U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Saturday marked the first anniversary of Iran’s disputed presidential election by calling on Tehran to meet their obligations to their own people and to the international community.

The disputed election victory of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sparked widespread protests around the world – and turned deadly in Iran. Dozens of people were reported to have been killed, while hundreds more were injured and arrested.

“When the Iranian people determined last year that their government had denied them their right to free and fair elections, thousands of Iranian citizens poured into the streets to protest peacefully,” Clinton said. “The Iranian authorities responded to their citizens’ call for accountability and transparency with violence, arbitrary detentions, dubious trials, and intimidation.”

Clinton said that, one year later, many political prisoners continue to suffer in jail, some even facing death sentences for “expressing their opinions.”

“The Iranian government’s denial of the fundamental freedoms and rights accorded to its citizens in the Iranian constitution and international treaties to which Iran is a party has drawn broad international condemnation,” Clinton said.

“We call for the immediate release of all imprisoned human rights defenders, including Shiva Nazar Ahari, Narges Mohammadi, Emad Baghi, Kouhyar Goudarzi, Bahareh Hedayat, Milad Asadi, and Mahboubeh Karami,” she added.

Clinton also asked Tehran to release the three American kikers, detained without charge after crossing into Iran from Iraq almost a year ago, and also to provide information on the status of Robert Levinson, who disappeared in Iran in 2007.

Clinton reaffirmed U.S. commitment “to engage with Iran on all issues in pursuit of a negotiated diplomatic resolution, on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests.”

Thanks Island Crisis.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Hillary “the Hammer” Rodham Clinton

One of my friends is a classic Republican: He’s a businessman from a Southern “red state,” and a Marine Corps veteran of Vietnam who earned a Silver Star for heroism at Hué. To put it mildly, he’s never been a fan of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Yet he recently called to acknowledge a conversion like Paul’s on the road to Damascus. He now kind of likes her.

“She’s out there doing things … she’s smarter than Bill. If she was [messing] up, the far right would be all over her and they’re not coming up with anything.”

He’s got a point. Hillary Clinton, the once-hated first lady, appears to have hit her stride as secretary of State. The right wing, even “talk radio,” deems her the “good” member of the Obama team.

The right-wing Republican mantra goes something like this: “If only the president were more like her. She’s pushing him on Iran, pushing for more troops in Afghanistan. He’s wobbly. She’s the iron fist in the velvet glove.”

The right is right that Clinton is tough on Iran, but it’s wrong to think that there’s much daylight between her and the president.

Clinton has been intolerant of Tehran’s dissimulation. As the administration “hammer,” her message is steely: First, Iran must live up to its nuclear nonproliferation treaty obligations or it will find itself globally isolated. Second, if Tehran builds nuclear weapons, it will ignite a nuclear arms race in the Sunni Arab world with more than a few of the Sunni nukes likely to be pointed at Shiite Iran, a historic rival.

“Both the president and his secretary knew there was a good chance Obama’s initial outreach to Iran would fail,” says a Clinton aide who sat down with me recently for an interview on condition that he not be named. But it was part of a
long-term calculation.

As the aide explained: “Failure would set us up to pursue the ‘pressure track’ more effectively … if Iran didn’t respond affirmatively [on its nuclear program], then you can bring the hammer down on them with an international consensus you could not otherwise have created.”

Indeed, on May 18, a day after Brazil and Turkey announced a nuclear fuel deal with Iran, Clinton said she had secured the support of Russia and China for “strong” new sanctions against Iran.

Clinton may appear to have been born a diplomatic pro, but at least some of her exemplary patience, discipline, and professionalism were probably forged on the anvil of some bruising blows during the eight years of her husband’s presidency.

Her battle-tested political savvy may be one reason today’s national security establishment – the State Department, the Pentagon, and the National Security Council – has shown less backstabbing, bureaucratic rivalry, or policy contradictions than I’ve seen in 45 years of watching Washington.

In the Nixon, Carter, Reagan, and second Bush administrations, infighting between State and the Pentagon, and the National Security Council and State, was at times poisonous.

Today, there seems to be less clamoring for celebrity status amid an overpowering realization the president is the celebrity.

Sure, there is some difference in tone between this White House and Foggy Bottom, but totally similar views between the commander in chief and the secretary of State would smack of redundancy or lack of imagination. Where all people think alike, no one thinks very much.

