Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
--- Begin Message --- -Caveat Lector- IRAN-USA RELATIONS,
BETWEEN SECRET TREATIES AND OPEN THREATS
by Youssef Azizi, Arab Iranian writer-journalist
Arab Monitor
Teheran, May 2003 - After the interruption of relations between the United States and Iran 23 years ago, those relations are passing through a delicate phase that could reveal itself to be decisive for their long-term redefinition.
Much depends on whether the Islamic Republic --the nation that spread the phrases "death to America", "America, Great Satan" and "America at the leadership of the bullies of the world"-- will be forced to confront an assault coming from four sides on behalf of the United States, considering the military occupation of Iraq to be the latest and most important geographic element of a noose closing in on Iran.
The United States broke off relations with Iran in 1980, following the occupation of the American embassy in Teheran by radical students. But even after that incident, President Ronald Reagan had on several occasions sought reconciliation with Iran. The latest attempt was made in the second half of the Eighties, when America sent a group of secret emissaries to Teheran.
However, the Islamic Revolution, then at its apex, could not help but rail against the United States, and the attempt failed, after news of the arrival of the American delegation and of its encounter with the president of the Iranian Parliament, Hashemi Rafsanjani, was leaked to the Lebanese press. That event resulted in a scandal that has become famous under the name Iran-Contra.
The period of George Bush Sr saw no development in the relations between the two capitals. Only afterwards, during the Clinton administration, was it possible to see a certain openness, when Secretary of State Madeleine Albright openly admitted to errors committed by the United States in regard to Iran -- referring to the unlimited support given the deposed Shah and participation in the coup that overthrew nationalist leader Mohammed Mossadeq, the nation's prime minister in the Fifties.
Iranian reformists accuse the regime of having missed more than one chance (such as that presented by the admissions of Albright) to improve relations with the US, and of failing to take advantage of the opportunity to cooperate with western intelligence agencies in the security area after the American military incursion against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. They hold the Conservatives (those who maintain control of the government) responsible for calling a halt any time progress toward normalization of relations between Iran and the United States is possible.
Coquettish exchanges between Iran and the USA -- but up to what point?
Zalmay Khalilzad, President Bush's special advisor for the Middle East and Southern Asia, and the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammed Joad Zareef. The New York Times has spoken of other discreet discussions between Iran and the US occurring in months past. The paper revealed that differences of opinion exist in the American administration over the best way to confront the question of Iran's nuclear program, stating that for several months contacts have been underway, with Ryan Crocker, a major figure at the US State Department, and Zalmay Khalilzad meeting with Iranian officials in Europe, especially in Geneva.
More than a year and a half ago, during the military campaign against Afghanistan, Reformist efforts contributed to the breaking of a taboo: Iran and the United States were seated together to work out questions of security in their common interests. That channel remained open even during the Anglo-American war in Iraq.
It was just that sort of contact which US Secretary of State Colin Powell referred to when some time ago he declared that "the US has been in contact with Iran on an issue concerning Israel, Palestine, and developments in Iraq".
According to Powell, the United States was making use of channels "we utilize when it is necessary to get into contact with Iran", adding that "we do not intend to conduct direct and open negotiations, as we do with Syria -- other channels are available which we can use".
It emerges that --officially but "unofficially"-- a meeting was held in New York between
As Iranian minister of Foreign Affairs Kamal Kharrazi declared at a recent meeting with the Foreign Affairs Minister of Luxembourg, Teheran wishes to develop its relations with the US as soon as political forces within Iran achieve equilibrium.
... In view of which, President George W. Bush, welcoming Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al Thani, the Emirate of Qatar, suddenly began to express his worries about Iran's development of what he called nuclear weapons.
In order to evaluate exactly what is happening between Iran and the United States, it is necessary to look further into three aspects of the question. First, what at the moment is worrying both nations. Second, the American position and the opinions prevalent within the administration. Third, Iran's position and the state of internal political and cultural attitudes toward the United States.
The current agenda encompasses the matters of nuclear development in Iran, the Iraqi situation (vis-a-vis Iran), the Israeli-Palestinian problem, and the greatest dilemma of all: how to restore relations between the two nations.
It seems that the explanations given by President Khatami regarding what stage Iran has reached in the development of peacetime nuclear technology, publicly admitted last January, as well as last February's visit to Iran by Mohammed el-Baradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, followed by his statements on the same subject, have pushed America to denounce what it describes as an "Iranian nuclear threat." The US sees the Iranian nuclear issue in the context of Israel's security and the stability of its peace process in the Middle East.
Apart from the question of nuclear technology, it is mainly over Iraq that America and Iran are quarreling. Iraq presents a variety of problems. For Iranians, the most important problem is [US protection of Saddam Hussein-sponsored anti-Iranian terrorist] Mujaheddin Khalq. Teheran has asked that he be extradited -- something Washington refuses to allow, limiting itself to putting a stop to his organization, announcing its intention to disarm his followers. America presents Iran with its own demands: it has asked Teheran to stop "inflaming the sentiments" of Shiites in Iraq against the Anglo-American military presence.
Clearly, the two parties have not yet seriously touched on the most controversial matter of all, which is the resumption of diplomatic relations. No doubt, that will not be discussed until tangible progress has been made in other agreements, for example on the Iranian nuclear program and the Iraqi question.
As for the position of the American administration and its currently prevailing orientation, there is still an ongoing battle between hawks and doves, between the Pentagon and the State Department. It is known that Israelis in the Likud and their allies at the White House have long been weighing the possibility of launching a surprise military attack on Iran. In order to minimize the risk of the hawks striking nuclear sites in the cities of Busher, Arak and Natanz, Iran's government has done the impossible -- it has communicated with the American administration.
However, in Iran as well, there are those who look forward to a military confrontation, who will not be satisfied with anything less than an American surrender.
Then there is the group around ex-president Hashemi Rafsanjani, interested in talks with the US -- but only if they can play a dominant and publicly visible role in the negotiations. Another reality is represented by those inside the government, such as the Foreign Affairs minister, and president Mohammed Khatami, who is currently conducting the better part of the discreet, semi-official talks.
When it comes to final decisions in matters of foreign policy, any such decision must be made by the Guide of the Iranian Revolution. It may seem the government is particularly active now, only because it has been given the green light directly from the Guide, but on the condition that it does not cross the line -- that it does not allow itself to be dragged by America into discussions that go beyond the predetermined agenda, into precisely the question of the resumption of diplomatic relations.
In America, presenting a united front regarding Iran poses no problem, in spite of the conflicts between hawks and doves. But in Teheran it is different. There are many who insist that official negotiations with the US will produce nothing until some solution has been found to the conflicts existing within their own government.
Iranians are convinced that American military action against the Islamic Republic is improbable; Iran believes that for the United States war remains a last resort -- but only so long as the hawks in the administration [are not in complete control]….
Questa e altre news disponibili su www.arabmonitor.info - Sito di informazione dal mondo arabo
www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
--- End Message ---
