A History of Failed Rapprochement
Steven L. Taylor
·
Saturday, April 4, 2015
·
13 comments
Worth a read from Foreign Policy: From Washington to Tehran: A Legacy of Failure.
If this deal holds it is a very, very big deal.
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter
Interesting article. Hopefully both the Obama administration and the Iranian leadership have learned from studying these past failures and are able to produce something successful this time. Iran’s young, Western-oriented, generally pro-American populace has always seemed to me the potential foundation of an important alliance.
@Mikey:
Absolutely agree. This is a potentially game-changing alliance, and we should have no hesitation about making it clear to the Iranian people that Americans would welcome a free Iran into the wider world. The regime holds onto its reflexive hatred of all things western, but the people do not, and that is a schism we should exploit.
@michael reynolds: Tehran is a very modern city much like those here in the states. Iran just like the USA also has issues with rural religious extremists.
One problem in Iran is that that extremist leaders have wound up running the show. This Ayatollah Khomeini was the very image of evil incarnate. This guy looks like he came sraight out of some “Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves” movie. One has to wonder how many innocent people that he had murdered.
“Ayatollah Assaholah” : popular bumper sticker of the early 80’s
@Tyrell:
“This guy looks like he came sraight out of some “Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves” movie.” is hardly an appropriate basis for making foreign policy determinations.
Also, even if you want to link it to Khomeini, note that he died in 1989. That was a a while ago.
@Tyrell: “This Ayatollah Khomeini was the very image of evil incarnate. This guy looks like he came sraight out of some “Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves” movie.”
Shorter Tyrell: We should go to war with Iran because a leader who’s been for a quarter century looked like my stereotype of a bad guy based on watching bad movies.
Actually, that’s pretty much the shorter on all his posts. Wouldn’t it be said if he turned out not to be a troll, but really thought what he posted?
Except there is no deal. Nothing has been signed. And the Iranians are already on the record with a completely different perspective on the “parameters” than Obama or Kerry.
Maybe something comes of this, but right now, they’ve basically just agreed, in a fashion, on what to talk about in the next couple months.
@JKB: Yes, things can still fall apart. The bottom line is, however, this is a substantial step forward.
Since things can always fall apart observing such does not take a lot of analytic prowess.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Well, call it what it is. It is an agreement to have talks in which both sides are characterizing the agreement in near diametrical terms. In essence, nothing.
Perhaps they can make something from nothing but right now all we have is false marketing campaign by the Obama administration. A cynic might think they are hoping, and probably will have success, that Congress will sour any deal so that Obama can claim he was thwarted since going forward would pretty much memorialize his being rolled.
@JKB:
Your characterization…and the one you copied from that right-wing nut-job site…is diametrically opposed to reality. If you read the statements they are actually not that far apart. Both are aimed at a certain audience…no doubt.
Netanyahu said the Interim Deal that lead to this framework wouldn’t hold. He was wrong. Again.
And you, as we all know, are always wrong about whatever you choose to opine on. Records matter.
Bottom line…you want war…man-up and say it.
Let’s look at the translations from someone who is actually fluent in Farsi and English, shall we:
Hmm, that sounds like perhaps there is not really so much as an agreement but rather near diametrical views?
Or here
Oops, not even the European press releases are backing up the Obama propaganda.
And the alternative to an agreement is not war, there is always the continuation of the UN sanctions and proximity pressures. If they weren’t important, then why is Iran so excited that they’ve got Obama’s agreement to immediately lift them?
@JKB:
The NY f’ing Post? Now there is a bastion of truth.
http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/translation-iranian-factsheet-nuclear-negotiations
http://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/USSTATEBPA/2015/04/02/file_attachments/378460/Media%2BNote%2B-%2BApril%2B2%2B2015%2B-%2BLausanne.pdf
There are some differences in emphasis…but no real apparent conflicts.
Some of it is good, some of it is bad, and some things are yet unknowable.
Is it better than the results of the previous 3 decades? Yup.
Will it satisfy you chicken-hawks? Nope. Nothing short of wasting more blood and gold will.
At least Bill “I’m Never Right” Kristol has the balls to say what he wants:
Apparently the blunder in Iraq he helped engineer, complete with the blood of 4000 troops, the deaths of over a hundred thousand civilians, and over $2T in wasted money isn’t enough for him. He won’t be happy until he sees something, and other peoples kids, go boom from the safety of his DC mansion.