Rice’s Offer to Iran Is No Breakthrough


The press is heralding Condoleezza Rice’s offer of direct talks with Iran as a signal of a new, more moderate, US approach to the standoff between the two nations, but there is little in her words to suggest any real change in Bush administration policy. What Rice actually said was: “[A]s soon as Iran fully and verifiably suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities, the United States will come to the table.”

The Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottak on state television responded by saying that Iran “will not give up our nation’s natural right [to enrichment], we will not hold talks over it. But we are ready to hold talks over mutual concerns.” The BBC reports he also said, that if the US “is interested in any change in the existing situation, it should change its behaviour and behave properly and logically”.

In the United States, Rice’s statement has been hyped as a major new overture to Iran. Bush said, “I believe this problem can be solved diplomatically and I’m going to give it every effort to do so.”

Yet at the same time, the US is readying a set of tough demands, including sanctions that would affect the world oil markets It hopes Europe will embrace these sanctions in future dealings with Iran if the latter doesn’t abandon its plans for nuclear development.

Iran says it wants nuclear energy for power. The US says it wants to make bombs. The standard neo-conservative line on Iran has not changed. It argues there must be regime change, forced by military intervention if need be. According to this view, diplomacy is little more than a PR maneuver to demonstrate to the rest of the world that we have tried as hard as we could to negotiate with Iran, but failed. The same approach, of course, was used in the run-up to the Iraq war.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.