Obama on Iran
by Shaun Appleby, Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 05:35:03 AM EST
A candidate supporter diary for MyDD
It should come as no surprise that the recently released NIE which asserts that Iran had abandoned it's nuclear weapons program in 2003 has descended like a thunderbolt on US politics. The pros and cons of this assessment are still sinking in and have resulted in some strange turnabouts and the jury, of course, claims to still be undecided on it's impact on previous plans, policies and propagandising:
The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran's nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy.Mark Mazzeti - NYT 3 Dec 07
This report not only up-ends truth-or-dare presidential politics, neo-conservative credos and campaign trail rhetoric but squarely busts the Vice President's resilient bunker. It certainly throws into disarray the carefully crafted sanctions discussions we now know to have been under-way among the Security Council powers. And in spite of claims of victory or vindication it is worth considering Senator Barack Obama's position on Iran throughout this campaign, as it has certainly weathered this little storm and is becoming, well, pretty close to mainstream policy:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid urged Bush to announce "a top-to-bottom review of his Iran policy" and launch a "diplomatic surge" on the country."He should announce that his Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense are prepared to meet anytime, anywhere with their Iranian counterparts to conduct vigorous diplomacy to advance U.S. interests and address the challenges of Iran," the Nevada Democrat said.
Matthew Hay Brown - The Swamp 4 Dec 07
There is no doubt that Senator Obama was ahead of the curve with these comments from a NYT article in early November:
Making clear that he planned to talk to Iran without preconditions, Mr. Obama emphasized further that "changes in behavior" by Iran could possibly be rewarded with membership in the World Trade Organization, other economic benefits and security guarantees."We are willing to talk about certain assurances in the context of them showing some good faith," he said in the interview at his campaign headquarters here. "I think it is important for us to send a signal that we are not hellbent on regime change, just for the sake of regime change, but expect changes in behavior. And there are both carrots and there are sticks available to them for those changes in behavior."
Michael R Gordon and Jeff Zaleny - NYT 2 Nov 07
This is precisely the position which Senator Obama has maintained since early February when the campaign commenced and it has endured unchanged while the climate of public opinion has undergone a marked shift.
His position on negotiating with Iran has been consistent since this early interview when the threat of Iran loomed unreasonably large and war was considered almost imminent. It blew them away:
KROFT: Would you talk to Iran or Syria?OBAMA: Yes. I think that the notion that this administration has -- that not talking to our enemies is effective punishment -- is wrong. ... You know, we can have a robust strategy of blocking and containing aggressive actions by hostile or rogue states, but still open up the possibility that over time those relationships may evolve and they may change. And there may be opportunities for us to resolve some of our differences, not all of them, but some of them in a constructive way.
Steve Kroft's Interview With Sen. Obama - CBS 11 Feb 07
Though this courageous stand led to the most damaging narrative of his campaign, that he was 'naïve and irresponsible' for holding it, the idea has gained broad support and become a rallying point for dissenting foreign policy opinion, including from some whom are clearly not supporters of Senator Obama:
On its face, Mr. Obama's idea seems little more than a far-left fantasy. But perhaps it looks this way because we are viewing it through too narrow a conception of warfare. We tend to think of our wars as miniature versions of World War II, a war of national survival. But since then we have fought wars in which our national survival was not immediately, or even remotely, at stake. We have fought wars in distant lands for rather abstract reasons, and there has been the feeling that these were essentially wars of choice: We could win or lose without jeopardizing our nation's survival.Mr. Obama's idea clearly makes no sense in a context of national survival. It would have been absurd for President Roosevelt to fly to Berlin and talk to Hitler. But Mr. Obama's idea does make sense in the buildup to wars where survival is not at risk--wars that are more a matter of urgent choice than of absolute necessity.
[...]
Great power scares unless it is exercised within a painstaking moral framework. Thus, moral authority is the single greatest challenge of American foreign policy. This is especially so in wars of discipline, wars fought far away and for abstract reasons. We argue for such wars as if they were wars of survival because we want the moral authority that comes so automatically to them. But Iraq is a war of discipline, and no more. If we left Iraq tomorrow there would be terrible consequences all around, but we would survive.
Shelby Steel Obama is Right on Iran WSJ 26 Nov 07
It is increasingly clear that not only was Senator Obama correct to articulate this view but that it also has the potential for a following that may cross, such as it is, the divide of Democrat and Republican. The underlying theme is a renewal of the moral authority of the United States in international affairs:
And I won't hesitate to use the power of American diplomacy to stop countries from obtaining these weapons or sponsoring terror. The lesson of the Bush years is that not talking does not work. Go down the list of countries we've ignored and see how successful that strategy has been. We haven't talked to Iran, and they continue to build their nuclear program. We haven't talked to Syria, and they continue support for terror. We tried not talking to North Korea, and they now have enough material for 6 to 8 more nuclear weapons.[...]
President Kennedy said it best: "Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate." Only by knowing your adversary can you defeat them or drive wedges between them.
[...]
They will no longer have the excuse of American intransigence. They will have our terms: no support for terror and no nuclear weapons.
Senator Obama - The War We Need to Win 1 Aug 07
It is worth noting this context when considering Senator Obama's opposition to the now infamous Kyl/Lieberman amendment:
We were counseled by some of the most experienced voices in Washington that the only way for Democrats to look tough was to talk, act, and vote like Republicans.[...]
Because I think the pundits have it wrong. I think the American people have had enough of politicians who go out of their way to look tough, who say one thing in a caucus and another in a general election. When I am the nominee of our party, the choice will be clear. My Republican opponent won't be able to say that we both supported this war in Iraq. He won't be able to say that we really agree about using the war in Iraq to justify military action against Iran, or about the diplomacy of not talking and saber-rattling. He won't be able to say that I haven't been open and straight with the American people, or that I've changed my positions. And you know what? The American people want that choice. Because I believe that's what we need in our next President.
Senator Obama Lessons from Iraq 12 Oct 07
In the aftermath of the release of the NIE two days ago Obama made the following admonition, just for the record:
"Members of Congress must carefully read the intelligence before giving the president any justification to use military force."Marc Santora - NYT 4 Dec 07
It is pretty clear that Senator Obama has differentiated a coherent foreign policy agenda for his campaign which is well-informed and pragmatic, and which exhibits the clarity, courage and prescience of his 2002 speech.
Tags: Election 2008, foreign policy, Iran, obama (all tags)
-----------
myDD - skin
-----------
56 Comments