Alert the BBC — Iran wants to talk
posted at 7:41 am on June 19, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
A few days ago, the BBC’s Jon Leyne noted how great it was that the Iranians seem willing to talk with the West over its pursuit of nuclear technology. It never occurred to the Beeb that Iran just might be stalling through the use of diplomacy. Reuters reports today that the Iranians have provided a little assistance to the BBC by bluntly stating the obvious:
Analysts also believe Tehran is using delaying tactics to press ahead with atomic work. An Iranian official said on Thursday time was on Iran’s side.
“We will review the package but not the part about enrichment freeze … We are moving forward with our work and Iran’s nuclear capability is being constantly augmented,” said the official, involved in talks with Solana in Tehran.
“Each passing day we are more advanced in nuclear technology, it gives us an upper hand in talks.”
The Iranians will discuss the incentives but not the condition for receiving them. That reminds me of the time I walked into the car dealership to discuss the Lamborghini but not the payment. It sounds about as reasonable as the Iranians, who as Reuters reports refuse to acknowledge any limitation on their nuclear program imposed by the West, especially the US. “The time for ordering other nations is over,” they declared.
Maybe the time for Iranian access to international banking and trade markets is also over, although that seems less likely with Russia and China blocking more effective sanctions. The Iranians insist that the inflated price of oil has cushioned the blow from the first three rounds of sanctions that got past the two Iranian trading partners, which is likely true. When the sanctions first got imposed, oil prices were less than half of what it is today, around $65 a barrel in 2006.
If the West wants to get serious with Iran, the terms will have to get tougher. Two methods could be used with oil to make it happen. We can either block oil shipments out of Iran and cut them off from their money altogether, which would provoke a war and send oil prices into the stratosphere, or we can start massively producing oil elsewhere and dilute the prices enough to cause an economic collapse in Iran. One Western power has the resources to do the latter, but its Congress hasn’t figured out that domestic oil production could be strategic in the war on terror by bankrupting its chief sponsor.
Do you think Congress will figure this out before the West gives the Iranians that Lamborghini?









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
No.
NotCoach on June 19, 2008 at 7:52 AM
We can either: A) STEAL oil shipments out of Iran and cut them off from their money altogether, which would provoke a war and send oil prices into the stratosphere,
Or B) we can start massively producing oil elsewhere and dilute the prices enough to cause an economic collapse in Iran.
I vote for Plan B first which will bring oil prices down, and once we have our ANWR oil, we go to Plan A, steal their oil shpiments and when that causes a war we launch Plan C, Operation Iranian Liberty, “O.I.L.”
Tony737 on June 19, 2008 at 8:01 AM
I vote for plan B also!
becki51758 on June 19, 2008 at 8:06 AM
It’s quite the statement that the Iranians have make things clear for the BBC, but it’s no surprise.
drjohn on June 19, 2008 at 8:07 AM
Reagan let Pasdaran-Hizballah kill two hundred Marines and skedaddled. Then sent them arms for hostages.
Don’t tee them up….
Beagle on June 19, 2008 at 8:09 AM
And we are paying today for Reagan’s mistakes when it comes to Iran as well as Carter’s mistakes, Bush senior’s mistakes and Clinton’s mistakes. Being soft on these Nazis for thirty years has only emboldened them.
NotCoach on June 19, 2008 at 8:13 AM
Seems like Reagan ordered an air strike, the jets were ready to take off and Cap Weinberger called it off, not Reagan.
Tom
marinetbryant on June 19, 2008 at 8:18 AM
Depends on whether they can set aside some time from allocating pork and postpone hearings on steroid use of baseball players and illegal videotaping by football coaches.
It’s all about priorities. Important stuff comes first. Moving ever closer to nuclear annihilation takes a back seat.
fogw on June 19, 2008 at 8:20 AM
Let’s say Iran misjudges the situation. Is an Iran without a working electrical generator or a working electrical distribution system a threat? Maybe we don’t have to kill a lot of Iranians to get our message across.
Plus, a 9th century caliphate is a bonus for the truly devout.
