MotherJones.com | MoJoBlog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: Iran Becomes Campaign Issue, Edwards First to State Position

« The Death Penalty: Still "Freakish" After all These Years | Blog Index | The Planet is Dying, Exxon is Unabashed »

Iran Becomes Campaign Issue, Edwards First to State Position

The Prospect's Ezra Klein cornered John Edwards yesterday and got him to clarify some of the tough speechifying he has been doing in front of pro-Israel groups like AIPAC. The concern Klein had was that Edwards' extremely strong support of Israel could be interpreted as more saber-rattling at Iran, and this would indicate that Edwards didn't properly learn the lesson of Iraq -- namely, "toppling Middle Eastern governments, occupying their societies, and trying to impose pluralistic democracy is an almost impossible endeavor, one with far more potential for catastrophe than completion" -- and that it wasn't that Iraq was a mistake, but that invading or attacking anyone in that region, most importantly Iran, invites disaster.

In forcing Edwards to state where he stands on Iran, Klein has made Iran a campaign issue: every serious candidate will have to state his or her plan for dealing with the country. Here's Edwards:

...you have a radical leader, Ahmadinejad, who is politically unstable in his own country. The political elite have begun to leave him, the religious leaders have begun to leave him, the people aren’t happy with him, for at least two reasons: one, they don’t like his sort of bellicose rhetoric, and second, he was elected on a platform of economic reform and helping the poor and the middle class, and he hasn’t done anything. In fact, while he was traveling, the leaders of the legislature sent him a letter saying, 'when are you gonna pay attention to the economic problems of our country.' So, I think we have an opportunity here that we need to be taking advantage of.

First, America should be negotiating directly with Iran, which Bush won’t do. Second, we need to get our European friends, not just the banking system, but the governments themselves, to help us do two things -- put a group, a system of carrots and sticks on the table. The carrots are, we’ll make nuclear fuel available to you, we’ll control the cycle, but you can use it for any civilian purpose. Second, an economic package, which I don’t think has been seriously proposed up until now. Because there economy is already struggling, and it would be very attractive to them. And then on the flip side, the stick side, to say if you don’t do that, there are going to be more serious economic sanctions than you’ve seen up until now. Now of course we need the Europeans for this, cause they’re the ones with the economic relationship with Iran, but the whole purpose of this is number one to get an agreement. Number two, to isolate this radical leader so that the moderates and those within the country who want to see Iran succeed economically, can take advantage of it.

Now that’s on the one hand, the flip side of this is what happens if America were to militarily strike Iran? Well you take this unstable, radical leader, and you make him a hero -- that’s the first thing that’ll happen. The Iranian people will rally around him. The second thing that will happen is they will retaliate. And they have certainly some potential for retaliating here in the United States through some of these terrorist organizations they’re close to, but we’ve got over a hundred thousand people right next door. And most people believe that they have an infrastructure for retaliation inside Iraq. So, that’s the second thing that’ll happen. And the third thing is there are a lot of analysts who believe that an air strike or a missile strike is not enough to be successful. To be successful we’d actually have to have troops on the ground, and where in the world would they come from? So, to me, this is the path...

The emphasis is mine, of course. The blogosphere will deconstruct this in the coming days, I'm sure, but Edwards' main points are now clear: negotiate with Iran, use a combination of incentives and threats, and don't make the mistake of attacking militarily.

Comments

Perhaps he is right? PLEASE not another senseless war.

Posted by: Marcella Perry on 02/03/07 at 11:12 PM

A LETTER FOR PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Here is a letter I wrote to the Prime Minister of Canada as well as several members of the people listed here.

TO: Jewish People Policy Planning Institute and friends

David Harris, American Jewish Committee;
Howard Kohr AIPAC;
Malcolm Hoenlein, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations
Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League;
Morley Levine from Hadassah;
Dennis Ross, former Clinton special envoy to the Middle East;
Irwin Cotler former Canadian justice minister;
Jehuda Reinharz Brandeis University President;
Israel Maimon Israeli Cabinet Secretary representing the Israeli government;
Yitzhak Molcho, who was formerly Benjamin Netanyahu's political advisor.

Jewish People Policy Planning Institute was represented by:
Dr. Yehezkel Dror,
Avinoam Bar-Yosef Institute Director General and
Avi Gil former Israeli Foreign Ministry director general.

I am troubled by the continuing conflicts in the Middle East. The unneccessary United States' war in Iraq, the failed proxy war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, along with the continuing conflict in the Palestinian Territories and the Bush White House "no dialogue" stance with Syria and Iran have flooded the Middle East with blood.

An article in Israel's Haaretz newspaper by Shmuel Rosner on Nov 4 is entitled "Kissinger powwows with Jewish leaders on Iranian threat to Israel". The article states that in a meeting last week in New York, one of a series of meetings on planning the future of the Jewish people, former U.S. secretary of state Henry Kissinger took part. Kissinger had accepted an invitation from the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute to be one of a group of leaders tasked with setting strategic goals for improving the situation of the Jewish people. Last week's discussion centered on the Iranian threat to Israel.

A second article in Haaretz on Nov 4 is entitled "Report: 6 Arab countries announce plans for nuclear programs". According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), six Arab states have announced plans to embark on programs to develop civilian nuclear energy programs: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates. The report states that the move, which follows the failure by the West to curb Iran's controversial nuclear program, may signal an upcoming rapid spread of nuclear reactors in the Middle East and North Africa.

