Celestial view in white house and Iranian options
Omid Memarian*
Thomas Freedman, the famous neoliberal colonist of New York Times, has come up with some rationales for USA not attacking Iran. Of course as a new entirety he illustrates diverse views existed in USA. Many are not after another war in USA. Logistically it is a big challenge for USA to start war with Iran. This is not a joke, keeping more that hundreds of thousands soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq - with no substance – with enough equipments and so on, however when it comes to Iran this is outside USA abilities and the residences of white house, knowing it that if any governments take more commitment than it’s abilities, it is doomed to be trampled. Additionally tolerating heavy expenses of war again would cause many internal tribulations. Freedman Is aware that Bush’s team has already decided. He considers that increase in Petrol price after attacking the Iran would consequences in “Bush’s War spreading out club and co”, hindrance. Freemanson
Looks at the issue from an economist point of view who is trying to justify the war. But the debates influencing/ruling bush are with same level of economic perceptive ?
I believe that a kind of celestial view is governing men in the white house. “God willing resulted in the expansion of democracy”. They do not talk about the results of researches of scholar’s rooms and think tanks. They say God has given us these responsibilities. This is the hardest part of the affair that consequences in diverse and possible analyses that may result in intricacy .The white house men
By referring and bringing evidence to Bible on different occasions talk about human rights and their comments. Talking about “commitment” would further complicate the whole debate. American People based within this observation would relate more to democrats’ statistics and figures. Therefore if this approach is used in decision making process by new conservatists and political people, the economic analysis would be questioned and scrutinized. The Iranian political foreign affairs need to take this issue to consideration when analyzing the whole subject matter.
If USA at all succeeds in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran belt project, they may increase their distance from Europe, and may become more polarized in their approach in today’s world. Consequently to play such role they would look for mesmerizing situations. What does this mean? This means that Americans do not mind to play major roles in all events. So what has to be done? USA is not going to stay aside and observe what Europe is going to do with Iran. However the assumption of Mr. Freedman that USA’s policy of “stick and carrot”, in which that she will play a role of stick and is in some way parallel with Europe, seems to be remote from intelligence. The USA is eager to promote its own plan. Therefore events that have taken place so far must be taken to consideration by Iranians.
Conversely clause 3 could only work when America in Iraq would be able to establish relative democracy and security. Nonetheless if necessary they would create a subsidized democracy and in relation to this mechanism of “spread seed, and look at the future”. The election in Iraq would indicate that America is rather hasty to sort out Iraq project. The contradiction is that this would be only possible with Iran’s co-operation. Why? Because Iran has influence in Iraq that could up set America’s game. Meanwhile Iran has tried its utmost for a calm election taking place in Iraq. Americans are aware of Iran’s role with regard to the calmness of the election. But this is not the end of the matter. It is after the election that it will be appear how power structure had been divided between Kurds, Sonnies, and Shiites, and which direction is going to, knowing the fact that Sonnies have not recognized the legitimacy of the election and Kurds are waiting to see. No doubt until there will be no unity, the quandary and crisis will expand and progress rapidly in Iraq. America is waiting patiently to see what is going to happen in Iraq and what would be the consequences of this game. So what ever they about any talk about another war is just a political empty bluff. American administration knows perfectly that getting involved with Iran right now is going to in danger it’s project in the area….
So there are two options for Iran at this period. One is to make longer the time of this phase and increase the expenses for Americans. And the second is to get concession from US which are useful and low-risk way for Iran. But consider that we can study these options with the other mentioned facts together
Iraq project has strengthened the Shiites there. If the one individuals-one vote establish establishes and go successfully ahead Shiites will not be loser. Everything that happens for Iraq like disintegration or anything else, Shiites will not be a loser. (More that 60% of Iraq population belongs to Shiites.) Iran can be the biggest winner in Iraq. Consider that because of a kind of Iranian Islam-style that is strongly a political Islam; Americans can not leap before looking. However, they have set up an intelligent relationship with US. Entering to another war will make the other areas insecure and risky. Americans can not look at Iran as an independent variation. To be careless in this ground, it will swallow the new-conservative brothers, in two playgrounds. They will confine to the ground.
Now, Iranian official’s options are restricted to negotiating with Europeans. Whereas, Iranians have to put their apples in several baskets. However the weak and powerless diplomacy system doesn’t let them to analyze several options concurrently. They are not able to involve in huge plays. So Iran has to work on national convergence, decreasing international challenges, pushing forward the human right discourse and also obtain a gathering between international players. Any serious changes in human rights cases will postpone the danger. It brings time for Iranians. Iranian can solve their problem in the nuclear talks diplomatically.
But for improving the human rights situation, they need serious change in policies. I believe that the exact time has arrived and also some of the judiciary officials have talked about the essential changes. Any changes in this arena will increase the coefficient of protection of national profits. The obstinacy of some in touch officials will have inconceivable costs for the country. Improving the human rights issues is the golden key against the Americans threats. Iran is not in a situation for reproaching Americans about what they have done cruelly in the world. US are one of the biggest violator of human rights all over the world. Ok! But we are not in a competition with them to violate the human rights more. Are we? We have to keep or hat firmly against the wind.
We have to be sure that the Americans are serious bout their threats. All changes in the administrational board of white house, the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan and the other facts show that Iran has to draft a multilateral plan for threats. Iran can not close the eyes and only say mottos in the streets by the regime fans. We need practicable actions. Iran has to use all the possible ways. You understand what I mean….
Days pass rapidly. And eyes are looking to the Iranian politicians in the biggest play that has started….