NaCly dog on June 19, 2008 at 8:22 AM
This analogy is incorrect. The Lamborghini sales contract describes a trade: you give the Lamborghini dealer enough money, and he gives you the car. The NPT is also a contract. Iran gives up nuclear weapon manufacture, they get the right to enrich uranium for nuclear power, and also the right to receive help from other States in doing so. Asking Iran to give up their benefit in the deal is breaking the contract. The correct Lamborghini analogy, then, is that Iran pays for the Lamborghini, but does not get the Lamborghini, but instead gets the generous “incentive” of receiving a Ford Focus instead. I can’t believe those insolent bastards won’t accept that deal! Bomb them!!
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 8:24 AM
I know giving Lamborghinis hasn’t worked in the past. But, Ed, people in the past have been giving Lamborghinis in the wrong way. History is different now. When we give Lamborghinis, the incentive will work!
/”Progressive”speak
eeyore on June 19, 2008 at 8:42 AM
TEHERAN, Iran (AP) — President Barack Obama met with Irans president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, today to hand over the keys to the Lamborghini the two countries have been negotiating over the past decade. Upon receiving the keys, the Iranian president remarked that this symbolized a new era for US-Iran relations – one of equals. The presidents also took the time to joke around about driving the Lamborghini, where Ahmadinejad pretendet to hand over the keys to Obama, but took them back and laughed. The Italian sports car was delivered to Iran during Obama’s first term, after Israel was disintegrated by Iran’s nuclear attack.
Seixon on June 19, 2008 at 8:43 AM
The BBC was all for delaying the start of the Iraq War, giving Saddam time to send his WMDs to Syria & Iran.
jgapinoy on June 19, 2008 at 8:49 AM
That nation’s Congress knows this full well and doesn’t care.
Lehosh on June 19, 2008 at 8:56 AM
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 8:24 AM
——-
Aaaand, this is where the analogy gets really strained.
More accurate to say Iran want the Lamborghini, but can only afford a nice Toyota Prius. Instead, Iran is asking the dealer to sell the Lamborghini, and using a large number of $100 bills with the same serial number as the down payment.
They’re *obviously* lying. The enrichment they’re undertaking has no *civilian* purpose, but would make for a very nice group of bombs.
Yes, Iran could use a good *civilian* nuclear power system. That would let them sell their oil rather than using it for their own needs. Not a bad idea, as that’s one of the approaches Canada is taking.
Canada, unlike Iran, is not run by a bunch of religious nut-jobs set on bringing about another world war so their twelfth imam can appear.
Mew
acat on June 19, 2008 at 8:59 AM
In a nutshell, no. It isn’t about Congress and their smarts, it is about conviction. Congress does not have any to spare for solving problems. They need all the conviction they have for making problems.
Limerick on June 19, 2008 at 9:02 AM
It’s appealing what you suggest on one hand. On the other hand, if by developing domestic resources you give the greenlight to the idiots who say it’s their right to drive Hummers or consume prodigious quantities of electricity in their Tennessee mansions and we thus waste the oil in stupidity, I couldn’t be more opposed. How about domestic drilling plus gas taxes to keep the price of gas where it is now?
thuja on June 19, 2008 at 9:07 AM
I’m sorry, but how do gas taxes not increase the price of gas?
Lehosh on June 19, 2008 at 9:10 AM
I’ve never owned an electric car so forgive this uninformed question…….
What is the cost comparison between 35mpg and getting the same mileage out of a wall outlet? Also, won’t this mean that the electric power industry will have to burn more oil to produce those amps getting pumped into my car? Doesn’t this also need to be factored into what the actual cost-per-mile is? Can the power grid even handle 300,000,000 fuel points?
Limerick on June 19, 2008 at 9:17 AM
acat:
There is nothing in Article IV of the NPT that says the Article does not apply to Muslim countries. Your analogy is that even though someone paid for the Lamborghini, the dealer is only required to offer them a Ford Focus instead. The dealers excuse is that the buyer is a “religious nut-job.” This argument is insane.
