"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Iran scoffs at US strike talk - Hmmm

never trust a poorly shaven military officer
"Iran scoffed on Thursday at the idea of U.S. military action to halt its nuclear program and gave no hint of compromise before a visit by U.N. inspectors to assess Iranian compliance with Security Council demands."

I couldn't have put the reason better than the one given by Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar," "If you take into account the fact that they are not doing anything, this shows it is just talk." This is a good point, but it is not just that the U.S. talks and takes no action as Iraq should be proof of that, but that the U.N. is a stumbling block to actually accomplishing anything other than talking.

At the moment, the Security Council is waiting on the report from the IAEA due April 28 "on whether Tehran has halted uranium enrichment and answered IAEA questions about its nuclear activities in line with a 30-day deadline set by the council."

The U.N. takes actions like waiting for a report, even as Iran announces to the world regarding its enrichment success. When 4/28 rolls around there will be more discussion and negotiation, then finally agreement that more discussions take place. We will hear about positive movement, this however will actually be with regard to diplomatic digestive regularity. It will be agreed that the IAEA should go back to the drawing board and report again, either sometime in late May or early June.

"China and Russia, the council's other two veto-holders, doubt punitive measures will work." The reasons for this are two-fold: 1) Neither of the two nations want to lose business with the Republic, so it is only so much self-fulfilling propesy and 2) both nations will continue doing business with the Republic, although it will be a little stickier if sanctions were agreed to.

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin, "every country has the right to decide for itself with whom and in what way it cooperates with other states," adding that only the U.N. Security Council could override this principle.'

Knowing full well that the U.N. Security Council is a farce allows for confident, principled statements like these; as Russia would never force demands on a sovereign nation.

Finally, Reuters points out that "President Bush has vowed to stop Iran from getting atomic weapons and has refused to rule out military options, including nuclear strikes, if diplomacy fails." The including "nuclear strikes" is pointed out so that no one is confused about who the "bad guy" is here.

tag: tag: tag: tag:


© blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks