Once upon a time, Vice President Richard Cheney advocated going to war with Iran in order to stop Iran’s nuclear program, even to the extent of authorizing the first use of nuclear weapons by any government since the the US dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August, 1945. Luckily, his favored solution to dealing with the problem of Iran’s nuclear program was not implemented.
President Obama’s security team has generally advocated for increased diplomacy to resolve the conflict with Iran. Republican critics of the President, on the other hand, have relentlessly condemned this approach as naive and dangerous to our national security. John McCain once sang “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran to the tune of a Beach Boy’s song at a campaign event in 2007. However, under the aegis of Secretary of State, John Kerry, an interim agreement was reached with the Iranian government to curtail their enrichment of uranium, while negotiations continued.
Nonetheless, prominent neocons and Republican figures, including Cheney, continued to call for war with Iran, as well as the leaders of the Government of Israel.
Despite criticism of the Obama administration and Kerry, however, regarding their Iran policy, it now appears that Iran is meeting its obligations under the agreement, as indicated by this report by Reuters:
The U.N. nuclear watchdog was expected to issue a monthly update later on Wednesday showing Iran is complying with the terms of last year’s interim deal with six world powers to curb some of its atomic activities, diplomats said.
The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is tasked with checking that Iran is living up to its part of the agreement that took effect in January and was last month extended by four months until late November.
Iran’s official news outlet, Tasnim, has also issued a statement by the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s Spokesperson, Marziyeh Afkham, that the government of Iran fully intends to continue to cooperate with the IAEA inspections of its nuclear program.
“Cooperation between Iran and the IAEA is moving forward and the country is determined to continue cooperation with the IAEA,” Afkham told reported during her weekly press briefing in Tehran on Wednesday.
She also called on the UN nuclear agency to prevent the political affairs from leaving negative impacts on the technical and legal process of negotiations with Iran.
The Iranian foreign ministry spokeswoman also described the course of Iran-IAEA talks as well as the recent visit to Tehran by the head of the organization, Yukiya Amano, as “constructive”.
What has Iran done to comply with its obligations under the agreement from last November? For one, it has eliminated its store of enriched uranium gas, which if further enriched might have led to a stockpile of uranium capable of being used to make a nuclear weapon. That important step was first reported back in July of this year by Secretary Kerry, along with the other steps Iran has taken to date in accordance with the November agreement:
Since its implementation, Iran has complied with its obligations to neutralize its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium; cap its stockpile of 5 percent enriched uranium; not install advanced centrifuges; not install or test new components at its Arak reactor; and submit to far more frequent inspections of its facilities. The International Atomic Energy Agency has regularly verified that Iran has lived up to these commitments.
While not everything with respect to these negotiations has always gone smoothly, significant progress has been achieved By the Obama administration. First and foremost, a shooting war with Iran involving either the US, Israel or both, has been avoided. The enriched uranium Iran had in its possession has been removed, and no further steps by Iran toward increasing its ability to enrich uranium has been taken.
Imagine for a moment if John McCain had been elected in 2008, or Mitt Romney in 2012. Does anyone realistically believe that they would have avoided war with Iran over its nuclear capability, considering their many numerous statements professing their willingness to attack Iran at their discretion.
How many people, civilians and soldiers alike, would have died, how bad would the world economy crashed, and how many other unforeseen negative consequences for our country and the world would have resulted if the Obama administration had not chosen to consistently pursue a diplomatic solution with respect to Iran’s nuclear program? Fortunately, we never had to learn the answers to those questions.
Thank you President Obama and Secretary Kerry for your efforts in continuing to use American diplomacy rather than military force to seek solutions to the Iranian nuclear program.
Ya, maybe so, but he still hasn’t spoken out about those cops in Ferguson. And where is my public option? And why hasn’t he destroyed the CIA and the whole intelligence community? Who needs them, amirite? What about those prisoners in Cuba? Freedom for them, I say!
What a loser he is!
.
Sure, I voted for him in ’12, but I held my nose the whole time. But I am done, I tell you, DONE!
I won’t even vote for POTUS in ’16. Why bother? Not voting has worked out so well for those people in Ferguson, might as well take that plan National!
.
Does my sarcasm meter pick up a reading?
Look, I’ll concede Obama delivered a pony on this one. But I wanted a unicorn pony with sparkles!
I understand he cannot do everything. However, I was willing to compromise (not that disgusting weakling compromise that Obama does, but my own ‘within liberal standards as I see them’ compromise) for a unicorn pony WITHOUT sparkles if I had to, but he still gave me his usual ordinary pony BS. I moved the overton window, and STILL he failed to deliver. That means he sucks.
So I am very disappointed.
.
Diplomacy requires some carrots and sticks, and some give and take.
And Republicans can’t “grok” that.
To our conservatives, a hammer needs to be used on every single nail.
The negotiations will fail, simply because what Iran absolutely wants (as stated by Khamenei), the US and other powers absolutely do not want. No amount of negotiations can overcome directly opposed desires unless someone knuckles under.
That said, even failed negotiations stall the Iranian program and push the possibility of war farther back. Every moment the US and Iran talk or tacitly cooperate against ISIS is a positive moment. Even such small things are better than hardliners pushing for conflict.
what is it that Khamenei stated that Iran wants on which neither side will budge? are you sure it’s not a stage in negotiation? Also, I think you’re leaving ISIS out of the picture,
http://www.tehrantimes.com/component/content/article/94-headline/116895-iranian-negotiators-will-not
-relinquish-nuclear-rights-leader-
leading to:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/14/iran-s-ayatollah-khamenei-says-talks-with-the-u-s-a
re-futile.html
Public statements that reaffirm his position for his supporters. ok.
Republicans have not yet gotten the point that we need to ally with Iran to combat ISIS. They’re still pouting about the hostage crisis they prolonged, which was the result of a Republican foreign policy blunder in 1953.
And John McCain is still trying to outdo his dad and forget what he did at the Hanoi Hilton. Not to mention those crashed jet planes.
Add to those the completely forgotten by voters Keating 5 S & L scandal.
maybe, maybe not OT: ok, Tarheel, what do you think this is?
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/215525-obama-heads-back-to-vacation-leaving-a-puzzle-behi
nd-him
I have no guesses
Thanks for this Steven, once again!
Hillary becomes president.
Good for Obama and Kerry and getting this done. Regardless of what Hillary has implied about Kerry and the media has said, he has 2 big diplomatic wins under his belt so far – Iran and Syria CWs. Neither were thought possible in 2012 and yet neither Kerry or Obama gets any credit for either.
I tend to agree; however, there are other forces at work to generate a war with Iran; diplomacy successes not withstanding.
Personally, I think the Iraq war was, in part, created by foreign agents of influence who preyed on weak and greedy US officials. Those same officials are still around and so are the foreign agents. Hillary has a proven track record of being taken in by them in the past- so look out.
Ridge
Iran is a pretty funny place.
If US proto-fascists of the 20s-50s hadn’t gone in and overthrown (with our UK puppy’s help) the democratically-elected PM in 1953, they would have been a natural ally in the region.
I’m sure that our proto-fascists, along with Israel, are glad that never happened. Funny, right?
So now, we’re back to trying to rearrange the Middle East again (because it works out every time an Empire goes in there and does it!) and Iran is a likely ally in doing it.
In fact, I think Iran has to be an ally if we want to do it with any semblance of doing it right. And we need to disregard our current “allies” of Saudi Arabia and Israel to do it.
Funny.
Steven, it seems Obama has placed a lot of trust in VP Joe Biden on foreign policy. Especially Iraq, Ukraine and the Middle East. What is your take on this, and the influence of National Security advisor Susan Rice, Vicky Nuland on Ukraine and of course our ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. They don’t seem to be on the same page.
American Foreign Policy: Where is the oil and who do we have to kill to get it?
No Republican and precious few Democrats would have done this, or stayed out of Syria. That’s a major foreign policy win, just as ACA is a major domestic win, one that had eluded Democrats for generations. History will be far kinder to this president than a lot of progressives have been.
Yes, thank you Obama for not doing stupid shit in this area.
It’s hard to say what prevented war with Iran in the Bush administration. Presumably GW and Condi got it through their thick skulls that they needed to not let Dick run the whole show, and that war with Iran would turn their administration from a generational fiasco into a world-historical cluster-fuck (although there’s still time!).
I firmly believe that irregardless of what Obama does, any republican presidency in the next say 20 years will push the chances for war with Iran, or at least some kind of military action there, well above 50%. And I think the chances for at least Afghanistan level military intervention somewhere in the world during any Republican presidency is at least 80%.
It’s obvious there is a very vocal and very well connected coterie of security-state assholes who will stop at nothing to get their precious regime change in Iran. Those same people are also more or less in the employ of Israel. Will a given Republican president actively seek war with Iran? Hard to say, but war is always a bright shiny toy on the shelf, especially when you haven’t used it in your administration yet. It fixes so many perception problems, at least temporarily.
As for Hillary, let’s just say I see no evidence to think she would have pursued the course that Obama did with Iran.
“Does anyone realistically believe that they would have avoided war with Iran over its nuclear capability, considering their many numerous statements professing their willingness to attack Iran at their discretion”?
Given how much these folks lie and how many campaign promises they make and immediately forget when elected – yes I think that once they got into the big seat and their military advisers explained that: “…achieving more than a temporary setback in Iran’s nuclear program would require a military operation — including a land occupation — more taxing than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.”
They would have weaseled out of attacking.