{"id":8969,"date":"2011-01-24T14:18:20","date_gmt":"2011-01-24T22:18:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=8969"},"modified":"2011-01-24T14:18:20","modified_gmt":"2011-01-24T22:18:20","slug":"monday-iran-talking-points-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2011\/01\/24\/monday-iran-talking-points-20\/","title":{"rendered":"Monday Iran Talking Points"},"content":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog<\/a>: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 24th, 2011:<\/em><\/p>\n

The Washington Post<\/a><\/em>: Jennifer Rubin<\/a> blogs, after the conclusion of the P5+1 talks in Istanbul, that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Instead of talking to an Iranian regime that has shown no interest in negotiations \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and, at the same time, derives legitimacy from the negotiations \u00e2\u20ac\u201d maybe there are more fruitful actions that we and our allies could be taking.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Such actions include \u00e2\u20ac\u0153stressing that the military option remains on the table; making regime change the official policy of the U.S.; working to isolate Iran from international bodies and heightening the focus on Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s human rights abuses.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d She concludes that the administration \u00e2\u20ac\u0153has to stop trying to engage a regime that refuses to be engaged.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal<\/a><\/em>: Amir Taheri opines that sanctions are squeezing the Iranian economy \u00e2\u20ac\u201d \u00e2\u20ac\u0153much of Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s industry depends on imported parts, many of which are now on the U.N.\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s forbidden list because of suspected dual use\u00e2\u20ac\u009d \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and sanctions are slowing the nuclear program. Taheri argues that sanctions are far more effective than typically thought and \u00e2\u20ac\u0153the evidence is that [sanctions are] hurting the economy and could weaken a regime that is also facing a tenacious internal opposition for the first time since 1981.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

The Jerusalem Post<\/a><\/em>: Tovah Lazaroff excerpts former British prime minister Tony Blair\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s comments before the British investigative panel on the Iraq War. Blair said, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The West has to get out of this \u00e2\u20ac\u201c what I think is a wretched policy, or posture of apology, for believing that we are causing what the Iranians are doing, or what these extremists are doing. We are not [causing this].\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Lazaroff looks for Israeli responses to Blair\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s remarks and reports, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153an Israeli official noted that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu had said on a number of occasions that a military option with respect to Iran should be on the table.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Lazaroff continued, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Netanyahu is of the opinion that for Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s nuclear program to be halted, Teheran must believe there is a credible military option, the official told The Jerusalem Post<\/em>.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 24th, 2011: The Washington Post: Jennifer Rubin blogs, after the conclusion of the P5+1 talks in Istanbul, that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Instead of talking to an Iranian regime that has shown no interest in negotiations \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and, at the same time, derives legitimacy from the negotiations \u00e2\u20ac\u201d […]<\/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-8969","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\/8969","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=8969"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8969\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8970,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8969\/revisions\/8970"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8969"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8969"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8969"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=8969"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}