The Bush White House failed Middle East policy have only strenghtened Iran. Moreover, it could be argued that an attack on Iran will convince these aforementioned 6 states to pursue civilian nuclear energy programs more rapidly. A strike against Iran, would only mean more long term nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and North Africa.

Moreover I would suggest:
(1) Exclude Henry Kissinger and his geopolitical concepts. The advise from Henry Kissinger and his "geopolitical visions"(Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, now Bush's advisor in Iraq) is not in the best interests of the people of Israel, Lebanon, and the middle East. Unless of course the concept of torture and perpetual war is envisioned. Kissinger told Bush and Cheney that: “Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.”

Vietnam: During nearly two decades of fighting, approximately 2-3 million Vietnamese were killed. America lost 58,000 soldiers. Even former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, hinted that he made mistakes in Vietnam in his book, “The Fog Of War.”

Cambodia: His geopolitical policies led to the rise in power of the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot’s killing fields where 20 percent of Cambodia’s population—-nearly 2 million people—- were tortured and executed.

(2) Reject President Bush’s Middle East policy vision. It is misguided and doomed. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have bungled the Middle East portfolio. Even the US Army Times have called for the removal of Rumsfeld. Chaos will haunt Israel.

(3) Refuse US Christian evangelicals thinking of racist intolerance and perpetual war. The irony of the alliance between Christian Zionists and Jewish Zionists is that the one ideology promotes the ultimate destruction of the other. Christian Zionists have pushed the militarist policies of both Israel and the U.S. in an effort to secure the Holy Land in preparation for the coming of the "promised land." As part of this strategy, the U.S. occupation of Iraq is deemed absolutely necessary.

(4) Reject Avigdor Lieberman ideology of hatred and division. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has appointed Avigdor Lieberman, from the hawkish Yisrael Beiteinu party, as deputy prime minister. Lieberman would be responsible for "strategic threats," such as Iran's nuclear ambitions. A former bar bouncer, Lieberman is detested for his strong-arm tactics. He has grown into a potent political force, in large part because of his popularity with Israel's sizable community of immigrants from the former Soviet Union. He has called for stripping Israeli Arabs of citizenship, executing lawmakers for talking to Hamas and bombing Palestinian population centers.

Concurrently I would call for the following:
(5) Call for President Bush to stand down U.S. military execises in the Persian Gulf. There is a massive concentration of US naval power in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. Two US naval strike groups are deployed: USS Enterprise, and USS Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group. The naval strike groups have been assigned to fighting the "global war on terrorism."
(6) Call for Iran to stop it's ongoing war games. Dubbed "The Great Prophet 2," Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) tried new generation of anti-helicopter weapons and other military hardware during the ongoing military maneuvers.
(7) Call for China and Russia to cancel plans for 2007 war games. Codenamed Peace Mission Rubezh 2007, the war games will be staged in Chebarkul in the Russian Urals. Participating countries include: Russia, China, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.

A First Step Recommendation:
Olmert should accept the Saudi plan as a first step to a negotiated settlement. Israel's Prime Minister Olmert must negotiate a peace treaty between Israel and the Arab world. He can use the Saudi plan. It calls for a comprehensive peace between Israel and the Arab world, based on a complete Israeli withdrawal from lands it captured in the 1967 Mideast war, namely the West Bank, Gaza Strip, east Jerusalem and Golan Heights.The Saudi initiative was adopted at an Arab League summit in Beirut, Lebanon, in March 2002. For the first time, it offered Israel normal relations with the entire Arab world in exchange for a complete withdrawal from captured territory.

Israel's Prime Minister Olmert must be an independent thinker with bold initiatives towards peace. As Benjamin B. Ferencz advocates "Law. Not war."

Stop feeding the circle of hatred, killing and violence. Peace is the only option. Egypt and Israel live in peace. Jordan and Israel live in peace. Israel and Lebanon can live in peace. Israel and the Middle East can live in peace.

I hope that you use your influence and help the cause of a negotiated peace as the only long term viable way to stop the madness in the Middle East.

Paul Malouf
Montreal Canada
(November 2006)

Posted by: Paul Malouf on 02/04/07 at 8:18 AM

Unfortunately, I don't foresee a peaceful solution to the Iran issue. Neither the US or Iran are willing to compromise. Meanwhile, you have Israel, which, has already been threatened by the Iranian president of being annihilated or wiped of the map. The country appears to continue to build it's nuclear facilities. It seems like they want to get the Nukes first and then talk just to have some leverage. I don't think the US or Israel will let this happen. I personally don't think it's a good idea to have nukes in the control of a religeous extremist like Amadenajad or however you spell his stupid name. Sorry to be the spoiler but I bet money we'll hit Iran with surgical airstrikes on nuclear facilities just to buy some time. The US is in too much of a mess right now in Iraq and Iran is using this situation to their advantage. I'm feeling a little hawkish on Iran. Never thought Iraq was a good idea. Afganistan was understandable.

Posted by: Goody Gumdrops on 02/05/07 at 12:01 PM

I sure hope that we do not have another war. Iran is 4 times as big as Iraq. If we can't win in Iraq, it is insanity to take on four Iraqs. Not to mention the fact that there are close to 500,000 Iranians in America and many of them are nationalists and would be tempted to make 9-11 look small. The Iranians would close the sea lanes that transport 20% of the world's oil and destroy the Saudi Arabian oil fields. Russia and China would be unhappy. China gets their oil from this area. Only a madman would go to war with Iran. Give peace a chance. Peace is our only option.

Posted by: Dr. Fleischer on 02/05/07 at 7:30 PM