U.S. President obama has reportedly held out the prospect of accepting iran’s civilian nuclear program
In contrast to some unconditional supporters of any israeli policy in germany, who necessarily damonize iran and brand all criticism, like just that of gunter grass on the policy of the israeli government, completely irrationally as anti-jewish or anti-semitic (sigmar gabriel’s criticism of israel and the reactions), the u.S. Government finally seems to want to free itself from the netanyahu strategy of blackmailing by permanently threatening a military strike against iran (israel’s government blackmails the u.S. Government with threats of war against iran). The news is discussed in the israeli media naturally heib.
Although it is still uncertain whether iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program or how far it has been developed, the israeli government has for years believed that it could use the threat of a military strike to destroy its nuclear facilities to draw the west, and above all the united states, behind it as an unconditional protective power. Instead of mediating between iran and israel and finally arriving at a reasonable policy toward the palestinians, the conflict, in which above all the iranian and israeli leaderships have an interest, has been permanently aggravated.
U.S. President obama, despite enormous prere from the american-israeli lobby, now seems to want to adopt a more independent stance in order to avoid being drawn into a new military conflict with far more unforeseeable consequences than the wars against afghanistan and iraq. The right-wing israeli government apparently still flirts with technical superiority over iran and the successful bombing of the iraqi reactor in 1981, which, however, took place under completely different conditions. Even if the iranian nuclear facilities could be destroyed, the iranians would quickly be able to rebuild them and even more so start a nuclear weapons program or continue the old one for their own protection. The former head of the mossad, meir dagan, points this out again and again. How russia and china would behave is unclear, but they would not simply stand still. And how long israel and/or the u.S. Would sustain a continued war against iran is a complete mystery (pentagon wargame on the consequences of an israeli attack on iranian nuclear facilities). And did the germans really want to get involved in such a military adventure, which has no reasonable outcome – especially since the right-wing religious israeli government, which actually has nuclear weapons, cannot necessarily be trusted either??
According to the washington post’s usually well-informed david ignatius, u.S. President obama is said to have addressed a message to iran’s supreme spiritual leader, ali khamenei, that turkey’s leader erdogan, acting as mediator, delivered last week. Turkey is at odds with iran over its position on syria, but is disgusted with israel and ames that iran is pursuing a civilian nuclear program. Turkey allegedly wants to urge iran to weaken its support for the syrian assad regime. And the turkish government would like the negotiations on iran’s nuclear program to take place in turkey, not in baghdad or china.
For the first time, the u.S. President is said to have made the offer that the u.S. Would accept a civilian nuclear program if the iranian leadership gave evidence that it was not pursuing a nuclear weapons program. What kind of evidence is said to be is not known. Obama could thus pick up on cautious rearances from khamenei (khamenei praises obama). However, obama apparently also threatened that the time for a peaceful settlement was running out. It is also not known whether the u.S. President, which would certainly be the sticking point, would also grant iran uranium enrichment. Perhaps this is to be the subject of new 5+1 negotiations starting next week, as ignatius suspects. Now it is necessary to see how the iranian leadership will react to the offer, if it was made verbally, and whether new promising negotiations will start. The israeli nuclear weapons, however, will continue to stand in the way of a diplomatic solution that would probably have to amount to a nuclear-free zone that has long been called for.