change - Obama Makes Gains at U.N. on Iran and Proliferation

[spanone]

UNITED NATIONS — President Obama, in his first visit to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly, made progress Wednesday on two key issues, wringing a concession from Russia to consider tough new sanctions against Iran and securing support from Moscow and Beijing for a Security Council resolution to curb nuclear weapons.

The successes came as Mr. Obama told leaders that the United States intended to begin a new era of engagement with the world, in a sweeping address to the General Assembly in which he sought to delineate differences clearly between himself and the administration of President George W. Bush.

One of the fruits of that difference — although White House officials were loath to acknowledge any quid pro quo publicly — emerged during Mr. Obama’s meeting on Wednesday afternoon with President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia, the first between the two since Mr. Obama decided to replace Mr. Bush’s missile defense program in Eastern Europe with a version less threatening to Moscow.

With a beaming Mr. Obama standing next to him, Mr. Medvedev signaled for the first time that Russia would be amenable to longstanding American requests to toughen sanctions against Iran significantly if, as expected, nuclear talks scheduled for next month failed to make progress.

“I told His Excellency, Mr. President, that we believe we need to help Iran to take a right decision,” Mr. Medvedev said, adding that “sanctions rarely lead to productive results. But in some cases, sanctions are inevitable.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/world/24prexy.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

[bbinacan]

1. That is good news. n/t

[spanone]

2. i agree.

[Kaleko]

3. Not sensational enough to get recs and many replies, I guess,

but important nonetheless.

[JimWis]

4. Yup - good news. Thanks for sharing the info.

[HappyCynic]

5. K & R

Should Obama really be trying to make deals? Hasn't the last administration always said that you never get anywhere with talking to and working with others? And through their attitudes and actions indicated that diplomacy consisted of threatening others with military action so they change their politics? Hmm.... That sounds kinda familiar...

di⋅plo⋅ma⋅cy –noun
1. the conduct by government officials of negotiations and other relations between nations.
2. the art or science of conducting such negotiations.
3. skill in managing negotiations, handling people, etc., so that there is little or no ill will; tact.

Nope. That's not quite it... Let's see...

ter⋅ror⋅ism –noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

That sounds more like it... err... Never mind...