{"id":8229,"date":"2010-09-28T12:38:36","date_gmt":"2010-09-28T20:38:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=8229"},"modified":"2010-09-28T12:38:36","modified_gmt":"2010-09-28T20:38:36","slug":"tuesday-iran-talking-points-8","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2010\/09\/28\/tuesday-iran-talking-points-8\/","title":{"rendered":"Tuesday Iran Talking Points"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>from <a href=\"http:\/\/www.lobelog.com\/\">LobeLog<\/a>: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for September 28th, 2010:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2010\/09\/28\/AR2010092801067.html\">Washington Post<\/a><\/em>: The Post picks up a report from the Associated Press about the upcoming arrival in Tehran of an Omani delegation to secure the release of the two remaining American hikers, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, detained by Iran under suspicion of espionage. Oman was also involved in the release of third hiker, Sarah Shourd, two weeks ago. The timeline for the arrival of the Omani delegation is at odds with an article in the Iranian newspaper Jomhuri-e Eslami, as <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2010\/09\/27\/world\/middleeast\/27iran.html\">reported over the weekend by the <em>New York Times<\/em><\/a>. The detention of the three \u00e2\u20ac\u201d now two \u00e2\u20ac\u201d Americans has been a point of tension between the U.S. and Iran for more than a year since their arrest in the mountains along the Iraqi-Iranian border.<\/p>\n<p><em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtontimes.com\/news\/2010\/sep\/27\/backing-diplomacy-with-force-passive-us-response-t\/\">Washington Times<\/a><\/em>: In an op-ed subtitled \u00e2\u20ac\u0153passive response to Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s proxy wars needs to end,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d <a href=\"http:\/\/www.rightweb.irc-online.org\/profile\/American_Foreign_Policy_Council\">American Foreign Policy Council<\/a> vice president and neocon pundit <a href=\"http:\/\/www.rightweb.irc-online.org\/profile\/Berman_Ilan\">Ilan Berman<\/a> urges the U.S. to actively and militarily engage Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s alleged proxies operating in Iraq and Afghanistan. Berman says the U.S. needs to publicly lay out their opposition to Iranian involvement in those countries and secure their borders with Iran. He adds: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153A range of other irregular warfare initiatives can be harnessed as needed to help dismantle, disrupt and deter Iranian activities in both theaters.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Berman thinks this will restore U.S. credibility and \u00e2\u20ac\u0153convince Iran that a military option, while not desirable, is both viable and inescapable if Tehran does not change course.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n<p><em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.nationalreview.com\/corner\/247890\/obsessive-compulsive-israeli-settlement-talks-benjamin-weinthal\">National Review Online<\/a><\/em>: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.rightweb.irc-online.org\/profile\/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Democracies\">Foundation for Defense of Democracies<\/a> fellow Benjamin Weinthal writes that the Obama administration\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s \u00e2\u20ac\u0153intense preoccupation\u00e2\u20ac\u009d with ending Israeli settlement construction resembles \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the meaningless rituals of obsessive-compulsive disorder.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Weinthal echoes <a href=\"http:\/\/www.lobelog.com\/reverse-linkage-debunked-iraq-war-talking-point-is-back\/\">the discredited reverse linkage argument<\/a> that a more assertive strategy towards Iran would halt Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s nuclear program and its support of Hamas and Hezbollah: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the key impediments to meaningful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d For him, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153In short, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s the Iranian regime \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and not the construction of housing projects \u00e2\u20ac\u201d that is the be-all and end-all of obstacles to peace in the region.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n<p><em><a href=\"http:\/\/mideast.foreignpolicy.com\/posts\/2010\/09\/24\/indias_iran_calculus\">Foreign Policy<\/a><\/em>: Raja Karthikeya looks at where India stands on Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s nuclear ambitions, concluding it is not a simple answer. India believes a nuclear weapons possessing Iran would be destabilizing, but sees Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s impetus focused on Arab and Sunni threats rather than Israel. India has chosen to align itself with Arab calls for a denuclearized Middle East in an attempt to address terrorism and energy interests. India will continue to support the UN sanctions and oppose U.S. sanctions because: they would be detrimental to the population of Iran; they would impede Indian companies doing business outside Iran; and India has a tradition of opposing sanctions-based diplomacy. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The majority of Indian strategists see unilateral sanctions as a path to war,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Karthikeya concludes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for September 28th, 2010: Washington Post: The Post picks up a report from the Associated Press about the upcoming arrival in Tehran of an Omani delegation to secure the release of the two remaining American hikers, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, detained by Iran under suspicion [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":75,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-8229","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8229","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/75"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8229"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8229\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8230,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8229\/revisions\/8230"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8229"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8229"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8229"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=8229"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}