HuffPo - "Outmaneuvering Iran" - Story On President Obama's Diplomacy

[TomCADem]

The goal of President Obama's diplomatic efforts is to get Iran to stop pursuing the development of nuclear weapons short of war. To this end, the following analysis is very helpful:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-cirincione/outmaneuvering-iran_b_300255.html

###

Obama knew all along that Iran had a secret uranium factory. He may be more of a master strategist than his foes--and even his friends--have realized.

The key to understanding today's announcement on Iran is this: President Obama knew about the secret Iranian facility nine months ago. Before he began his strategy of engagement, he knew Iran was lying about its program. When he extended his hand in friendship, he knew Iran had built a secret factory to enrich uranium. Before he offered direct talks, he knew Iran was hiding a nuclear weapons breakout capability.

Each move was denounced as "weak" and "naïve" by the right. That talk looks foolish today. These were the moves of chess master, carefully positioning pieces on the board, laying a trap, and springing it at the opportune moment.

We now know that Obama was not acting on impulse, or philosophy or general principles, but on deep strategy. He knew better than his critics that Ahmadinejad could not be trusted. He just had a better plan for how to deal with him

###

[Cha]

1. High intrigue with our

President in the thick of it!

[chieftain]

2. K & R

[nevergiveup]

3. The timing of his announcement on the defense missile system

in Eastern Europe was also a chess move designed to get cooperation with Russia. Sanctions against Iran will be much more powerful with Russia on-board.

[invictus]

4. What a load of neo-cons bullshit!

There is no proof that Iran is actually trying to develop nuclear weapons.

[rustydad]

10. Iran

Not only a lack of proof but also Iran has signed the Non Proliferation Treaty and has allowed UN inspectors to inspect. On the contrary Israel, India, and Pakistan, all US allies, have not done either. And all three have missilized nuclear weapons and have the missiles to deliver them. Talk about pot calling kettle. Russia and Iran are masters of chess. Obama likely has never played the game. Bob

[TomCADem]

11. So, Why Have A Two Tier Nuclear Program?

One tier is public, and the second tier is developed in secret in an underground bunker? Somewhat odd for a peaceful nuclear program.

[boppers]

14. Why have two systems?

Uhm, redundancy, in case some nation goes off half cocked and and tries blowing one of them up? I'm guessing they're mostly trying for Zippe (or other improved centrifuge design). WRT calling it a "secret", it's hardly a secret now.

[TomCADem]

15. Sounds Inefficient If That's The Goal - They Are An Oil Rich Country

Why spend millions of dollar having a "redundant" peaceful, energy producing nuclear facilities when you have a country in a sea of oil? Its like putting solar panels in the middle of Icelands geothermal fields. But hey, if you believe that Iran is spending money in redundant nuclear programs purely for peaceful purposes, and not to build a nuclear bomb, then that is pretty trusting of you. Indeed, to accept that explanation, and not to believe that President Obama is truly interested in the U.S.'s national security in trying to halt the proliferation of nuclear weapons strikes me as rather biased. But hey, feel free to accept the Iranian talking points.

Oh, and I am sure you buying the notion that all those Iranian protesters are actually collaborators with the U.S.?

[boppers]

16. Oil's dirtier, and running out faster.

More barrels available for export, more money for now.... well, that, and having a deterrent against Russia, Israel, and the US (etc. etc. etc.) holding them hostage is kind of in their national interest, so I can see both the peaceful "reactor science" and deterrent "weapons science" programs as being national, reasonable, goals. We'll see how it plays out, but if I was a Persian in charge of the program, I'd have "broken ground on a new football pitch for a technical college, with underground classroom areas about 2-3 stories tall" in the last couple of days.

I'm pretty sure that halting proliferation, as a policy, FAILED. That's not accepting Iran's talking points, that's taking an honest look at the last 40 years. It didn't stop Israel, South America, India, Pakistan, North Korea... and now Iran and Venezuela are technology sharing on going nuclear (both oil rich, but both are now pushing to be bigger players on the world's stage).

As far as me thinking that the Persian demonstrators are in league with the US, uhm, no. Instead, I think that new tools, and new technologies, are totally re-shaping the world in a way that cold-war thinking never accounted for. People all over the world who get 21st century technology are learning good, and bad, ways to use it. Non-proliferation, social control via media control, that all only works when information can be tightly controlled, and that world started to die about 40 years ago...

Weapons design is online. Explosives formulas are online. Trigger designs, neutron reflector tests, numerous reactor plans, centrifuge plans, required physics and chemical formulas ... heck, some bored students at a tech college even built a small scale functioning nuclear reactor in *under 24 hours*. The days of having political dominance over other nations because of information dominance are over, so now we're entering a world where control over weaponry isn't about information, it's about will. South Africa went nuclear, built 6 bombs, and then went "meh", dismantled them, and used the uranium for fueling reactors.

[TomCADem]

17. So, The Iranians Might Just Build A Bomb For Sh*ts and Giggles?

Interesting thought with the reference to South Africa. The point of your argument appears to be, "no big deal," everyone does it, why get all huffy about Iran having nukes, because non-proliferation as a policy is doomed to fail. And, maybe the Iranians, like the South Africans, just want to build a nuke for the heck of it, then dismantle it.

[Umbral]

18. Irrelevant, they haven't violated international law or the nonproliferation treaty.

About all they are guilty of, at least as far as we've been made aware, is irritating Israel.

[TomCADem]

20. Well, I Guess You Are Right, Perhaps We Should Wait Until They Successfully Test A Nuke

Becuase they may then have violated a treaty. However, by that time, is it too late? Isn't the problem with North Korea and Pakistan that the U.S. really did not address the situation until after they developed nukes? What you suggest as a good policy? If the law is that there is no violation until the nuke has actually been developed, then perhaps the law should be changed, because that strikes me as a stupid policy for non-proliferation.

Citing Pakistan and North Korea as models for future U.S. action does not make the argument against non-proliferation any stronger in my mind. I think President Obama's strategy of putting everything on the table prior to negotiations is the best DIPLOMATIC strategy. Otherwise, why talk?

[HopeOverFear]

5. You go, boy

[Clio the Leo]

7. I think you have to make an exception and say.....

..... "You go sir!" Seriously, I just got off the phone with Gina and she said he's been given a special dispensation. :)

[HopeOverFear]

8. I agree

[Clio the Leo]

6. What!? Obama knows stuff that we dont?

How could this be? ....... He's not telling us everything? He has secret meetings we here are DU are not privy to?



What next?! He's negotiating health care reform without running it by Politico and DailyKos first? I cant even wrap my brain around it!

[spanone]

9. BREAKING NEWS: Iran nuclear chief says U.N. will be allowed to inspect newly revealed site

[krawhitham]

12. Isn't nice to know

That 99% of the time Obama walks into a room our President is the smartest person in that room

[boppers]

13. More broken jounalism.

"had built a secret factory" <---wrong. They *are building* a factory, and reported it to the IAEA before it was complete, as required.

"nuclear weapons breakout capability" <---wrong, this is about uranium enrichment, not weapons design.

People who know little about nuclear weapons and required IAEA reporting keep messing up the story. It reminds me of Saddam and the UN weapons inspectors, where the story kept getting spun until people believed outright lies and falsehoods.

[invictus]

21. +1

[renegade000]

19. I'd rather think Obama was acting on general principles

Namely, "speak softly and carry a big stick". It really is far superior to the Bush administration's bellicose philosophy of "scream like a howler monkey and throw your feces around."