With his re-election prospects in question, the administration of President Barack Obama is reportedly weighing a dramatic reconciliation with Iran, a move said to be supported by First Lady Michelle Obama but opposed by senior foreign policy officials.
Administration sources said the White House has been debating a proposed initiative in which Obama would visit Iran and declare rapprochement with the mullah regime according to a report by Middle East Newsline citing sources who requested anonymity.
The sources said Obama's leading advisers have argued that such a dramatic move would mark a legacy for a president whose prospects for re-election in 2012 appeared to be rapidly fading.
"The idea is that the president does with Iran what [President Richard] Nixon did with China — a reconciliation and dialogue that would recognize Teheran as the leader of the region," a source familiar with the debate said, according to the report.
The sources said opponents of the proposed initiative toward Iran included senior officials in the National Security Council as well as the Defense Department and State Department. They argued that Iran, which refused to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, has not demonstrated any willingness to halt such objectionable programs as uranium enrichment and long-range ballistic missile development.
At this point however, many of Obama's closest aides were said to support a U.S. reconciliation with Iran that would allow the Middle East regime to continue with a civilian nuclear program.
The sources cited such administration advisers as Valerie Jarret, Samantha Power and U.S. envoy to the United Nations Susan Rice, who want a U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan to pave the way for a rapprochement with Teheran.
The sources said the president's wife, Michelle, has also endorsed the reconciliation proposal. They said proponents have argued that this was Obama's only option to achieve a breakthrough in U.S. foreign policy before the 2012 elections.
"There is a huge debate in the White House on this," one source said.
The sources said the White House has been alarmed by the failure to raise funds for Obama's re-election campaign. They said Jewish members of the Democratic Party, once deemed the biggest supporters of Obama, were donating at a rate of no more than eight percent of that in 2008.
A political consultant involved in White House fundraising efforts said Obama's foreign policy could veer sharply from the status quo if he becomes convinced that he would lose in 2012.IHT
3 comments:
Saddam's been dead for years. There are no WMD's. Oil is not paying for war. Get the heck out now. We need to stop trying to police the world when we can't even police our own streets and borders.
This as Syria murders thousands of protesters with arms supplied from Iran. Iran supplies IEDs to Iraqi militant groups. US forces have caught members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard inside Iraq attempting to murder our troops. Anyone with any knowledge can recount thousands of other examples of what Iran is currently doing that we cannot, in anyway, shape, or form support. If Obama does this....
Actually engagement is the best way to neutralize. Imagine if Kennedy had not tried to reach out to Khrushchev? Or if Reagan has not engaged Gorbachev? Or Nixon had not engaged China? Face it: we have no other option at this point. We are economically to weak to engage in another military expedition. Military strikes are impossible since many of the nuclear sites are probably unknown or so deeply buried that they can't be taken out. Sanctions only push Iran into China's arms. An engagement would remove their hostility towards us, allow US companies to make money in Iran, therefore boosting the economy. In return, we would get assurances that Iran will not threaten Israel and will stop funding terrorism...really everyone wins.
Post a Comment