UANI

EYE ON IRAN

AUGUST 11, 2008

Reuters reported that Iranian and European spoke this morning regarding Iran’s nuclear program “but an EU official said there was no change in the dispute. Iran's National Security Council said negotiator Saeed Jalili and European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana agreed to continue their talks…. However, an official in Solana's office gave a more downbeat account of the conversation, saying: ‘Nothing has changed. We stick to the two-track approach. The channels of communication remain open.’” (http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSLB3516920080811)
 
Per the Tehran Times, the Majlis Speaker spoke about Iran’s inflation and what the government should be doing to control it. “’We do not need the government officials to devise ideological subjects; instead, they should be seeking to resolve economic problems,’ he told a group of Revolutionary Guards Corps officials in a meeting on Sunday. President Mahmud Ahmadinejad has faced mounting criticism for his economic policies which have pushed inflation to over 26 percent.” (http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=175088)
 
Professor Joshua Gleis wrote in the International Herald Tribune about how China and Russia are benefiting from business with Iran. “Talks with Iran have reached another impasse…. Intelligence agencies fear the Iranians will soon reach the critical "point of no return" when they will have the technological know-how to develop a nuclear weapon. That apprehension has set off a flurry of rumors that Israel or the United States will attack Iran before it is able to reach that threshold. In this environment, one would think that the international community would be doing everything in its power to press Iran into accepting a compromise. And the developed world is rightly ratcheting up the pressure on the Iranian government. Yet two countries - China and Russia - are not only undermining the effort, they are actually profiting from the rest of the world's sanctions.” (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/10/opinion/edgleis.php)
 
Rep. Hamilton wrote in today’s Indianapolis Star that the US should not attack Iran. “Although the U.S. should never take the military option off the table, I oppose a U.S. military strike now. At best it would slow, not destroy, the Iranian nuclear program, rallying support for the hardliners in Iran and making a negotiated settlement virtually impossible. It would undercut U.S. policy in Iraq and the region. It could prompt Iranian retaliatory moves. Since Iran has yet to produce enough nuclear material for a bomb, there is still time for skillful diplomacy, a combination of incentives (WTO membership) and the prospect of intensified sanctions, to work.” (http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080811/OPINION12/80...)
 
The New York Times reported on the release of Yaghoub Khezri from improsinment in Iran. “[I]n 2004, some old business partners from Tehran reached out to Mr. Khezri and told him it was safe to come back and claim property that had been seized by the government, the lure -- both financial and emotional -- proved more powerful than any fears about what might happen if he returned. And at the age of 81, it was most likely his last chance to see Iran. Almost as soon as he landed in Tehran, however, Mr. Khezri found himself at the center of a nightmare. He was arrested, and at first faced charges that carried a possible death sentence. Eventually, he was convicted of ''womanizing'' and ''immoral acts'' and sentenced to three and half years in prison and 99 lashes.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/nyregion/11iran.html?ref=nyregion)
 
Bill Kristol wrote in the New York Times about Iran and how it has been aided by other “dictatorial and aggressive and fanatical regimes.” “Incidentally, has Russia really been helping much on Iran? It has gone along with -- while delaying -- three United Nations Security Council resolutions that have imposed mild sanctions on Iran. But it has also supplied material for Iran's nuclear program, and is now selling Iran antiaircraft systems to protect military and nuclear installations…. Iran and North Korea help Syria. Russia and China block Security Council sanctions against Zimbabwe. China props up the regimes in Burma and North Korea. The United States, of course, is not without resources and allies to deal with these problems and threats. But at times we seem oddly timid and uncertain.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/opinion/11kristol.html)
 
Harvard professor, Noah Feldman, wrote in the New York Times on how he is optimistic about the nuclear negociations with Iran. “So which script will play out, the threat of war or the dull hum of diplomats negotiating a modus vivendi that might someday be called peace? The answer lies in no small part with the Iranian government, itself a complex mix of ideologues and foreign-policy professionals under the not-always-watchful eye of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. If Iran is in fact close to developing functioning nuclear weapons, then it probably will not compromise. As North Korea has shown, even a few weapons are enough to enhance a country's status and bargaining power immensely. If, however, Iran's leaders assess the difficulties of mastering centrifuge technology as a real barrier to gaining weapons, they might as well negotiate and try to get the best deal they can while the U.S. and Israel are worried about them. Paradoxically, then, saber rattling against Iran may help achieve political resolution. It could turn out that the more it looks as if the coming months may bring war, the more likely it becomes that winter will instead bring meaningful progress toward peace” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/magazine/10wwln-lede2-t.html)
 
NYU terrorism expert, Hagai Segal, wrote in the South China Morning Post on the Iranian Administration and their nuclear intentions. “Discerning Iran's precise nuclear policy has become a matter of paramount importance, not just for Israel and the United States, but for China, Russia, the European Union, the UN and Nato. If Tehran will stop at nothing to develop a nuclear bomb, then a major international crisis looms; if not, then tensions could lower surprisingly quickly. Penetrating the murky world of Iranian national decision-making and definitively identifying the regime's intentions are, however, notoriously difficult, and this poses significant challenges to these international players. Rather than being a single-minded, cohesive regime, Iran's diverse leadership is regularly divided over key policies. Some figures seek self-imposed isolation, others advocate challenging the US, moderate Sunni Arab regimes and Israel. Still others advocate more pragmatic engagement with the west.” (http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cb...
 
The Washington Post Magazine carried a story on Pres. Ahmadinejad and his Wikipedia controversary. “English-language entries about Iranian people and politics, including an overview of that 2005 Iranian presidential campaign. A few days before the initial round of voting, Pournader noticed there were Wikipedia profiles for seven of the eight candidates, the exception being Ahmadinejad. ‘So I created an article about him,’ he explains. His entry described Ahmadinejad as ‘the most fundamentalist’ of the candidates, recipient of a doctorate in civil engineering and the current mayor of Tehran. It bore what's called a ‘stub’ tag, indicating that the biography needed fleshing out. Not to worry. Other Wikipedia contributors would soon be stepping forward.” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/05/AR200808...)