Green Room

What if the Other Guy Doesn’t Want to Talk? Iran, Obama and Negotiations.

posted at 10:52 pm on September 7, 2009 by

During last year’s campaign, one of the main themes President Obama tried to use against Bush, even though Bush was not running for office back in 2008, was Obama’s intent to negotiate with Iran, first “without preconditions” later modified to something akin to some conditions, maybe one or two.  The campaign ended in November.  Now what?

This past April, the Obama administration announced the US and its European allies are preparing proposals that would shift strategy toward Iran by dropping a longstanding American insistence that Tehran rapidly shut down nuclear facilities during the early phases of negotiations over its atomic program, according to officials involved in the discussions.

As Charles Krauthammer pointed out this past June,  “President Obama repeatedly insists that American foreign policy be conducted with modesty and humility. Above all, there will be no more “dictating” to other countries. We should “forge partnerships as opposed to simply dictating solutions,” he told the G-20 summit. In Middle East negotiations, he told al-Arabiya, America will henceforth “start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating.”

Well, seems Iran has tossed a major load of caltrops in the path of those who believe we can negotiate our way to stop Iran from achieving a deliverable weapons system within the decade.  We are listening.  Listening to each and every pronouncement from the likes of Ahmadinejad and Chavez, Kim Chong-il, Putin and all the rest.  Seems it is perfectly OK for them to dictate terms to us…we have to be humble and listen…is that the Obama foreign policy rubric these days?

Iranian President Ahmadinejad , hot off his “I love Chavez” weekend meeting with Hugo,  said Monday that Iran will neither halt uranium enrichment nor negotiate over its “nuclear rights.”

So, the question now is…what next?  The other guy doesn’t want to talk…so what are the real options left to us?

Theory, and wonderfully crafted ideas about hope and change at some point have to be articulated into actions and reality.  Humility before a major force is what leads to defeat.  Listening is not a solution.

Iran has continued to cozy up to North Korea, and now Venezuela has offered Venezuelan gasoline to Iran, to offset perhaps the weakest link in Iran’s economy, a lack of gasoline refinery capability.   Did the Administration hear that, if they were listening at all?

Iran just coasts along, friends with Chavez and the Kim Dynasty, and Russia, and China, and a lot of other nations who see no problem with Iran becoming a nuke power?

We just stand back and wait for some sort of fantasy opportunity that maybe Ahmadinejad will have a “come to Jesus moment” and decide that maybe having nukes isn’t such a wonderful idea?  Humility?

While this Administration has been concentrating on forcing Obamacare down our throats, the rest of the world has been moving right along…and getting more dangerous as each day passes.  There is a weakness seen in today’s America.  And those who are noticing this weakness have no qualms about taking advantage of our fratricide and seeking their own ends.   Our well-being is the farthest thought from their minds.

So, again, the questions to the Obama Administration…how do you plan to negotiate with a nation that has no desire at all to negotiate?  And, in the absence of negotiations, what will your Administration do to prevent Iran from establishing a deployable nuclear capability?   The sound of crickets chirping from the Oval Office is getting somewhat annoying.

Recently in the Green Room:



Trackback URL


I don’t even have the heart to rub this in the face of the Obamabots who gave me the “why are we afraid to talk to them” bullshit back during the campaign. This is going to end very badly. As in, the kind of badly that involves large numbers of lost human lives.

Cylor on September 7, 2009 at 11:34 PM

If the other side doesn’t want to talk, then perhaps they will talk about what needs to happen before they will talk, you know, talks about talks but not actual talks.

The left has this notion that talking, in and of itself, is a good thing. In the meantime, people die. Over the long haul the “peaceniks” kill more people but in smaller amounts over a longer period of time.

Sometimes war IS the answer and it causes a decisive result that is final. It is “peace talks” that lead to an ambiguous non-end that drags forever. How many North Koreans have died since the “peace” treaty was signed? But look at the economy of Viet Nam. A final end was put to the situation with a clear winner and a loser and they have been able to move forward. Non-peace peace gives a never-ending income to “diplomats” who work for decades maintaining that peace. How many careers have been made out of the Korea problem or the middle east problem?

Just get it overwith.

crosspatch on September 7, 2009 at 11:59 PM

Iran just coasts along, friends with Chavez and the Kim Dynasty, and Russia, and China, and a lot of other nations who see no problem with Iran becoming a nuke power?

What a lot of us don’t understand is that now we’re also one those countries.

erp on September 8, 2009 at 7:46 AM