China is behind the real reason Tehran is in talks with America
F THE object is persuade Iran to quit its nuclear arms ambitions, then negotiating with it will achieve precisely the opposite.
Iran chose the moment to talk to the West, and the West hastened to oblige.
And Iran chose to negotiate solely on account of sanctions, but, for a long time, sanctions did not work, so what changed its mind?
It was the risk of new, much tougher sanctions that would embrace Iran’s remaining trading partners, especially China, which has been exempt until now.
China fears the US may pressure it to choose between trade with Iran and trade with the US, so it has applied pressure on Iran to negotiate in order to preserve trade with both.
Iran’s trade with China is critical to its embattled economy, so that talks with the West are intended only to forestall the threat of interruption.
Meanwhile, the West and Iran serve different agendas. The former sees what it hopes, the latter sees a prevaricating
IWould you like your picture to be used with your letter? Attach it as a jpeg when you send your letter. If the picture is of good enough quality, it could be used should your correspondence be chosen for publication and compromising West that will avoid making the hard choices necessary to achieve its object.
Despite the obvious intentions of Iran, the Obama administration is trying to persuade Congress not to proceed with new sanctions because it wants to believe Iran can be persuaded to change its mind about developing nuclear weaponry.
Worse, it is prepared to compromise existing sanctions for the illusion compromise by Iran.
If the Obama administration succeeds, Iran will succeed too with its aim to progress its nuclear ambitions without suffering new, harsher sanctions.
The pain of existing sanctions is not enough to stop its nuclear ambitions and explains why the centrifuges are still running furiously.
Iran’s reason for talking is the threat of tougher sanctions, not existing sanctions.
For talks to be something other than a vain Western hope of averting a bomb and a mere diversionary tactic for Iran, sanctions must be toughened relentlessly. Not acting tough with Iran is precisely the wrong thing to do and the wrong time to do it.
A good strategist knows when to press home his advantage and a bad one forgoes it at the decisive moment.
President Obama’s dovishness will be his legacy, but Israel and the West will bear the consequences.
Liberal democracies need to understand that the Iranians are not Farsi-speaking Westerners. They do not share a culture of liberalism and democracy; on the contrary, they despise it and their ambition to own nuclear weapons is a matter of primary importance for which they will sacrifice almost everything. It gives them the status of a regional superpower and strikes fear in the hearts of their enemies.
The main problem is that Iran is ruled by messianic nationalists with an apocalyptic vision – deterrence of its enemies is not the only reason to own nukes.
The destruction of Israel and Western liberal culture are openly stated ambitions and deserve to be taken seriously. Threats of mutually assured destruction will not deter Iran’s deployment of nuclear weaponry in the hands of its proxies and its policy of state-sponsored international terrorism is reinforced by perceptions of Western enfeeblement.
It is to Iran’s great advantage that liberal nations shy away from understanding the nature of the beast. David Polovin