Analysis: Iran Nuclear Concerns Weigh Heavy On US

Behind President Barack Obama's toughened but modulated response to the Iranian election crisis is a calculation that when the dust settles, the United States will still face an unpredictable adversary that gets closer every day to producing nuclear weapons.

No one can say whether the unrest following disputed presidential elections will yield an Iran more willing to cut a deal over its disputed nuclear program. But as Obama sees it, the United States must be ready to talk no matter who sits on the other side of the table.

"My position coming into this office has been that the United States has core national security interests in making sure that Iran doesn't possess a nuclear weapon and it stops exporting terrorism outside of its borders," Obama told reporters Tuesday.

The new president has tried not to poison chances for negotiations over those threats, although that gave Republican critics room to call him timid.

His unspoken strategy aimed at defusing Iran's nuclear threat has been coupled with public messages that seek to avoid giving Iran's rulers any ammunition to claim that the United States is meddling.

"My role has been to say the United States is not going to be a foil for the Iranian government to try to blame what's happening on the streets of Tehran on the CIA or on the White House," Obama said during a news conference, "that this is an issue that is led by and given voice to the frustrations of the Iranian people."

Days of deadly tumult and then quiet defiance on Tehran's streets mark the greatest challenge to Iran's ruling structure since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

They also present a huge wild card for the new U.S. administration, which came to office pledging a fresh start with Iran after three decades of mutual suspicion and hostility.

The budding outreach to Iran could be smothered in the cradle, as Obama acknowledged.

"We have provided a path whereby Iran can reach out," he said. "It is up to them to make a decision."

That's the same thing Obama said before the disputed June 12 election, and it's also the same thing President George W. Bush said during his last two years in office.

The stakes are higher for Obama, in no small part because Iran's nuclear machinery is still chugging toward the ability to produce nuclear weapons if the regime chooses to do so. Iran insists its nuclear program is peaceful, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has used the program as a nationalist rallying cry.

Ahmadinejad claimed a landslide re-election despite obvious questions about the size and distribution of his support, and the results were endorsed by Iran's senior cleric, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Ahmadinejad's main challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi, claims the vote was fixed, and the heavy-handed government response has given Iran's largely disorganized resistance a new organizing principle.

The election results could mean greater internal pressure on Ahmadinejad to improve relations with the West and bargain over the nuclear program, as Obama hoped out loud on Tuesday.

"The fact that they are now in the midst of an extraordinary debate taking place in Iran, you know, may end up coloring how they respond," Obama said.

Leaders of Britain, France and Germany were quicker than Obama to weigh in on the Iranian upheaval or, in the case of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, to call for a recount. Those three countries would be part of any new negotiations with Iran, along with the United States, Russia and China.

Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, won crucial backing from other nations that would take part in talks. Russia said it respects the declared election result and said disputes about the vote are "exclusively an internal matter."

Senior Obama advisers say Obama is keeping his options open, and that it's too soon to tell where the situation is leading. They acknowledge that so far Iran's response suggests a period during which the regime will be focused mostly on itself.

Suzanne Maloney, a former top State Department expert on Iran, said it is more likely that an empowered Ahmadinejad will be an obstruction to talks and the regime will rebuff international condemnation or pressure to come to the table.

"They are willing to ride out an ugly period at home, so what makes us think they can't ride out increased economic pressure and sanctions" from abroad? Maloney asked.


You must be logged in to post comments.

Username:
Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by CCC Location: Greenville on Jun 25, 2009 at 07:10 AM
    Dwayne, I'll tell you what we can do; shoot down their missles w/ our anti missle system. Oh I forgot; for some reason the great one has decided that one of the first things is going to do is cut WAAAAAY back on our missle defense systems. I guess we can try sligshots. Here's a legitimate ? for anyone. Why would the leader of a country decrease the ability to protect one's country from a particular threat when the other countries are increasing their ability to threaten us (more long range missles)? Once again this is just a common sense/rational question that ALL Americans should be asking. Any obama supporters no why? I'm asking you because you supposedly new about your candidate before placing your vote and he said pre-election he would cut spending on missle defense. Why?
  • by Dwayne Location: Greenville on Jun 24, 2009 at 09:08 AM
    Do people really believe that a President who listened to an anti-semetic preacher for 20 years cares if Iran makes a nuclear warhead. Iran has stated their clear intention to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth". Obama is aware of Iran's hatred of Israel. Obama unfortunately has turned his back on Israel while double speaking against anti-semetism. Classic Obama. Speak one thing and do the polar opposite. I am an American for Israel. May God bless America and Israel. When missiles start heading toward the US what will the great one do?
  • by Wolfgang Location: Chocowinity,NC on Jun 24, 2009 at 06:42 AM
    Do not run and go golfing now Obama Democracy can win in Iran. President Bush and his administration knew what would happen to the Muslim Dictators. If we got a Democracy in that region of the Middle East. When the people of Iraq finally voted in a free election and showed the world those millions of purple fingers. The Americans will set you free from the Saddams of the world with fair laws for the people. Pres. Bush new that all peoples have a natural soul to be free. It does now seem that freedom is contagious and the Iranian people have taken notice of the freedom enjoyed by their neighbors in Iraq. From the beginning of the Iraq War, it was pointed out that the Middle East was a political mess, and that if Democracy was introduced, it would spread throughout the region. Thank you President Bush, for standing up for what was right. Even When You Stood Alone. The true mark of a Great Leader. “When governments fear the people there is liberty. Thomas Jefferson
WITN

275 E. Arlington Blvd. Greenville, NC 27858 252-439-7777
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 48997551 - witn.com/a?a=48997551
Gray Television, Inc.