The Clinton aide says it was Obama who set the harmonious tone for his national security team, insisting he wanted a team without internal rivalries. That’s a welcome change from the contentious relations between President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Secretary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates reportedly “see the world through the same glasses.” Each has a huge number of items on their plate, so there is no time for argument over the grand ideological disputes – the kind that hobbled previous administrations.

On the face of it, Obama’s team is an odd mix: Defense Secretary Gates is a former CIA director; National Security Adviser James Jones Jr. is a highly decorated retired US Marine Corps four-star general. And Clinton is a Midwestern lawyer turned first lady turned New York Senator.

Clinton’s experience as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee no doubt helps the chemistry. As a member of that committee she became quite close to senior military officials. “She also came to understand the workings of the military and the way it fits into the broader national security fabric,” says the aide.

Is she in the same league as James Baker, the most recent “great” secretary of State? Not yet, perhaps. But then the simpler bipolar world that Mr. Baker had to manage no longer exists. We no longer live even in a multipolar world. As Clinton put it recently, we now belong to a “multipartner world.” Still, she notes, there is no major global problem that can be solved without US involvement.

Ironically Clinton’s greatest diplomatic challenge now may be convincing Israel, an American ally, that Obama is no less a friend of the Jewish State than was her husband. It is not proving easy.

Thanks the Christian Science Moniter.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

At the start of broad bilateral talks in Beijing, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is urging China to cooperate on formulating an international response to North Korea and Iran.

Secretary Clinton said there are few global problems that can be solved by the United States or China acting alone or without them working together.

In her opening remarks to the high-level Strategic and Economic Dialogue that got underway in Beijing Monday, she pointed to North Korea and Iran as two cases where strong U.S-China relations are vital.

She said the U.S. and China cooperated last year in the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions on North Korea after it conducted a nuclear weapons test.

“And today we face another serious challenge, provoked by the sinking of the South Korean ship,” said Clinton.  “So we must work together, again, to address this challenge and advance our shared objectives for peace and stability on the Korean peninsula.”

In Seoul, President Lee Myung-bak announced Monday his country would cut most trade ties with the North and bar its ships from its waters in response to the sinking of a South Korean navy ship and the death of 46 sailors in March.

Secretary Clinton also pointed to the recent negotiations among the permanent five members of the U.N. Security Council, which include China and the U.S., in agreeing on a draft resolution that would impose new measures on Iran for its suspect nuclear program.

“The prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran concerns us all,” she said.  “And to address that threat, together we have pursued a dual-track approach of engagement and pressure, aimed at encouraging Iran’s leaders to change course.  The draft resolution agreed to by all of our P-5+1 [five permanent Security Council members plus Germany] partners and circulated at the Security Council sends a clear message to the Iranian leadership:  Live up to your obligations, or face growing isolation and consequences.”

Secretary Clinton added that U.S-Chinese cooperation is needed on a wide range of other issues, including terrorism, climate change, energy, health, education and development. On the economic side, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the two economic powers have a common interest in a strong and balanced world economy.

The Chinese side of the talks is being led by State Councilor Dai Bingguo and Vice Premier Wang Qishan.

While they did not mention North Korea or Iran by name, they did urge candid and in-depth discussions between the two countries and acknowledged that the two powers are becoming increasingly interdependent on the world stage.

President Hu Jintao also addressed the opening of the two days of economic and political talks. He said China and the U.S. have worked together to counter the world financial crisis, furthered trade and economic ties and stepped up cooperation on new and clean energy sources.

He said although the two countries are different and may disagree on some issues, China attaches great importance to its relations with the United States. He said both countries want to develop a “long-term, sound and steady relationship” that would contribute to peace, stability and prosperity.

Thanks VOA News.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton canceled plans to travel to Finland this week because of the volcanic ash cloud that has disrupted European aviation, a U.S. State Department official said on Monday.

It had not yet been decided whether Clinton would travel later in the week to Estonia for a gathering of foreign ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, added the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“Because of the continued aviation complications in Europe, the secretary’s stop in Helsinki has been canceled,” he said.

The State Department last week said Clinton would visit Helsinki on Wednesday to discuss European security issues, Afghanistan and Iran with Finnish officials and to give a speech on what it called “human security issues.”

It said she would then visit Estonia on Thursday and Friday to attend the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting. It was unclear whether the Western security alliance would hold the gathering, given the vast plume of ash thrown up by an eruption under the Eyjafjallajokull glacier in Iceland.

Thanks Washington Post.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday pledged to go ahead with missile defense plans and said they had no link to a new nuclear disarmament treaty after Russia threatened to pull out.

“The START treaty is not about missile defense. It is about cutting the respective sizes of our arsenals — our strategic offensive weapons,” Clinton told reporters.

The United States will be “working with them to try to find common ground around missile defense, which we are committed to pursuing,” she said.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier threatened to abandon START, or the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, if US anti-missile systems significantly dent Russia’s strategic nuclear capabilities.

President Barack Obama, joined by Clinton, is due to sign the new START treaty with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Thursday in Prague after months of detailed negotiations.

But Russia remains upset by US plans for missile defense systems in eastern Europe, which Washington says are meant to defend against emerging threats such as Iran but Moscow sees as an incursion into its sphere of influence.

Clinton, while saying she was not familiar with Lavrov’s remarks, said that Russian concerns on missile defense were “no surprise” to the United States.

“We have persistently sought to explain to them the purpose for missile defense, the role that we believe it can and should play in preventing proliferation and nuclear terrorism,” she said.

“We have consistently offered the Russians the opportunity to cooperate with us.”

Thanks Raw Story.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

‘Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite.” Thus did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seek to reassure the crowd at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee two weeks ago about the Obama Administration’s resolve on Iran. Three days later, this newspaper reported on its front page that “the U.S. has backed away from pursuing a number of tough measures against Iran” in order to win Russian and Chinese support for one more U.N. sanctions resolution.

This fits the pattern we have seen across the 14 months of the Obama Presidency. Mrs. Clinton called a nuclear-armed Iran “unacceptable” no fewer than four times in a single paragraph in her AIPAC speech. But why should the Iranians believe her? President Obama set a number of deadlines last year for a negotiated settlement of Iran’s nuclear file, all of which Tehran ignored, and then Mr. Obama ignored them too.

In his latest Persian New Year message to Iran, Mr. Obama made the deadline-waiver permanent, saying “our offer of comprehensive diplomatic contacts and dialogue stands.” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had a quick rejoinder. “They say they have extended a hand to Iran,” the Iranian President said Saturday, “but the Iranian government and nation declined to welcome that.”

The Iranians have good reason to think they have little to lose from continued defiance. Tehran’s nuclear negotiator emerged from two days of talks in Beijing on Friday saying, “We agreed, sanctions as a tool have already lost their effectiveness.” He has a point.

The Chinese have indicated that the most they are prepared to support are narrow sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program of the type Tehran has already sneered at. As the Journal’s Peter Fritsch and David Crawford reported this weekend, the Iranians continue to acquire key nuclear components from unsuspecting Western companies via intermediaries, including some Chinese firms.

Yet the Administration still rolls the sanctions rock up the U.N. hill, in a fantastic belief that Russian and Chinese support is vital even if the price is sanctions that are toothless. French President Nicolas Sarkozy urged Mr. Obama a year ago to move ahead with sanctions even without the Russians and Chinese, but Mr. Obama insisted he needed both. A year later, everyone except apparently Mr. Obama can see who was right.

The Administration also argued upon taking office that by making good-faith offers to Iran last year, the U.S. would gain the diplomatic capital needed to steel the world for a tougher approach. Yet a year later the U.S. finds itself begging for U.N. Security Council votes even from such nonpermanent members as Brazil and Turkey, both of which have noticeably improved their ties with Iran in recent months.

The U.S. can at this point do more unilaterally by imposing and enforcing sanctions on companies that do business in Iran’s energy industry. But so far the Administration has shown considerably less enthusiasm for these measures than has even a Democratic Congress.

As for the potential threat of military strikes to assist diplomacy, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made his doubts about their efficacy very public. The President’s two-week public attempt to humiliate Benjamin Netanyahu has also considerably lessened the perceived likelihood of an Israeli strike on Iran, thereby further diminishing whatever momentum remains for strong sanctions.

All of these actions suggest to us that Mr. Obama has concluded that a nuclear Iran is inevitable, even if he can’t or won’t admit it publicly. Last year Mrs. Clinton floated the idea of expanding the U.S. nuclear umbrella to the entire Middle East if Iran does get the bomb. She quickly backtracked, but many viewed that as an Obama-ian slip.

Most of the U.S. and European foreign policy establishment has already concluded that Iran will succeed, and the current issue of Foreign Affairs makes the public case for what to do “After Iran Gets the Bomb.” Authors James Lindsay and Ray Takeyh argue that a nuclear Iran is containable, and that it is better than the alternative of a pre-emptive U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

However, even they acknowledge that a nuclear Iran “would be seen as a major diplomatic defeat for the United States,” in which “friends would respond by distancing themselves from Washington [and] foes would challenge U.S. policies more aggressively.” And that’s the optimistic scenario.

