Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama Aide on Iran: "It's not about us"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-15-09 03:04 PM
Original message
Obama Aide on Iran: "It's not about us"
Obama Aide on Iran: "It's not about us"
Posted by michaelscherer | Comments (18)

Despite the occasional English-language sign toted amid the protesting masses in Tehran, one fact remains: the protests in Iran this week, unlike the turmoil that preceded the 1979 Iranian revolution, does not have so much to do directly with the United States. The dispute now gripping the Iranian streets is one of domestic politics in the most literal sense, with different factions of the government and political elite struggling against each other over mostly domestic issues.

That's not to say that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to take the United States out of the conversation. In his press conference Sunday, Ahmadinejad described the contested Iranian election as a "blow to the tyrannical pillars of the ruling nations of the world," also known as the "domineering and hegemonic capitalist system that lacks culture."

But the White House is consciously working to avoid any statements that might provide fuel for Ahmadinejad's populist rants. All of the public comments so far have sought to minimize the United States role in adjudicating or intervening in the Iranian dispute. "The point is this is not about us," said one administration official, who has been working on the issue of Iran. "The point here is we will continue to monitor the situation to see how it, in a sense, resolves itself over the coming days. The pressure is on them to demonstrate to the world that this was a legitimate election and that the outcome reflects the will of the Iranian people."

This message is likely to be repeated later today, when President Obama takes questions from reporters at around 5 p.m. following a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. Look for the president to express concern over the election results and the violence, while calling for patience as the true winner of the election is sorted out. As Vice President Biden said yesterday on Meet the Press, "Look, we just don't know enough. . . . It's been less than 24 hours since the polls have closed." There is no message here for the Iranian people. No attempt to intervene publicly in its domestic politics. No urgency to congratulate a winner in the election, or declare the current election results invalid.

This position makes diplomatic sense. Obama is seeking expanded relations with the Iranian government no matter who controls the presidency. But as Scott Wilson points out in the Washington Post today, the wait-and-see approach is also not always the rule in U.S. diplomacy. It took just one day for the Bush Administration to recognize the unelected interim government in Venezuela, after Hugo Chavez was briefly toppled in a coup in 2002. The decision quickly turned into an embarrassment for the White House, as Chavez regained power a few days later.

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/06/15/obama-aide-on-iran-its-not-about-us/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-15-09 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm glad Obama isn't getting involved in Iran's election (like the neocons want).
It's NOT about him/us and Obama has to deal with whomever "wins."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-15-09 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. Rec'd~ This is a great article..how
about this?!

"This position makes diplomatic sense. Obama is seeking expanded relations with the Iranian government no matter who controls the presidency. But as Scott Wilson points out in the Washington Post today, the wait-and-see approach is also not always the rule in U.S. diplomacy. It took just one day for the Bush Administration to recognize the unelected interim government in Venezuela, after Hugo Chavez was briefly toppled in a coup in 2002. The decision quickly turned into an embarrassment for the White House, as Chavez regained power a few days later."

Why was lieberman out there saying to "stand loud with the protestors"?

I didn't him on tv..just read a caption of the thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-15-09 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R btw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 06:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC