One thing we are encouraged to forget is that the Shias in Iraq came under bombing and killings for more than 2 years before they started retaliating against the killers, NOT all Sunnis indiscriminately, and more importantly, during that period, US army as the occupying force was required to provide the civilians with security but nothing was done about all the Sunni bombings for 2+ years by anyone, and finally the bombing of Askari Golden Mosque/Shrine broke the camels back and forced the Shias to go after the militant Sunnis responsible. We need to also remember that back when elections were held, the Sunnis opted to boycott and didn't participate but I have no doubt that the Shias would still welcome them back if they put arms down and come to the table.
This is an interesting Tom Friedman piece asking who is America's friend, and who is America's real enemy, in the Middle East? In the process, Friedman offers a vision US policy on Iran that borrows heavily from Henry Kissinger. That policy is neither to wage war on Iran, as the neocons prefer, nor to isolate it, as some of the pro-Israeli Democrats seek. It is instead to improve the US leverage viz a viz Iran, and then tell Iran that the US is ready to talk. And to talk about everything, settling it all, without trying to impose 'regime change', so that the two countries can be friends. I don't agree with some of what Friedman proposes, but it it certainly makes for a much more coherent approach than what the US has been doing. http://whittierdailynews.com/opinions/ci_5138602
Kudos to Thomas Friedman. This is what I have been saying for years. By dint of culture, history and geography, Iran is the natural ally of the United States, and even Israel. The real enemy are the Saudis.
damn Arabs Interesting piece for sure. I especially agree with him on the whole Israel-Palestinian conflict as many in the world belive is the reason for so much violence. It is, but not the most important one.
Iran is a much more enlightened, much more appealing, much more civilized country than Saudi Arabia. In that sense, Iran will always look like a more appealing friend to the US and Israel than Saudi Arabia. Conversely, the west is obviously and without doubt, a more appealing example for Iran to befriend than Saudi Arabia and the Wahabi barbarism they promote. In that sense, Iran similarily finds the West, led by the US, a more magnetic presence whereas it sees Saudi Arabia as mostly repulsive. However. After a period when Iran had declined too much for it to be much of a rival to anyone on its own, and following a period when Iran needed to cooperate with the west to help the country reclaim its historic place, Iran is today in a competitive relationship with the US/Israel in the Middle East. In that sense, I would not call Iran a natural ally of the US or Israel. Instead, once the rivalry between Iran and the US has settled on mutually amicable and acceptable terms, the two countries can have a relationship not unlike Iran's relations with the Byzantine empire during period when the two were in peace and not war. Those relations, while at other times marked by continous wars, had long periods marked by peace and respect between the two sides as well. What Friedman, and even Kissinger, have suggested is not unreasonable, although certainly Iran will want the deal to be negotiated on the terms most favorable to it. Still, what Friedman has in mind is civilized and instead of foscuing on lies that in the process corrupt the US political processes itself, it focuses on the legitimate question: can the US and Iran reach a modus vivendi on their respective positions in the Persian Gulf? The way both Friedman and Kissinger approach that issue, the US needs to first take a few hostile steps to check Iran's growing influence (nothing too serious, just enough for the US to gain back some leverage viz a viz Iran), and then for the two sides to meet to negotiate their respective spheres. In the Kissinger formulation, for the pre-negotiation process to remind Iran that it is still far away from being able to truly challenge the US on a global scale, being offered instead a 'respectable' but confined position. Or as Friedman would put it, for Iran to be reminded that it cannot push the US out of the Persian Gulf. Iran will want the best deal it can negotiate. And frankly, the best reference to what kind of deal will work as a stable and enduring example are ones that refer to what was often negotiated between the Byzantine and Persian Empires. The political spheres of each need to run along those lines, with some minor adjustments here or there due to the passage of time. Otherwise, anything less, will prove temporary. The product of too much US leverage.
That is a good Friedman piece. Along a somewhat similar line Pat Lang tried to generate some discussion recently about the values that Iran and the US share. If the US is serious about encouraging democracy among the Muslim nations of the Middle East, then Iran should be studied as an example of combining Islamism with pluralist democracy.
Iranian diplomat captured in Baghdad. Link ``It seems that this terrorist act has been committed in the framework of Bush's order and with the goal of escalating the confrontation with Iran,'' Iran's ambassador to Iraq, Hassan Kazemi-Qomi, was quoted by Iranian state television as saying. A U.S. military spokesman denied that U.S. forces had played a role in the incident, which comes amid tensions between the United States and Iran over Tehran's nuclear program. ``We are not aware of any mission that even resembles this incident,'' a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, Lieutenant- Colonel Christopher Garver, said.
When you read the details of the incident, it is clear that notwithstanding its denials, the US orchestrated this kidnapping. I say that not only becuase of the vehicles and uniforms worn by the folks who kidnapped the Iranian diplomat, but because some of the people involved in the abduction were arrested by Iraqi police and were later 'transferred to the custody' of forces which take direct orders from the US military. Incidentally, the official who was abducated was the second secretary of the Iranian embassy, a cvilian and a career diplomat on his way to inspect a bank Iran is opening in Baghdad. The US is essentially trying to create an atmosphere where Iranians won't feel safe in Iraq, hoping to intrude in Iraq's relations with Iran as such. These actions, however, will blow in their own face, since Iran has equal means to target Americans in Iraq. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq ...