General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIranian President Calls For 'Constructive Engagement' With U.S. In Op-Ed
Iranian President Hasan Rouhani declared Thursday in a Washington Post op-ed that the United States and the rest of the world "must work together to end the unhealthy rivalries and interferences that fuel violence and drive us apart" through a policy of "constructive engagement."
Rouhani, the newly elected moderate leader of a nation that has long been at odds with the U.S. over its nuclear policy, advocated for international dialogue on issues plaguing the Middle East. He modeled that kind of "constructive interaction" by declaring that Iran would "help facilitate dialogue" between the Syrian government and rebel opposition.
The president also directly addressed tension over Iran's nuclear energy program, describing it as "peaceful" and arguing nuclear power "is as much about diversifying our energy resources as it is about who Iranians are as a nation."
Rouhani wrote that the international community needs to "aim higher" in order to move beyond sticking points like the Syrian conflict and Iran's nuclear policy, suggesting a desire for potential talks between Iran and the U.S. at the United Nations General Assembly next week.
"Rather than focusing on how to prevent things from getting worse, we need to think and talk about how to make things better," Rouhani wrote.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/iranian-president-calls-for-constructive-engagement-with-u-s-in-op-ed
By MARK LANDLER
WASHINGTON Few American presidents have held a deeper belief in the power of the written word than President Obama. And in few ways has that belief been more tested than in his frustrating private correspondence with the leaders of Iran, a country with which the United States has had no diplomatic ties for 34 years.
<...>
The election of Mr. Rouhani, a moderate, in June kindled hopes that diplomacy might end the chronic impasse with Iran over its nuclear ambitions. But the letters, and the cautious hope they have generated, suggest there is a genuine opportunity for change.
It is not the first time since entering the White House that Mr. Obama has put pen to paper to try to sway Irans leadership. Until now, he has had little to show for it: even under the pain of punishing economic sanctions, the Iranian government has shown little interest in negotiating a deal with Washington on its nuclear program.
This time, Mr. Rouhani said in an NBC News interview broadcast on Wednesday, the tone of Mr. Obamas letter was positive and constructive. He added, It could be subtle and tiny steps for a very important future.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/world/middleeast/through-diplomacy-obama-finds-a-pen-pal-in-iran.html?_r=0
(Reuters) - Iran said on Tuesday that President Hassan Rouhani had exchanged letters with U.S. President Barack Obama, confirming a rare contact between leaders of the two nations at loggerheads over Iran's nuclear program, the Syrian war and other issues.
The United States and Iran cut diplomatic relations in 1980, after students and Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took American diplomats hostage.
But since the surprise election of Rouhani, a centrist cleric who defeated more conservative candidates, in June, officials from both countries have made increasing hints that they are open to direct talks to seek an end to the decade-long nuclear dispute.
The United States and Europe have imposed sanctions on Iran's economy, including its vital oil sector, over concerns it is working towards nuclear weapons capability. Tehran denies that and says the nuclear issue is being used as an excuse to punish a country unpopular in the West.
- more -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/17/us-iran-usa-idUSBRE98G0MT20130917
Kerry Calls Signs From Iranian President Positive
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023698560
By RICK GLADSTONE
The House overwhelmingly approved legislation on Wednesday that would impose the toughest sanctions yet on Iran, calling the measure a critical step to cripple the countrys disputed nuclear program and brushing aside calls for restraint by critics who said the Iranian president-elect should first be given a chance to negotiate.
The 400-to-20 vote to approve the legislation, known as the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act, came four days before the inauguration of Irans President-elect Hassan Rouhani, a moderate cleric who won on a tide of dissatisfaction with the conservative hard-liners who have been in power in Iran for the past eight years. Mr. Rouhani, a former nuclear negotiator, has said he will seek to ease tensions with the United States.
<...>
There had been little doubt that the bill, which now goes to the Senate for consideration in September after the Congressional summer recess, would be approved, given the widespread antipathy in Washington for Irans government since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
But the timing of the vote had raised alarm among some lawmakers who contended it would be viewed in Iran as a blatantly hostile signal at a delicate time. Experts in Iranian politics said they feared the vote could embolden Irans hard-liners and weaken Mr. Rouhanis ability to ease the estrangement with the United States.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/us/politics/sending-message-to-iran-house-approves-tougher-sanctions.html
Roll call: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll427.xml
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr850/text
ProSense
(116,464 posts)He's losing the popularity contest to Putin.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)President was better received on DU than a Democratic President?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)a disrupter if you support the President.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)than the one now shaping up -- but which require a huge amount of support.
Syria has been a mess for at least two years - the civil war is horrific. You can second guess everything that had been done in the past, but what were the options after Assad used chemical weapons? There never seemed to be that many possibilities and all were bad.
Even if Obama had not called it a red line, not responding when it happened would have been a real problem. Not to mention, it would not be really doing nothing -- but likely greatly increasing providing military goods at a greater level to the rebels - something that actually COULD carry more risks that a targeted US strike.
As it is - getting teh chemical weapons out and Geneva 2 restarted is better than what anyone thought possible = if your goal was no war.
There are plenty of people, including the neocons angry that they will not have a strike that they always hoped would undergo mission creep.
What NO ONE on DU has pointed out is that what happened may be the first time the US government rejected a PNAC war - in favor of diplomacy, elimination of CW, and a peace conference. Could it be a signed of our foreign policy turning?
karynnj
(59,501 posts)if Iran once again had normal relations with everyone. Good for Obama and Kerry for reaching out -- and good that the new President of Iran is reaching back!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)K & R