The United States' relationship with Iran seems to be hanging in a delicate diplomatic balance. There's the news about the possible threat of Iran's nuclear program and reports about its involvement in the sectarian violence in Iraq.
And yet, a recent National Intelligence Estimate states that Iran has halted its nuclear weapons design program in 2003, and did so "in response to international pressure," which, it says, "indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs."
Journalist Barbara Slavin and Historian Abbas Milani offer an inside look at Iran's politics, history and culture during a conversation featured on Word for Word.
During that discussion, Milani says:
"Iran is the only Muslim country in the world where we know empirically, anecdotally that the people are pro-America. It's the only Muslim country in the Middle East where the street is relatively pro-American .... After September 11th, it was the only country where there was a spontaneous show of grief and solidarity with the American people."
What's your take on the U.S. - Iranian relationship now? Is Iran the new Iraq in U.S. foreign policy? Slavin and Milani discuss Iran's vulnerability and how the corruption in the Iranian regime affects its citizens -- how does hearing about Iranian culture and daily life as Slavin and Milani describe it impact your understanding about the issue?
__________________________
Larissa Anderson
Producer, Word for Word
MPR | APM
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 26
Reform from Iran will come from within. The problem is that most of their business people and intelegensia from the schools have fled the country. So, they are becoming another 3rd world country full of radical Muslims mad at us when they should really be mad at the rulers.
Even though this is a featured thread within Gather, this is not something new. Our government, this Administration, has been doing everything they can think of to let the people of Iran, and Americans, know we are not their enemy. We have serious disagreements, and strong commitments to that area that demands Iran never has a nuclear bomb.
The Iranian people in large part, not all, really want personal freedoms. Even though the Shah was not a good leader, hell he was a corrupt tyrant. Yet the Iranian people under this current system of governance, those who remember life back then, now know they never had it so good. This style of governance is deadly and extremely dangerous. So my personal view on a absolute non-nuclear Iran has not changed.
That article you mentioned said, Iran suspended its weapons grade enrichment, and nothing more. Specialists from around the world have stood up and said in essence, "Big deal, in less then three months Iran can be back to full nuclear weapons grade enrichment." So that means that study disproves nothing, and fear should still be on the table when it comes to Iran and its nuclear ambitions. Especially when it, (Iranians Government), has stated Israel and the Big Satan (The United States) must and will cease to exist.
Um… I beg your pardon!
Israel has told the United States their is a time line and a line Israel will not allow Iran to cross. Even though those words in that report read well on paper, in reality they are not worth the paper they are written on.
The world is not safer because Iran has paused its, "known about", nuclear ambitions. If anything this world is on pause to see what the next President will do, because Iran knows this President aint just a paper tiger cowboy. He will bomb them back to dark ages. With my full support I might add!
--CM
The people of Iran appear ready and waiting for us to free them, at least base on the article above. Just think soon they will be throwing flowers at your feet and the price for a tank of gas in the U.S. will start to go down below $1.75 per gallon. Just like G.W. told us and I believe him don't you?
We just can't trust the U.N. , France, Germany and just forget about Russia. No fellows looks like we'll have to take care of these bad guys all by ourselves. Are you with me? Not to worry, Sen. McCain says, if it takes a 100 years he'll bring us back with honor.
Now, Erin you take point and you Winston follow up behind him, I got you guy covered back here.
Now! Move out and remember it's not about oil but spreading freedom.
With five years under our belt were'er getting better at this, Iraq, Afganistan was just practice, so lets go ahead, move out and take out the 'big dog' Iran.
Erin, Winston where are you guys?
Oh, you left and you want to work for Blackwater. But why?
You say they pay better. hmmm. But can we afford this, I mean the U.S. government and taxpayers.
Oh, will just barrow it from the Chinese and pay them back on their bonds sometime in the future.
Makes sense to me.
It would be another travesty if we attacked Iran. I hope Bush is stopped in his tracks before he can carry out this terrible preemptive attack plan which he has had from his very first State of the Union speech and probably since he had so much time on his hands while not serving his country in the Air National Guard.
What exactly do you want? They were asked to halt their nuclear program and they did that. Still not good enough? And guess what- people have been giving the same timelines for full weapons grade enrichment since before we invaded Iraq. Only three months? They said that 60 months ago!
Actually 60 Minutes did air a story on the whistleblower but it was classified shortly thereafter. If you search for "Sibel Edmonds" on YouTube, you should be able to see it in parts because thanks to the people reposting it after it gets deleted.
When you talk about Iran, I wonder if you're talking about the administration or the citizens? This is something Barbara Slavin and Abbas Milani who appear on Word for Word talk about. Slavin just wrote a book on U.S-Iran relations called "Bitter Friends, Bosom Enemies" and Milani is an Iranian-American historian. They discuss at length the difference between Iranian citizens and the Iranian adminstration, how the Iranian citizens feel about their administration and how they feel about the United States. I'd be interested to hear how what they have to say meshes with your thoughts.
What exactly do you want? They were asked to halt their nuclear program and they did that. Still not good enough?
No that is not good enough. Stopping their entire program will be.
Larissa Anderson,
When you talk about Iran, I wonder if you're talking about the administration or the citizens?
From the books I have read, most of the citizens of Iran feel pretty dang warmly towards the United States, love our crazy ass culture. Their government threaten to destroy us daily. I don't understand the confusion. I thought I made that clear earlier.
Richard P.
Charles is an arm chair warrior he is ready to drop the bombs on Iran with his full support. So where will the U.S. stop?
Arm chair warrior, that's funny. Last I read you're still a full time puss! Now, where will the US stop? When all our enemies are dead. Simple, right!?
Funny how Tim McVeigh seems like an all American kid.
So why didn't stop him when you had the chance?
Talk about a puss, you don't know who the real enemy is..."Do you feel lucky punk, well do ya? Go ahead, make my day!'
The moment I am ready to live without nuclear power is when I will have the right to tell people living in a desert that they should not use the cleanest, most efficient source of energy known to man. Otherwise I am a hypocrite.
Because I am aware that you choose not to think for yourself, I will do some of your thinking for you: Considering our attack capabilities, don't you think that our enemies would fear us more if they had nuclear power plants? Allowing Iran to have 21st Century comforts will mean that they will stand to lose more over bad foreign policy decisions. Imagine how angry they would be at their leaders if they lost air-conditioning for a decade. In order for them to get that way there must be proliferation of air-conditioning at good prices.
Being conservative doesn't mean you have to be an idiot.
We assess with moderate confidence that convincing the Iranian leadership to forgo the eventual development of nuclear weapons will be difficult given the linkage many within the leadership probably see between nuclear weapons development and Iran's key national security and foreign policy objectives, and given Iran's considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons. In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons—and such a decision is inherently reversible.
Or what about this?
We assess with moderate confidence that Iran probably would use covert facilities— rather than its declared nuclear sites—for the production of highly enriched uranium for a weapon. A growing amount of intelligence indicates Iran was engaged in covert uranium conversion and uranium enrichment activity, but we judge that these efforts probably were halted in response to the fall 2003 halt, and that these efforts probably had not been restarted through at least mid-2007.
You do see those words "probably" don't you??
This one stood alone, just the one sentence--
We assess with high confidence that Iran has the scientific, technical and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so.
If it decides to do so.... well, isn't that peachy....
Iran is a threat, always has been a threat since the student revolution, *you know, those pro american peace loving kids in college* and is going to be a threat into the foreseeable future.
That is so funny you using Dirty Harry, when their is no way in hell you agree with that character and his philosophy!
--CM
You have the nerve to say I'm an idiot and that I need to think for myself, yet you post statements like this which show just how little you comprehend anything, let alone what this entire conversation is about.
The moment I am ready to live without nuclear power is when I will have the right to tell people living in a desert that they should not use the cleanest, most efficient source of energy known to man.
Listen here ya little liberal twit. This has nothing to do with Iran being able to generate whatever power sources it needs to supply its people. NOPE! This has everything to do with Iran then taking that material running it through centrifuges and then taking that material placing it in a missile/rocket and using it on Israel. Or them giving a small one to their henchmen across the globe. Thereby making all the creature comforts disappear in an atomic reaction that is scarier then anything we can even comprehend. Not freaken power needs. But a nuclear response/war hitting every corner of the globe killing billions! Here let me put it into a context your simple liberal mind can comprehend. You think there is global warming now, wait until five thousand little suns start glowing all over this planet. Little helpless deer and Owl's, seals Bengal Tigers, and lions and bear oh my… will disappear in an instant. That's what Iran not having nuclear power/weapons is all about!
And you have the nerve to call me an idiot. Be careful twit, when pointing that crooked finger at others because you have three more pointed right back at you.
Charles Marcello
I almost missed this:
Right! But when your enemy lives next door will you kill them too?
Damn right I will! If I find out there are people living next to me who are about to go out and kill innocent people. Ya damn right! I will fight them!
And this was just stupid!
Funny how Tim McVeigh seems like an all American kid.
So why didn't stop him when you had the chance?
Wow, just wow!