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 9:19 AM
dave
Cho, no doubt, was just exercising his constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The law protected his rights and following the letter of the law is all that matters. Had he announced that his neighbor was soon going to meet a violent end it still would not be ‘legal’ to confront him and take his guns away. Acts, and not intent, is all we need concern ourselves with.
Dave has convinced me. Iran has the right to do with their nuclear fuel cycle anything they want. If Iran melts a couple of million people then we can act. It is the decent thing to do. We have plenty of mops just for situations like this.
Limerick on June 19, 2008 at 9:21 AM
They have it figured out. You presume that in the end the democrats are still patriots who want to see the US survive as long as they get to be the power brokers running the country.
The democrats know their path to ultimate power requires the complete defeat, the complete collapse of the United States.
They know exactly what they are doing.
What other explanation do you have for the sudden interest in nationalizing the oil industry?
The liberal left is completely content to take over the country an incremental inch, and incremental law, an incremental industry, one by one, until they have it all.
rockhauler on June 19, 2008 at 9:27 AM
Limerick:
No they don’t. They are not allowed to make nuclear weapons, only nuclear power.
So the US is allowed to break the law and bomb other nations causing hundreds of thousands of deaths because we know what other people are thinking. What a wonderful world.
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Please point to my bombing remark. Remember what you said about ‘knowing what other people think’ when you answer.
Limerick on June 19, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Limerick:
What if Russia thinks it “knows” that the US wants to nuke Iran, and that they would not like that because Iran supplies them with energy. Using your insane logic, then it is justified for Russia to nuke us today, because they “know” what we are thinking, and they “know” our intent? Or is it that only the US has the power to “know” what other people are thinking.
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM
Yeah, let us tax ourselves into prosperity like Europe.
Johan Klaus on June 19, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Then when an SS-18 or SS-27 is reported in the air we should seek to verify our intelligence and ask for support from the United Nations.
Limerick on June 19, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Limerick:
I give up. You are right. We should bomb Iran.
dave742 on June 19, 2008 at 9:46 AM
I think Captain Ed misunderestimates the BBC*.
It never occurred to the Beeb that Iran just might be stalling through the use of diplomacy.
I say there is no chance the beeb didn’t know what Iran was
doing. Rather, the beeb supports Iran to get nukes. They support
the defeat of the West. They’ve been like this since 2001.
It’s a bit of BH Obsama syndrome, humiliation would be good
for the Wet’s soul. So they think. They might not even think that far, they just hate the USA and want to see it nuked.
They haven’t understood Iran’s statements that London would
not escape righteous retribution, blah blah blah.
They’re not stupid – just evil.
davem on June 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM
“Analysts also believe Tehran is using delaying tactics to press ahead with atomic work.”
Nah, they wouldn’t do that, would they?
When Iran finally does make an atomic bomb, everyone will feign SURPRISE!
GarandFan on June 19, 2008 at 10:17 AM
They don’t necessarily burn oil. My power in Central PA is from Three Mile Island. There’s also hydroelectric in some parts of the country. I think most are coal-burning, though?
DrSteve on June 19, 2008 at 10:33 AM
About 50% from coal, 3% from oil.
I don’t really know why electric rates are going up so much. I read a comment the other day that it has to do with taxes on electricity, but have no idea if that is true.
I suspect it’s because the market can bear it. With home heating oil at $5/gal. or more, I’d be better off buying electric heaters for my home. So I think the utilities just raise their prices to match the price of other fuels. But I may be way offbase on this, but I’d love to know the reason.
JiangxiDad on June 19, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Got my own answer. My utility co. on Long Island generates it’s electricity from oil and natural gas. Great!
JiangxiDad on June 19, 2008 at 10:50 AM
There is only one honest, effective way to deal with Iran and that is with military force. Nothing else has, or will work.
JDPerren on June 19, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Just severely limit the importation of gasoline and Iran will cry. They don’t have the capacity to manufacture gasoline on their own and they have to import a significant amount.
Dannic on June 19, 2008 at 8:11 PM