on their nerves for a few years, seeing American invasions overt or covert in groups of deadly airplane crashes, the murder of unpopular local clergy, and an excess of squirrels; Iranian trainers, officers, money bags, and bomb-makers keep making the international news when they arearrested or even kiled in the wilds of Shiite Iraq; and finally, Hizb'allah has incurred the anger and resentment of most of the Lebanese, after their precipitous kidnapping last summer resulted in the as-yet unrepaired destruction of the Shiite side of Lebanon, ie on the Israeli side of the Litani River, not to mention this year's unsuccessfu coup attempt. I'd say President Bush's policy is far from unsuccessful. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-05-22 09:34 |