Charles Marcello
Francis, I will present you with what I consider the most convincing counterargument to such points. The Economist recently stated this:
"Unchanged is the suspicion hanging over Iran's nuclear intentions. Mr Ahmadinejad has never been able to explain convincingly why Iran is the first country to have built a uranium-enrichment plant without having a single civilian nuclear-power reactor that could burn its output (the ones Russia has all but completed at Bushehr will operate only on Russian-made fuel). He says he wants to build lots more power plants. But learning to enrich uranium—a hugely costly venture—still makes questionable economic sense for Iran, since it lacks sufficient natural uranium to keep them going and would have to import the stuff. And although the 3,000 fast-spinning centrifuge machines it has up and running at Natanz are enriching only to the low levels used in civilian reactors, running the material through a few more times, or reconfiguring the centrifuge cascades, could soon produce uranium of weapons grade."
It is such suspicious activity that demands extreme caution and consistent pressure when dealing with Iran. They may very well be a threat.
Also, to respond to the initial question posed in this article, about our relations with Iran and the people of Iran, there was an interesting article in yesterday's financial times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e05324a8-df0a-11dc-91d4-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1) about the lack of domestic debate in Iran about the nation's nuclear program.
We have all been dutifully been informed of the National Intelligence Estimate that tells us that Iran ceased it's nuclear weapons program in 2003 which is exactly what they have been saying since 2003 in the face of threats of war. It is the ignorance of what you are saying which is what the President has been saying the whole time that is painting a picture of the United States of America as aggressors, aiding in the recruitment of terrorists, winning sympathy for Iran, and making Ahmadinejad look like the rational one in this exchange. When your rhetoric makes a holocaust denier look more rational than you, there is a serious problem with your strategy. Could you imagine being outwitted by David Duke?
Yes, that makes you an idiot. Here's what you missed: Mosaic Intelligence Report
Being that enriching uranium to weapons grade is far more complicated than enriching it for consumer use, Iran can be monitored by the IAEA to ensure that it's not happenning as the IAEA already did: IAEA confirms the "peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities"
Full text of Iran-IAEA Modalities of Resolution of Outstanding Issues
Matthew, (some of the same stuff I said to Charles, just without all the disrespect). I see you have read up on the issue. It is no secret that any nation worth their salt would like nuclear insurance if anything to ensure that they are not invaded by us such is the case with North Korea who fired an empty missile over Japan then detonated nuclear material a short time later.
Being invaded by us is a legitemate fear that Iran should have considering the example of Iraq. We invaded Iraq because we said that they possessed weapons that WE gave them. The United States is feared. So feared, in fact that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program when called on it. The people of Iran are for the most part good people who have to deal with George W Bush making their ignorant leaders look good to their surrounding neighbors, giving them all kinds of bumper sticker material and slogans to fan the hatred against us, and it doesn't help if our leaders keep doing dipsh!t things: Cheney Tried to Stifle Dissent in Iran NIE
I believe there is a saner solution because:
1) If Iran ever launched a nuke attack on us or Israel they would be erased from existence.
2) If an unaccounted-for nuke was detonated on us or any of our allies who are we going to blame? Erased from existence.
As long as they are monitored and not afraid that we will unilaterally invade them it is possible to have a peaceful nuclear program.
Wow you really do know what you're talking about... Oh ya... you do, you do! , I wonder what was just said today…
Mohaddessin claimed that Tehran has established a command and research center near a Tehran university. And, he said, Iran is developing a nuclear warhead for use on medium-range missiles at a site on the southeast edge of Tehran. Mohaddessin also claimed that the regime obtained aid from North Korea.
It was not possible to independently verify the NCRI claims. Mohaddessin said his group got the information from "hundreds" of reports and sources from within the Iranian regime, whom he did not name. He said some of the sources are within the nuclear project itself.
An official of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to talk to the media, said the agency was aware of the allegations. Mohaddessin said he had provided information to the IAEA on Tuesday.
Not to mention all the released reports from government bodies the world over that says Iran is in fact continuing their enrichment. And I know we should not trust the United States government, but what the hell let's see what they have to say…
The IAEA report does not give Iran a clean bill of health. Iran has not allowed the IAEA to interview key officials connected to the P-2 program, and the report notes that there remain major unanswered questions about Iran's past and current centrifuge program.
Once these issues are resolved, the IAEA Work Plan calls for moving on to questions about Iran's past experiments with Polonium-210 (a material used as a neutron generator to initiate the chain reaction in nuclear weapons), suspicious activities at the Gchine uranium mine and mill, unexplained experiments with high-explosive testing and the design of a missile re-entry vehicle suitable for a nuclear weapon, and other issues.
The IAEA is trying to thread the Iranian nuclear needle. It wants to encourage Iran enough so that the regime feels it can answer the questions without fear of punishment while pressing Iran enough to convince the mullahs that stalling will in fact risk isolation and sanctions. The report describes Iran's attitude towards the IAEA's effort to clarify the scope and nature of its nuclear program as "reactive rather than proactive."
Everyone else must be crazy or lying…
Yet!
Now lets do a little research on the link our little commie Francis H gave us to read. Who is Global Research . Ca?
An independent research and media group of progressive writers, scholars and activists committed to curbing the tide of "globalisation"...
What is posted above are their own words, (even though they spelt globalization wrong).
Now lets get to the meat and potato's regarding Iran!
The Iranian government has been and continues to support terrorist actions world wide... FACT! They have paid for suicide bombers to blow up weddings, disco bars, cafe's, and pizzerias around the middle east and else where.
Not to mention all the missiles flying into Israel on a daily basis, right now, that the US media doesn't cover… Wonder why?
Yet Francis H wants everyone to believe they're afraid of being invaded for no damn good reason, and that some country might want to do them harm for what? And if only Iran had nuclear missiles they could protect themselves from the mean ol' United States…
They (the Iranian government) support the murder of innocent people with bombs, suicide bombers, missiles and rockets… and yet Francis H wants us all to believe if they have nuclear weapons they won't use them or pass them along.
Hmm, Francis H wants us to believe that, but lets see what facts say about what Iran has said in the not so distant past.
All the world is in a surprising uproar because Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Israel should be wiped off the map. The EU condemned the statement, Israeli leaders called for expelling Iran from the UN.
And let us not forget
Iran writes "Death to Israel" and "Death to the United States" on missiles exhibited on parade. Iranian MPs have boasted that they would use their nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. "Islam would survive the retaliation, but Israel will be gone forever."
I mean I have no idea what I am talking about, none! I mean I only get my source of news from all over the world, not leftist websites hell bent on destroying all Democratic and Capitalist style governments the world over in search of their utopian Communist manifesto.
Read more here about how peaceful and all the wonderful things Iran has said it will do if it gets nuclear weapons in the past:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/01/23/do2301.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/01/23/ixop.html
There are hundreds of news articles from America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East all saying the same damn thing year after year…
I know I know... Shame on me for reading news outside of leftist propaganda... Shame shame!
I mean the next thing you know Francis H will tell us if America goes to war with Iran it will be because Iran wants to covert its oil from US dollars to the Euro! I just can't wait for that one.
Let's post that here for all to read as well… What the hell!
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html
I mean let's just get that out of the way right Francis H…
People who think for themselves need points of reference to process what is being purported. Why are you afraid to cite the source of "what was said today"? Who is Mohaddessin? Who is the NCRI? If we are going to communicate, you are going to have to start thinking like a thinker. He said, she said doesn't tell me anything- provide the tools to verify. Nevermind, I find it myself...
Ohhhhhhhhhh, NCRI- National Council of Resistance of Iran! I see, kind of like the INC- Iraqi National Congress and Achmed Chalabi. Charles, you couldn't find any other source than the people whose purpose is to start war with Iran?
An independent research and media group of progressive writers, scholars and activists committed to curbing the tide of "globalisation"...
"What is posted above are their own words, (even though they spelt globalization wrong). "
Charles really. Are the use of the words "Progressive" and "Activist" really supposed discredit them? I don't see anything wrong with "Progress". You might fear it- I don't. An activist is someone who is working to make a change that they see as positive. All those people protesting outside of abortion clinics- they are activists too. The people protesting the removal of the 10 Commandments from that courthouse, GASP!- activists. These activists are trying to stem the tide of globalisation (British spelling mind you from the people who created the language we speak, in other words International English) and since they are independent (not beholden to a corporation) and teamed up with scholars (people with PhDs- usually quite intelligent) that actually adds creedence to what they say.
Everything they write is archived so yes that 2005 document seems to contradict the NIE. That's why it's important to have some concept of space-time. You do know that the NIE of 2008 trumps this document from 2005 right?
The US is pursuing a complex strategy regarding Iran , and using its nuclear program as a means of pressuring Iran is one aspect. Seeking dialogue with Iran through "back-channel" discussions is another aspect. While the "blaming Iran" rhetoric was going on in Washington during the Congressional testimony of Petraeus and Crocker, the US made public an official request for dilaogue with Iran, which the Iranian government publically acknowledged receiving.
The general strategy of the US since the end of the Cold War has been to establish dominance over the Silk Road and the word's chief sources of oil in the region. This strategy is implemented by CENTCOM, which covers some 38 nations from Central Asia to Africa. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan , Pakistan et al. are parts of its concern. Russia and China are viewed as the main adversaries by the US for the control of resources of the region. Iran is the other key power in the region.