(mailmemarian@yahoo.com)
*Omid Memarian is a 30-year-old journalist living in Tehran
Thomas Freedman, the famous neoliberal colonist of New York Times, has come up with some rationales for USA not attacking Iran. Of course as a new entirety he illustrates diverse views existed in USA. Many are not after another war in USA. Logistically it is a big challenge for USA to start war with Iran. This is not a joke, keeping more that hundreds of thousands soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq - with no substance – with enough equipments and so on, however when it comes to Iran this is outside USA abilities and the residences of white house, knowing it that if any governments take more commitment than it’s abilities, it is doomed to be trampled. Additionally tolerating heavy expenses of war again would cause many internal tribulations. Freedman Is aware that Bush’s team has already decided. He considers that increase in Petrol price after attacking the Iran would consequences in “Bush’s War spreading out club and co”, hindrance. Freemanson
Looks at the issue from an economist point of view who is trying to justify the war. But the debates influencing/ruling bush are with same level of economic perceptive ?
I believe that a kind of celestial view is governing men in the white house. “God willing resulted in the expansion of democracy”. They do not talk about the results of researches of scholar’s rooms and think tanks. They say God has given us these responsibilities. This is the hardest part of the affair that consequences in diverse and possible analyses that may result in intricacy .The white house men
By referring and bringing evidence to Bible on different occasions talk about human rights and their comments. Talking about “commitment” would further complicate the whole debate. American People based within this observation would relate more to democrats’ statistics and figures. Therefore if this approach is used in decision making process by new conservatists and political people, the economic analysis would be questioned and scrutinized. The Iranian political foreign affairs need to take this issue to consideration when analyzing the whole subject matter.
If USA at all succeeds in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran belt project, they may increase their distance from Europe, and may become more polarized in their approach in today’s world. Consequently to play such role they would look for mesmerizing situations. What does this mean? This means that Americans do not mind to play major roles in all events. So what has to be done? USA is not going to stay aside and observe what Europe is going to do with Iran. However the assumption of Mr. Freedman that USA’s policy of “stick and carrot”, in which that she will play a role of stick and is in some way parallel with Europe, seems to be remote from intelligence. The USA is eager to promote its own plan. Therefore events that have taken place so far must be taken to consideration by Iranians.
Conversely clause 3 could only work when America in Iraq would be able to establish relative democracy and security. Nonetheless if necessary they would create a subsidized democracy and in relation to this mechanism of “spread seed, and look at the future”. The election in Iraq would indicate that America is rather hasty to sort out Iraq project. The contradiction is that this would be only possible with Iran’s co-operation. Why? Because Iran has influence in Iraq that could up set America’s game. Meanwhile Iran has tried its utmost for a calm election taking place in Iraq. Americans are aware of Iran’s role with regard to the calmness of the election. But this is not the end of the matter. It is after the election that it will be appear how power structure had been divided between Kurds, Sonnies, and Shiites, and which direction is going to, knowing the fact that Sonnies have not recognized the legitimacy of the election and Kurds are waiting to see. No doubt until there will be no unity, the quandary and crisis will expand and progress rapidly in Iraq. America is waiting patiently to see what is going to happen in Iraq and what would be the consequences of this game. So what ever they about any talk about another war is just a political empty bluff. American administration knows perfectly that getting involved with Iran right now is going to in danger it’s project in the area….
So there are two options for Iran at this period. One is to make longer the time of this phase and increase the expenses for Americans. And the second is to get concession from US which are useful and low-risk way for Iran. But consider that we can study these options with the other mentioned facts together
Iraq project has strengthened the Shiites there. If the one individuals-one vote establish establishes and go successfully ahead Shiites will not be loser. Everything that happens for Iraq like disintegration or anything else, Shiites will not be a loser. (More that 60% of Iraq population belongs to Shiites.) Iran can be the biggest winner in Iraq. Consider that because of a kind of Iranian Islam-style that is strongly a political Islam; Americans can not leap before looking. However, they have set up an intelligent relationship with US. Entering to another war will make the other areas insecure and risky. Americans can not look at Iran as an independent variation. To be careless in this ground, it will swallow the new-conservative brothers, in two playgrounds. They will confine to the ground.
Now, Iranian official’s options are restricted to negotiating with Europeans. Whereas, Iranians have to put their apples in several baskets. However the weak and powerless diplomacy system doesn’t let them to analyze several options concurrently. They are not able to involve in huge plays. So Iran has to work on national convergence, decreasing international challenges, pushing forward the human right discourse and also obtain a gathering between international players. Any serious changes in human rights cases will postpone the danger. It brings time for Iranians. Iranian can solve their problem in the nuclear talks diplomatically.
But for improving the human rights situation, they need serious change in policies. I believe that the exact time has arrived and also some of the judiciary officials have talked about the essential changes. Any changes in this arena will increase the coefficient of protection of national profits. The obstinacy of some in touch officials will have inconceivable costs for the country. Improving the human rights issues is the golden key against the Americans threats. Iran is not in a situation for reproaching Americans about what they have done cruelly in the world. US are one of the biggest violator of human rights all over the world. Ok! But we are not in a competition with them to violate the human rights more. Are we? We have to keep or hat firmly against the wind.
We have to be sure that the Americans are serious bout their threats. All changes in the administrational board of white house, the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan and the other facts show that Iran has to draft a multilateral plan for threats. Iran can not close the eyes and only say mottos in the streets by the regime fans. We need practicable actions. Iran has to use all the possible ways. You understand what I mean….
Days pass rapidly. And eyes are looking to the Iranian politicians in the biggest play that has started….
(mailmemarian@yahoo.com)
*Omid Memarian is a 30-year-old journalist living in Tehran
posted by no war
@
12:44 AM
|
<< Home