Posts Tagged 'Engagement'

“News agencies exaggerate Clinton’s threat of sanctions”

“News agencies exaggerate Clinton’s threat of sanctions”
July 8 & 9, 2009
     Despite previous reports that the US is not open to discussing new sanctions against Iran, in a recent interview, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that “even stricter sanctions” would be pursued if the US policy of engagement failed (Reuters). Initial reports from several news agencies—including Iran’s Press TV, Israel’s Jerusalem Post and others—have quoted Clinton’s remarks without including her assertions that the US would first continue working toward engagement. Clinton also sharply criticized Tehran for suppressing domestic opposition and said that “it is not in the best interests of the world to be doing business with Iran to promote the regime” (Globovision).
     Alistair Lyon writes that Tehran’s domestic turmoil is hurting the chances for direct Iran-US engagement. The US faces the dilemma that engagement would legitimize the controversial reelection of President Ahmadinejad, which has increased international calls for new sanctions. Farideh Farhi believes Tehran may delay talks after having lost much of its negotiating power due to the recent controversies (Reuters (2)).
Reuters | Globovision | Reuters (2)


“Tehran’s targeting of UK may indicate willingness to engage US”

“Tehran’s targeting of UK may indicate willingness to engage US”
June 23 & 24, 2009
     Gregory Katz declares that Britain has replaced the US as Iran’s “great Satan” as Tehran considers downgrading relations with its former colonial ruler. Both nations have recently expelled one another’s diplomats, and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei called Britain the “most evil” of foreign powers in a recent speech. According to Katz’s report, efforts by the BBC Persian Service to circumvent Iranian censorship and the British embassy’s decision to treat injured demonstrators have raised suspicions in Iran that Britain is actively supporting the protests (Associated Press).
     David Roberts believes that the targeting of Britain is Iran’s “first gesture” toward possible détente with the US should the election controversy subside and the US remain willing to engage diplomatically (Gulf Blog). Scott Peterson cites an unnamed analyst who argues that while President Ahmadinejad is “enthusiastic” about renewing ties with the US, recent remarks by President Obama condemning violence against protestors may affect Khamenei’s decision to pursue rapprochement. Analysts disagree whether Khamenei’s endorsement of Ahmadinejad signals an intention to engage the US with a strong negotiator or a sharp rejection of US overtures (Christian Science Monitor).
     Patrick Clawson argues that the protests have strengthened Khamenei’s view that the West is determined to overthrow the current regime and that the nuclear issue is only another pretext for such efforts. Michael Singh adds that Tehran’s handling of the election controversy and “reselection” of Ahmadinejad indicates the regime’s insecurity and unwillingness to engage with the US. Singh believes Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship and states that the growing power of the Revolutionary Guards may further insulate Tehran from international pressure (Washington Institute for Near East Policy).
Associated Press | Gulf Blog | Christian Science Monitor | Washington Institute for Near East Policy