Meanwhile, the CIA has recently reported that Iran more than tripled its stockpile of low-enriched uranium in 2009; that it has “[moved] toward self-sufficiency in the production of ballistic missiles”; and that it “continues to develop a range of capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons.” A senior Western official recently told us he is confident the Iranians either have or are building secret nuclear facilities beyond the one near Qom that was disclosed last year.

***

President George W. Bush will share responsibility for a nuclear Iran given his own failure to act more firmly against the Islamic Republic or to allow Israel to do so, thereby failing to make good on his pledge not to allow the world’s most dangerous regimes to get the world’s most dangerous weapons. But it is now Mr. Obama’s watch, and for a year he has behaved like a President who would rather live with a nuclear Iran than do what it takes to stop it.

Thanks WSJ.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said six world powers are united on possible sanctions against Iran.
   Speaking at the United Nations, Clinton said those powers include China and Russia and said talks will continue over the next several weeks.
   The UN Security Council, along with Germany, has agreed to begin work on drafting a sanctions resolution against Tehran over Iran’s nuclear program.
   Clinton said there will be, quote, “a great deal of further consultation” involving the Security Council and other nations.
   President Obama said this week he expects new UN sanctions against Iran in a few weeks.

Thanks My State Online.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

 

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin greeted visiting Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday with a volley of complaints about trade, while another top Russian official voiced caution about the Obama administration’s campaign for tough sanctions on Iran.

Clinton’s meetings, at the end of a two-day trip, reflected continuing tensions in the U.S.-Russia relationship a year after the Obama administration launched a “reset.” Although the two sides have moved closer on a range of issues such as arms control and Afghanistan, cooperation remains elusive.

Putin, whom many consider the real power in Russia, agreed only at the last minute to receive Clinton. He then used what was supposed to be a ceremonial photo opportunity at his ornate dacha outside Moscow to criticize the drop in U.S. trade during the global economic crisis, Russia’s difficulties in joining the World Trade Organization, and U.S. sanctions that have affected Russian companies — an apparent reference to penalties on firms doing business with Iran, Syria and North Korea.

Clinton appeared unfazed by the blunt lecture, which her aides chalked up simply to a politician’s desire to impress the domestic TV audience. She highlighted how the two sides are close to agreement on a pact to succeed the expired Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, and mentioned a recent visit by high-tech executives to Russia organized by the State Department and the White House. “If we continue to work together, we can move beyond the problems to greater opportunities,” she said.

Clinton’s agenda in Moscow was dominated by the almost complete agreement on each side to reduce its deployed long-range nuclear weapons and by the U.S.-led drive for tough sanctions on Iran. She also met with international mediators to discuss Middle East peace.

In a news conference earlier Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov urged caution on Iran sanctions, saying the Kremlin is not alarmed by the Islamic republic’s nuclear program and wants to avoid “aggressive” penalties.

His remarks illustrated the difficulties the administration could face in getting the U.N. Security Council to approve new sanctions. One of Clinton’s top aides, Undersecretary of State William J. Burns, told reporters on her plane Wednesday that the U.S. government feels “a sense of urgency” about Iran’s nuclear program and that “it’s time to demonstrate that there are consequences.”

But Lavrov said Friday that reports on Iran published regularly by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) “do not give reasons for any sort of alarms.” He spoke minutes after Clinton had said almost the opposite, pointing to the latest IAEA report, the first to say explicitly that Iran might be trying to build a nuclear bomb.

Lavrov acknowledged that the Kremlin is unhappy with Tehran’s latest actions — which include rejecting a Russian-backed plan aimed at quickly reducing Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium — and that sanctions are sometimes “impossible to avoid.”

He added, however, that sanctions “must not be aggressive, they must not paralyze” Iran, and they should not target the civilian population or have adverse humanitarian consequences. Instead, they should be focused on decision-makers, he said.

Analysts say the Russian government has been torn over the sanctions issue. On the one hand, it was stung to discover Iran’s furtive nuclear work last year and angered by its rejection of international offers to ensure that its enriched uranium is used for peaceful purposes.

But powerful lobbies close to the Kremlin are involved in the sale of weapons and nuclear energy equipment to Iran and don’t want to lose that trade, analysts say. In addition, the Kremlin fears pushing Iran to the point where it quits the international Non-Proliferation Treaty and bars nuclear inspectors, diplomats say.

Despite Lavrov’s reluctant tone on sanctions, Clinton aides appeared heartened Friday. They noted that he had until recently been a harsh critic of such penalties and said his list of conditions for sanctions suggest he is ready to work on a new U.N. resolution.

The United States is focusing on sanctions that would target members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and the businesses they operate. Russia had sought to water down three previous sets of U.N. sanctions, and its support will be crucial in approving a resolution.

Thanks Washington Post.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, visiting Brazil to enlist support for tougher United Nations Security Council penalties on Iran over its suspected nuclear weapons program, said the U.S. believes Iran will only negotiate after sanctions are imposed.

“Once the international community speaks in unison around a resolution, then the Iranians will talk and begin to negotiate,” Clinton said during a press conference today in Brasilia after talks with Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim. “We want to get to negotiations; we just think that the best path is through the Security Council.”

Clinton said that while Brazil and the U.S. differ over whether sanctions are the best approach, both countries “do not want to see Iran become a nuclear weapons country.”

Brazil, which holds a temporary voting seat on the UN Security Council, backs Iran’s claim that its nuclear program is for energy and medical purposes, and has resisted a U.S. and European push to impose new penalties to squeeze Iranian commercial and financial transactions as a means to force Iran to the negotiating table.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has cultivated trade and diplomatic ties with Iran, and is scheduled to visit Tehran in May.

Lula today reiterated his resistance to sanctions, telling reporters, “it’s not prudent to put Iran against a wall.” He said he would have “frank” talks with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over Iran’s enrichment of uranium, and repeated that Iran has a right to a peaceful nuclear program.

Thanks Business Week.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Photobucket


The only man causing President Obama more headaches than Joe Biden these days is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who, coincidentally, was right after Biden on Obama’s short-list for V.P.).

Despite Obama’s personal magnetism, the Iranian president persists in moving like gangbusters to build nuclear weapons, leading to Ahmadinejad’s announcement last week that Iran is now a “nuclear state.”

Gee, that’s weird — because I remember being told in December 2007 that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Iran had ceased nuclear weapons development as of 2003.

At the time of that leak, many of us recalled that the U.S. has the worst intelligence-gathering operations in the world. The Czechs, the French, the Italians — even the Iraqis (who were trained by the Soviets) — all have better intelligence.

Burkina Faso has better intelligence — and their director of intelligence is a witch doctor. The marketing division of Wal-Mart has more reliable intel than the U.S. government does.

After Watergate, the off-the-charts left-wing Congress gleefully set about dismantling this nation’s intelligence operations on the theory that Watergate never would have happened if only there had been no CIA.

Ron Dellums, a typical Democrat of the time, who — amazingly — was a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, famously declared in 1975: “We should totally dismantle every intelligence agency in this country piece by piece, brick by brick, nail by nail.”

And so they did.

So now, our “spies” are prohibited from spying. The only job of a CIA officer these days is to read foreign newspapers and leak classified information to The New York Times. It’s like a secret society of newspaper readers. The reason no one at the CIA saw 9/11 coming was that there wasn’t anything about it in the Islamabad Post.

(On the plus side, at least we haven’t had another break-in at the Watergate.)

CIA agents can’t spy because that might require them to break laws in foreign countries. They are perfectly willing to break U.S. laws to leak to The New York Times, but not in order to acquire valuable intelligence.

So it was curious that after months of warnings from the Bush administration in 2007 that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program, a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was leaked, concluding that Iran had ceased its nuclear weapons program years earlier.

Republicans outside of the administration went ballistic over the suspicious timing and content of the Iran-Is-Peachy report. Even The New York Times, of all places, ran a column by two outside experts on Iran’s nuclear programs that ridiculed the NIE’s conclusion.

Gary Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control and Valerie Lincy of Iranwatch.org cited Iran’s operation of 3,000 gas centrifuges at its plant at Natanz, as well as a heavy-water reactor being built at Arak, neither of which had any peaceful energy purpose. (If only there were something plentiful in Iran that could be used for energy!)

Weirdly, our intelligence agencies missed those nuclear operations. They were too busy reading an article in the Tehran Tattler, “Iran Now Loves Israel.”

Ahmadinejad was ecstatic, calling the NIE report “a declaration of the Iranian people’s victory against the great powers.”

The only people more triumphant than Ahmadinejad about the absurd conclusion of our vaunted “intelligence” agencies were liberals.

In Time magazine, Joe Klein gloated that the Iran report “appeared to shatter the last shreds of credibility of the White House’s bomb-Iran brigade — and especially that of Vice President Dick Cheney.”

Liberal columnist Bill Press said, “No matter how badly Bush and Cheney wanted to carpet-bomb Iran, it’s clear now that doing so would have been a tragic mistake.”

Naturally, the most hysterical response came from MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann. After donning his mother’s housecoat, undergarments and fuzzy slippers, Keith brandished the NIE report, night after night, demanding that Bush apologize to the Iranians.

“Having accused Iran of doing something it had stopped doing more than four years ago,” Olbermann thundered, “instead of apologizing or giving a diplomatic response of any kind, this president of the United States chuckled.”

Olbermann ferociously defended innocent-as-a-lamb Mahmoud from aspersions cast by the Bush administration, asking: “Could Mr. Bush make it any more of a mess … in response to Iran’s anger at being in some respects, at least, either overrated or smeared, his response officially chuckling, how is that going to help anything?”

Bush had “smeared” Iran!

Olbermann’s Ed McMahon, the ever-obliging Howard Fineman of Newsweek, agreed, saying that the leaked intelligence showed that Bush “has zero credibility.”

Olbermann’s even creepier sidekick, androgynous Newsweek reporter Richard Wolffe, also agreed, saying American credibility “has suffered another serious blow.”

Poor Iran!

Olbermann’s most macho guest, Rachel Maddow, demanded to know — with delightful originality — “what the president knew and when he knew it.” This was on account of Bush’s having disparaged the good name of a messianic, Holocaust-denying nutcase, despite the existence of a cheery report on Iran produced by our useless intelligence agencies.

Olbermann, who knows everything that’s on the Daily Kos and nothing else, called those who doubted the NIE report “liars” and repeatedly demanded an investigation into when Bush knew about the NIE’s laughable report.

Even if you weren’t aware that the U.S. has the worst intelligence in the world, and even if you didn’t notice that the leak was timed perfectly to embarrass Bush, wouldn’t any normal person be suspicious of a report concluding Ahmadinejad was behaving like a prince?

Not liberals. Our intelligence agencies concluded Iran had suspended its nuclear program in 2003, so Bush owed Ahmadinejad an apology.

Feb. 11, 2010: Ahmadinejad announces that Iran is now a nuclear power.

Thanks, liberals!

Thanks www.anncoulter.com

Please visit Ann. Great website!

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

 

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, has said Iran has left the international community little choice but to impose harsh penalties against it over its controversial nuclear programme.

Speaking at a US-Islamic World Forum in Doha, Qatar on Sunday, Clinton said there was mounting evidence that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapon.

“The evidence is accumulating that that’s exactly what they are trying to do,” she said.

“Iran has consistently failed to live up to its responsibilities. It has refused to demonstrate to the international community that its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.”

Clinton said the US and some of its allies were working on new measures to try and persuade Iran to change its course and reconsider its “dangerous policy decisions”.

‘Shift in rhetoric’

She also stressed that the administration of Barack Obama, the US president, wants a peaceful solution to the nuclear dispute, but she said that its patience would eventually reach a limit.

“I would like to figure out a way to handle it in as peaceful an approach as possible, and I certainly welcome any meaningful engagement, but … we don’t want to be engaging while they are building their bomb.”

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, has said Iran has left the international community little choice but to impose harsh penalties against it over its controversial nuclear programme.

Speaking at a US-Islamic World Forum in Doha, Qatar on Sunday, Clinton said there was mounting evidence that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapon.

 “The evidence is accumulating that that’s exactly what they are trying to do,” she said.

“Iran has consistently failed to live up to its responsibilities. It has refused to demonstrate to the international community that its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.”

 Clinton said the US and some of its allies were working on new measures to try and persuade Iran to change its course and reconsider its “dangerous policy decisions”.

‘Shift in rhetoric’

She also stressed that the administration of Barack Obama, the US president, wants a peaceful solution to the nuclear dispute, but she said that its patience would eventually reach a limit.

“I would like to figure out a way to handle it in as peaceful an approach as possible, and I certainly welcome any meaningful engagement, but … we don’t want to be engaging while they are building their bomb.”

Asked what evidence the US had that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons, PJ Crowley, the US state department spokesman, said that Washington was basing its assertions on Iran’s actions.

“Given the current trajectory that Iran is on – the fact that it still has centrifuges spinning, and the fact that it is unwilling to constructively engage the international community – we have to assume that Iran is pursuing a nuclear programme,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Given all the steps that Iran has taken and all the actions that Iran refuses to take, we can only begin to draw the conclusion that Iran’s intentions are less than peaceful.”

Nazanine Moshiri, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in the Iranian capital, Tehran, said Clinton’s assertion of evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapon programme indicates a shift in US rhetoric.
“Most Iranians will be quite surprised by that because a few days ago the White House said Iran wasn’t capable of reaching 20 per cent uranium enrichment,” she said.
 
“Iran has told Al Jazeera they are capable of producing nuclear weapons but they are not going to. They only want to enrich to 20 per cent for their Tehran reactor.”

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president, said on Thursday that the country’s nuclear scientists had completed the further enrichment of the the first batch of its stockpile of uranium.

Tehran has said that it stepped up enrichment to produce fuel for a medical research reactor, but the US and its allies have said that the move signals a rejection of a UN-backed plan to swap Iran’s low-enriched uranium for processed nuclear fuel.

Iran has repeatedly stated that its nuclear programme is to meet the country’s civilian energy needs.

Middle East peace

Clinton’s comments at the forum, which is jointly organised by the Qatari foreign ministry and the US-based Brookings Institution, came only hours after she arrived in Doha for the start of a three-day visit to the region.

She is also using the trip to win Arab backing for the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, a topic which she broached during her address.

“The goal of a comprehensive peace is fully in the interest of the United States. We are committed to our role in ensuring that negotiations begin and succeed,” she said.

“I know that people are disappointed that we have not yet achieved a breakthrough. The president … and I are disappointed as well.

“But we need to remember that neither the United States nor any country can force a solution. The parties must resolve their differences through negotiations.”

Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst, said her remarks on the Israeli-Palestinian issue revealed nothing new about how the Obama administration would resolve the situation .
 
“There’s an attempt to address the Palestine-Israeli question without putting any responsibility on the occupying force, Israel, ” he said.
 
“We haven’t heard much new there.
 
“But while there is a sense that the secretary of state asks everyone to take responsibility for their actions, there is no taking responsibility for the US failure to revive the deadlocked peace process by not fulfilling its pledge to end the dispute over Israeli settlements.”

Clinton’s speech comes eight months after a similar address by Obama, who called for a new beginning in ties between the US and the Muslim world during a speech in Egypt in June.

The secretary of state on Sunday addressed concerns that Obama’s call during his speech was “insufficient and insincere”.

“Building a stronger relationship cannot happen overnight. It takes patience, persistence and hard work from all of us,” she said.

“We are and will remain committed to the president’s vision for a new beginning.”

Thanks Al Jazeera.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Hundreds of thousands of Iranians massed Thursday in central Tehran to mark the anniversary of the revolution that created the country’s Islamic republic, while a heavy security force fanned out across the city and moved quickly to snuff out opposition counterprotests.

Police clashed with protesters in several sites around Tehran, firing tear gas to disperse them and paintballs to mark them for arrest. Dozens of hard-liners with batons and pepper spray attacked the convoy of a senior opposition leader, Mahdi Karroubi, smashing his car windows and forcing him to turn back as he tried to join the protests, his son Hossein Karroubi told The Associated Press.

The celebrations marking the revolution’s 31st anniversary were an opportunity for Iran’s clerical regime to tout its power in the face of the opposition movement, which has managed to keep up periodic street protests since the disputed June presidential elections despite a fierce crackdown.

The opposition turnout was dwarfed by the huge crowd at the state-run celebrations. Many were bused in to central Azadi, or Freedom, Square to hear an address by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who proclaimed a new success in Iran’s uranium enrichment program and dismissed new U.S. sanctions.

And the massive security clampdown appeared to succeed in preventing protesters from converging into a cohesive demonstrations. Large numbers of riot police, members of the Revolutionary Guard and Basij militiamen, some on motorcycles, deployed in back streets near key squares and major avenues in the capital to move against protesters.

Opposition Web sites spoke of groups of protesters in the hundreds, compared to much larger crowds in past demonstrations

One protester told The Associated Press she had tried to join the demonstrations but soon left in disappointment. “There were 300 of us, maximum 500. Against 10,000 people,” she told an AP reporter outside Iran. She said there were few clashes.

“It means they won and we lost. They defeated us. They were able to gather so many people,” she said. “But this doesn’t mean we have been defeated for good. It’s a defeat for now, today. We need time to regroup.”

Another protester insisted the opposition had come out in significant numbers, but “the problem was that we were not able to gather in one place because they (security forces) were very violent.”

“Maybe people got scared,” he said. “The idea wasn’t to lose or win today … But what is certain, today was not a good day.”

Both spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by authorities, who have jailed protesters for talking to foreign media.

Authorities banned foreign media in Iran from covering the pro-reform protests. Tehran residents also reported Internet speeds dropping dramatically and e-mail services such as Gmail being blocked in a common government tactic to foil opposition attempts to organize.

Thousands upon thousands marched along the city’s broad avenues toward Azadi Square to celebrate the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, according to footage on state TV. There, the massive crowds waved Iranian flags and carried pictures of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic state, and his successor as supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

State buses ferried many to the square. State media touted the turnout as a show of support for the government—though to an extent, celebrations for the revolution cross partisan lines, and many Iranians who oppose Ahmadinejad but support the clerical leadership turn out annually. Among those attending was influential former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, an opposition supporter.

In his nationally televised address in the square, Ahmadinejad proclaimed that Iran has produced its first batch of uranium enriched to a higher level, saying his country will not be bullied by the West into curtailing its nuclear program a day after the U.S. imposed new sanctions.

“The first package of 20 percent fuel was produced and provided to the scientists,” he said, reiterating that Iran was now a “nuclear state.” He did not specify how much uranium had been enriched.

Iran announced on Tuesday that it was starting for the first time to further enrich uranium from around 3 percent purity to 20 percent purity, bringing sharp criticism from the United States and its allies, which accuse Tehran of seeking to develop a nuclear weapon.

Tehran, which denies seeking to build a bomb, has said it wants to further enrich the uranium—which is still substantially below the 90 percent plus level needed for a weapon—to fuel a research reactor for medical isotopes.

Ahmadinejad also criticized President Barack Obama, saying he was following the confrontational line of his predecessor George W. Bush. “We expected Mr. Obama to make changes,” Ahmadinejad said. “But he is losing the chance and not acting properly … Obama’s approach and behavior is disappointing.”

For days ahead of the anniversary celebrations, anti-government Web sites and blogs have called for a major turnout in counterprotests and urged marches to display green emblems or clothes, the opposition’s signature color.

Security forces fired tear gas to disperse a group of protesters who were trying to march toward Azadi Square as they chanted “death to the dictator,” the opposition Web site Kaleme said, reporting an unknown number of arrests. Police and Basijis on motorbikes swept toward central Tehran, where protesters and security forces clashed in several locations, it reported.

Riot police fired paint-filled balls at hundreds of protesters chanting opposition slogans in Sadeqieh Square, about a half-mile (one kilometer) from the anniversary rally, witnesses said.

Security forces also briefly detained Khomeini’s granddaughter and her husband, who are both senior pro-reform politicians, according to the couple’s son, Ali.

The granddaughter, Zahra Eshraghi, and her husband Mohammad Reza Khatami, who is the brother of a former pro-reform president, were held for less than an hour before being released, their son told the AP.

The witnesses spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution from authorities. Foreign media were allowed to cover the ceremonies in the square, including Ahmadinejad’s speech, but there is a ban on covering opposition protests.

Iranian authorities again tried to squeeze off text messaging and Web links in attempts to cripple protest organizers. Internet service was sharply slowed, mobile phone service widely cut and there were repeated disruptions in popular instant messaging services such as Google chat.

Many Internet users said they could not log into their Gmail account, Google Inc.’s e-mail service, since last week.

The opposition claims that Ahmadinejad’s victory in the June 12 election was fraudulent and that the true winner was pro-reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi. Hundreds of thousands marched in the streets against the government in the weeks after the vote, prompting a massive wave of arrests.

Nevertheless, the opposition has succeeded in continuing to hold regular protests, often timing them to coincide with days of important political or religious significance in attempts to embarrass authorities. The tone of the rallies has shifted from outrage over Ahmadinejad’s re-election to wider calls against the entire Islamic system, including Khamenei.

Tensions have mounted further since the last large-scale marches, in late December, which brought the most violent battles with security riots in months. At least eight people were killed in clashes between protesters and police, and security forces have intensified arrests in the weeks since.

In January, two people who were put on trial alongside opposition politicians and protesters were executed for allegedly plotting to overthrow the state. Authorities have announced that 10 other opposition supporters have also been sentenced to death—a move many believe was aimed at intimidating protesters.

Thanks Breitbart.com

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with: