Comments on: Building a Coherent Iran Strategy from Incoherent Advice

By: Brett

Brett — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:30:20 +0000

Has Iran publicly apologized for the 1979 Hostage situation? That would be something to extract from the Iranian regime if they want to have their banks and accounts unfrozen.

As is, it would be nice just to get an embassy back in Iran, and be able to buy Iranian oil (which they'd no doubt like to be able to sell to us).

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:56:57 +0000

Let's just say that I'm as satisfied with the proof Iranian compliance as I believe Iran would be satisfied with American assurances that it's not trying to overthrow its government.

By: Cernig

Cernig — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:06:01 +0000

PD, what parts of the NPT is Iran not in compliance with, right now? It has a Treaty right to enrichment and has a basic inspection regime as required. There is no proof it has a current weapons program

Treaty apparently complied with? Check.

Regards, C

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:11:40 +0000

OTOH, the U.S. should set as a precondition that Iran comply fully with its obligations under the Nuclearn Non-proliferation Treaty.

Check, right?

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:08:39 +0000

Cernig, how would the U.S. prove that it halted ongoing CIA efforts to overthrow the Islamic republic? Or that it isn't doing so indirectly through various other lackies?

By: Cernig

Cernig — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:29:31 +0000

Let me get this straight. Iran says any one of its "long list" of requests that the US stop trying to change it's government by covert action, stop keeping its money or preventing flights will be good enough to start negotiations, along with an Iraq timetable. There's already an Iraq timetable. Check. Iran's first on the list is "halt ongoing CIA efforts to overthrow the Islamic republic." Luers et al suggest "a reaffirmation of Article I of the 1981 Algiers Accord, in which the United States pledged not to interfere politically or militarily in Iran’s internal affairs." Check. And this reaffirmation of a legally binding treaty pledge is unfathomable to you because covert action to undermine their government should be a held as a "bargaining chip" in what would have to be good faith negotiations by both sides to have any chance of working. That's unfathomable to me. Regards, C