Obama's Letter to Iran: Dangling the Carrot
Published in Addustour
(Jordan) on 22 March 2009
by Yasser Azaatra (link to original)
The U.S. President's letter to the people of Iran was not brimmed with excitement. We say this because his perspective on Iran was announced earlier on. Dialogue with Iran, it was declared, is the very solution to solving the nuclear program problem. It is true the letter had a warmer tone, which, perhaps, took some people aback. Furthermore, being directed to the Iranian populace, more than to their leadership, the letter was perhaps an attempt to influence Iran's coming elections, aiming to raise local debate on the viability of President Ahmadinejad' strong statements and even more on the feasibility of maintaining a nuclear program at all. This comes at a time when many Iranian people see that the issue does not warrant confrontation with the giants, advising instead that focus be on local issues, particularly the economy.
It is clear there is some head-butting in assessing the Obama administration’s next step vis-à-vis Iran. Indeed, indications suggest that Obama would not undertake military action no matter how the Iranian leadership reacted to the giant powers’ demands regarding the nuclear project. The procedure, it is maintained, will not go beyond economic sanctions. Some go even further to speak about a U.S.-Iranian alliance against Arab interests.
Of course, in the light of this “enlightened” discourse, which speaks of an Iranian menace and gives priority to the American Zionist threat as reflected in propagandistic discourse by pro-U.S. states, there is strong evidence that Obama would track the Iranian nuclear project personally. Indeed, he would do this while respecting Israel, which, in a roundabout way, holds onto Obama’s foreign policy with an iron grip.
Whether or not he sees safety in a strategic alliance with the Jewish state or simply panics before the muscles of the Republican and Democratic Zionist lobby, which pressures Congress with pro-Jewish perspectives, information and politics, Obama is well aware of the Zionist lobby’s predisposition to undermine the will of his administration.
Those Israelis alarmed by the Iranian nuclear question doubt Obama's strategy for Iran, but also wants to encourage his call for dialogue. A dialogue where Iran is called to write off its nuclear project file and end its support to resistance forces in the region. The price America has to pay for Tehran to reply to those calls, definitely does not matter. It is here, where the fundamental question crops up: can the United States afford to pay the price Tehran may demand in order to abandon its nuclear dream and stop supporting resistance forces? It is likely Iran would consent, as is the case with poor, weak and divided Arab states.
Distrust amid Arabs and Iran is in America’s interest. It enables America to blackmail both parties, mainly the Arab party. This, in turn, is in Israel’s interest. No doubt, any Iranian-Arab compromise will be at the expense of Israeli-American interests. And this is because an Arab-Iranian alliance would be against the interests of both America and Israel. We refuse forcing Palestinians to surrender and say no to the acculturation process to which the region has been subject.
There is real opportunity for a new Iranian-Arab perceptive. However, it is hampered by the hegemony of the United States, which puts various types of pressure on the situation. The American amiable policy towards Iran will not last long because the Israelis, backed up by a powerful lobby, are losing patience. Obama is well aware that his anger may be costly.
It is clear there is some head-butting in assessing the Obama administration’s next step vis-à-vis Iran. Indeed, indications suggest that Obama would not undertake military action no matter how the Iranian leadership reacted to the giant powers’ demands regarding the nuclear project. The procedure, it is maintained, will not go beyond economic sanctions. Some go even further to speak about a U.S.-Iranian alliance against Arab interests.
Of course, in the light of this “enlightened” discourse, which speaks of an Iranian menace and gives priority to the American Zionist threat as reflected in propagandistic discourse by pro-U.S. states, there is strong evidence that Obama would track the Iranian nuclear project personally. Indeed, he would do this while respecting Israel, which, in a roundabout way, holds onto Obama’s foreign policy with an iron grip.
Whether or not he sees safety in a strategic alliance with the Jewish state or simply panics before the muscles of the Republican and Democratic Zionist lobby, which pressures Congress with pro-Jewish perspectives, information and politics, Obama is well aware of the Zionist lobby’s predisposition to undermine the will of his administration.
Those Israelis alarmed by the Iranian nuclear question doubt Obama's strategy for Iran, but also wants to encourage his call for dialogue. A dialogue where Iran is called to write off its nuclear project file and end its support to resistance forces in the region. The price America has to pay for Tehran to reply to those calls, definitely does not matter. It is here, where the fundamental question crops up: can the United States afford to pay the price Tehran may demand in order to abandon its nuclear dream and stop supporting resistance forces? It is likely Iran would consent, as is the case with poor, weak and divided Arab states.
Distrust amid Arabs and Iran is in America’s interest. It enables America to blackmail both parties, mainly the Arab party. This, in turn, is in Israel’s interest. No doubt, any Iranian-Arab compromise will be at the expense of Israeli-American interests. And this is because an Arab-Iranian alliance would be against the interests of both America and Israel. We refuse forcing Palestinians to surrender and say no to the acculturation process to which the region has been subject.
There is real opportunity for a new Iranian-Arab perceptive. However, it is hampered by the hegemony of the United States, which puts various types of pressure on the situation. The American amiable policy towards Iran will not last long because the Israelis, backed up by a powerful lobby, are losing patience. Obama is well aware that his anger may be costly.