As President Obama tries diplomacy on Syria and Iran, an urgent question is whether Official Washington’s hardliners will tolerate the kinds of concessions that will be necessary. For instance, a deal on Iran’s nuclear program will have to be balanced, says Trita Parsi.
Official Washington’s neocons, who never wanted deals with Iran or Syria to succeed, are having a field day attacking the difficult negotiations and doing everything possible to make them fail. The new front in this offensive will be Iran and its nuclear program, writes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
Iran continues to signal a readiness to negotiate seriously over its nuclear program – in exchange for relief on sanctions – but Israeli leaders and American neocons still are pushing the Obama administration toward a heightened confrontation and war, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar observes.
Hassan Rouhani’s inauguration as Iran’s new president revives hope for resolving the Iranian nuclear dispute, but continued belligerency from the U.S. Congress and Israeli leaders could dash the opportunity – as could American misreading of regional trends, as Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett explain.
With Iran’s election of Hassan Rohani as the new president, the West is confronted with the PR dilemma of not having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to kick around anymore. But there is a route to a more constructive relationship, if Official Washington would lessen its hostility, write Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett.
The mainstream U.S. news media always blames Iran for the nuclear dispute, while ignoring other key facts like Israel’s rogue nuclear arsenal and the failure of the West to offer Iran meaningful sanctions relief. But Iran’s election of Hassan Rouhani creates a chance for mutual concessions, says ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
Four years ago, the U.S. news media pronounced Iran’s elections a fraud despite no hard evidence, and predicted a similar outcome again this year. But the election of Hassan Rouhani is now hailed as a democratic victory, a paradox addressed by Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett and Seyed Mohammad Marandi.
Every four years when Iran holds presidential elections, U.S. journalists travel to Tehran, hang out with middle-class English speakers and – when the vote tallies are in – insist that the electoral outcome must have been rigged. But that typically reflects a lack of U.S. media objectivity about Iran, say Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett.
With a reasonable compromise within reach on Iran’s nuclear program, the Obama administration pulled back, apparently fearing domestic political fallout. The result means a likely painful stalemate for the foreseeable future, as Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett describe.