An Iranian Shift?

July 6, 3:54 PMProgressive Politics ExaminerJay McDonough

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Progressive Politics Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Earlier this week it appeared Iran was making a subtle, but noticeable shift in the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program.  The P5+1 group (permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany) had submitted a proposal (essentially the same one submitted two years ago, but including some unknown incentives for Iran) and were awaiting a response from the Iranians.  Advance word was that Iran was requesting more negotiations with the European Union Foreign Minister Javier Solana and public statements from Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki were oblique, but promising in tone that some shift had occurred with the Iranians.

The Iranians formally responded Friday to Solana.  Public statements from the negotiating parties were similar; careful, no detail, and with a considerably reduced level of rhetoric.  From the NY Times:

 “We intend to study the Iranian response,” said Gordon D. Johndroe, deputy White House press secretary, in a statement. He said the United States would discuss the letter with the five other governments — Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China — “before responding formally.”

Similarly, a British Foreign Office official said, “We have received the Iranian response and we are consulting” with the other governments before responding.

Foreign Minister Mottaki appeared on Fareed Zakaria's GPS this morning and, following the interview, CNN analysts agreed Mr. Mottaki's tone was markedly more conciliatory then in the past; that Iran seemed to be now interested in, at least, "talking about talking".  CNN's Christine Amanpour reported the P5+1 proposal included a six week moratorium on Iranian nuclear expansion in exchange for no further UN sanctions, the "freeze for freeze" approach. 

Christine Amanpour also noted this morning the "freeze for freeze" proposal now being considered is nearly identical to a proposal made two years ago.   At the time, it's thought Iran had 90 working centrifuges enriching uranium.  They now have over 3,000 centrifuges performing uranium enrichment.  That's referred to as a missed opportunity.

Iranian political changes also suggest there may be an opportunity for more productive negotiations.  The re-emergence of Ali Larijani bodes well for improved dialog with the west.  Larijani had been a senior Iranian foreign policy figure who was fired by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.   Larijani was just elected to speaker of the Iranian Parliament by a large margin, signaling Parliament's discontent with Ahmadinejad and, perhaps, a willingness on Larijani's part to challenge Ahmadinejad in next June's presidential election.  While Larijani is well connected within the Iranian theocracy, he is also known as being a moderate and pragmatist. 

With any luck, the sane, adult forces within the Bush Administration who prevailed in the recent, successful negotiations with disarming North Korea will be able to flex their muscles and assert themselves in the negotiations with Iran.   It seems obvious the White House's saber rattling towards Iran is having little effect (and is likely the reason the "freeze for freeze" proposal 2 years ago was rejected), just as the saber rattling towards North Korea stymied initial progress on negotiations. 

One would think President Bush would be very interested in completing a peaceful negotiation to the Iranian nuclear problem before he leaves office.  That would sure make a great entry in the Legacy section of his resume.