{"id":8715,"date":"2010-12-06T15:29:24","date_gmt":"2010-12-06T23:29:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=8715"},"modified":"2010-12-06T15:29:24","modified_gmt":"2010-12-06T23:29:24","slug":"monday-iran-talking-points-15","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2010\/12\/06\/monday-iran-talking-points-15\/","title":{"rendered":"Monday Iran Talking Points"},"content":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog<\/a>: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for December 6th, 2010:<\/em><\/p>\n

National Review Online<\/a><\/em>: American Enterprise Institute<\/a> Resident Fellow Ali Alfoneh opines that expectations should be \u00e2\u20ac\u0153subzero\u00e2\u20ac\u009d for the P5+1 talks, continuing today in Geneva, since \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the Iranian negotiators in Geneva represent the Ahmadinejad government and possibly Khamenei, therefore they cannot deliver what they may promise.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Alfoneh says the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and not the civilian leadership represented in the Geneva talks, is responsible for most aspects of the nuclear program and \u00e2\u20ac\u0153has a vested interest in a low-intensity diplomatic crisis between the Islamic Republic and the United States, as it would pave the way for expansion of the IRGC\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s power within the Islamic Republic.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

The Weekly Standard<\/a><\/em>: Senior Foundation for Defense of Democracies<\/a> Fellow Reuel Marc Gerecht<\/a> warns that negotiations with Iran \u00e2\u20ac\u0153will never work.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d \u00e2\u20ac\u0153You cannot talk about Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s nuclear program without understanding it within a religious context,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d writes Gerecht. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Secularism has transformed Western <\/em>culture\u00e2\u20ac\u201dor, as Ahmadinejad and Khamenei would say, has permanently debased it.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Gerecht predicts that when the P5+1 meet in Geneva, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153If the Obama administration and the Europeans actually understood the opposing side, they would realize the sanctions now on the books are not nearly enough to make Khamenei blink.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d In a subtle call for military action, Gerecht concludes \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Islamic history is littered with defeated religious militants. But they were defeated<\/em>. They didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t arrive at a new understanding of their faith through diplomacy and negotiations.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

FrumForum<\/a> <\/em>\/ National Post<\/em><\/a>: David Frum<\/a> writes an anti-linkage piece describing how Arab capitals don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t care about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are instead consumed with Iran. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Governments in the region do not in fact care very much about the Israeli-Palestinian dispute,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he writes. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153They are transfixed by Iran. They are terrorized by the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d He suggests the United States should follow their lead and drop the Israeli-Palestinian conflict altogether until the Palestinians are ready to acquiesce to many of Israel\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s demands. On Iran, Frum is alarmed by the WikiLeaks revelations: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153WikiLeaks confirms and underscores the intransigence and belligerence of Iran.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Frum adds that Iran is \u00e2\u20ac\u0153even more dangerous\u00e2\u20ac\u009d than most analysts thought.<\/p>\n

Weekly Standard<\/a><\/em>: Stephen Hayes and Foundation for Defense of Democracies<\/a> fellow Thomas Joscelyn (formerly of the Claremont Institute<\/a>) write about the links between Al Qaeda and Iran in an article called \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The Iran Connection\u00e2\u20ac\u009d for the print edition of the Weekly Standard<\/em><\/a>. The two combed through WikiLeaks revelations in order to showcase accusations by Arab leaders that Iran has been visited by relatives of Bin Laden and harbors Al Qaeda members and their families. The article also point to the alleged support of extremist groups and anti-U.S. fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq. It notes that while the P5+1 talks will focus on Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s alleged nuclear weapons program, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the United States is concerned about the Iranian nuclear program not just because of nuclear weapons, but because of what the Iranian leadership plans to do with them.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d The authors conclude by invoking the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Nearly a decade after the 9\/11 attacks, not only do we have abundant evidence that Iran, the world\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s foremost state sponsor of terror, supports al Qaeda. We also have evidence that Iran actively assists terrorists and insurgents targeting our soldiers and diplomats in two war zones.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for December 6th, 2010: National Review Online: American Enterprise Institute Resident Fellow Ali Alfoneh opines that expectations should be \u00e2\u20ac\u0153subzero\u00e2\u20ac\u009d for the P5+1 talks, continuing today in Geneva, since \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the Iranian negotiators in Geneva represent the Ahmadinejad government and possibly Khamenei, therefore they cannot deliver what […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":71,"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-8715","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\/8715","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\/71"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8715"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8715\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8716,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8715\/revisions\/8716"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8715"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8715"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8715"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=8715"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}