Why Obama is Right To Want Talks With Iran

America is surely the most patriotic country in the world, so I put this challenge to every American patriot. It is not the job of a patriot to just support whatever his/her country does. It is the job of the patriot to try to make their country all it can be. Sometimes this means leaving your comfort zone and challenging the status quo.

Obama’s intention to open talks with Iran has become very controversial. Republican Presidential nominee, McCain, has criticized Obama and President Bush has compared it with appeasing the Nazi’s. So why should Obama speak to a state that sponsors terrorism? The simple answer is that it is the best way to stop that state from sponsoring terrorism.

Just before the invasion of Afghanistan, the British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw went to Iran for talks. Although Iran and Afghanistan are both Muslim countries, they belong to different factions of Islam and had a number of border clashes. As a result of Jack Straw’s visit to Iran, the American led alliance actually received useful intelligence information from Iran.

Stop to think about that for a moment. Iran supported the American led alliance against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, so they are clearly not in league with Al Qaeda.

So could there be benefit in Obama talking to Iran? Why not, there was definite benefit when the British did. As for Bush’s comparison of appeasing the Nazi’s, he made no such complaint when the British successfully lobbied Iran on Bush’s behalf.

So what thanks did President Bush give to the Iranians for providing intelligence and not opposing the US presence on their border? He declared Iran as part of the "Axis of evil". The British were stunned.

At the time many Iranians, particularly students, were calling for more liberalization and Western style freedoms. The British diplomacy had brought Iran that little bit closer to the West and by consequence had given the student movement more credibility without direct interference. Bush’s Axis of Evil speech was a gift to the Iranian hardliners who organized big anti American demo’s in Tehran, damaging the aspirations of the student movement.

As Obama has pointed out, the USA talked to the USSR and eventually the Berlin wall came down. Imagine something similar happening in Iran. Negotiation does not mean you are weak. How you negotiate determines strength or weakness.

The United Kingdom will not concede to terrorist demands during sieges or hijacks. However, the United Kingdom did eventually negotiate with the Irish Republican Army (IRA) who conducted a terror campaign for decades in Northern Ireland and the British mainland. The result was not appeasement. The result was peace. The killing stopped. Make no mistake about the IRA, over the decades they killed more people than Al Qaeda has, they were responsible for almost daily shootings and bombings in Northern Ireland as well as regular bombings in London and other British cities. British servicemen could not wear their uniform of-duty for fear of having themselves or their families targeted by the IRA.

As part of the peace deal, IRA bombers were released from British prisons. Those widowed and orphaned by IRA bombs were outraged. If Obama talks to Iran, those widowed and orphaned by Iranian sponsored terrorism in Israel will also be outraged.

However, because those IRA bombers did walk free, thousands of Irish and British people have not felt that pain and anger. There are less widows and orphans because the British government talked to the IRA.

So why would Iran want a nuclear bomb anyway? To blast Israel? To blast the West? Or is it because they feel that they themselves are threatened and feel the need to defend themselves.

Whilst bombing Israel cannot be ruled out, being such a small country it is unlikely that Israel’s Muslim neighbors would appreciate an Iranian nuclear bomb going of so close to their borders with the resultant fall out. Furthermore, Iran would expect a nuclear response from the USA, which they know they could never survive.

As for bombing the West, Iran has not yet sponsored terrorism in the West and is not friendly with Al Qaeda.

But why would Iran feel threatened to the extent of wanting a nuclear bomb? Firstly, when the Islamic government first took over from the former pro-Western Shah of Iran, the West tried to interfere and prop up the Shah against the wishes of the Iranian people. Later the West supported Saddam Hussein into power in Iraq and then supported Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran which cost hundreds of thousands of Iranian lives. In 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian Airliner thinking it was a fighter, killing all on board.

The reason I opened this article with a challenge to patriots comes down to this key question: if one mother has her child killed by terrorism and another mother has her child killed as a result of the foreign policies of a democratic government . . . . . which mother grieves the most? Which one feels the most pain and loss?

Is it conceivable that Iranians might feel terrorized by the West?

Some people will be outraged by this suggestion, but more Iranians have died as a result of Western policies than Americans dying from Iranian terrorism. This is where true patriots must accept responsibility for their countries actions if they want Iran to accept responsibility for theirs. Only then can there be peace.

Now American troops are positioned in Afghanistan on Iran’s Eastern border and in Iraq on their Western border. To Iran’s south is the Persian Gulf with numerous US warships.

If you are old enough, (or know your history) think back to the Cuban missile crisis and how threatened the USA felt when nuclear missiles were being placed so close by. Yet Iran has the world largest nuclear power on almost every side, labeling them as evil and (to date) refusing to even talk to them. You can argue that Iran deserves it. Maybe you are right. Nevertheless, they are still going to want to defend themselves whether they deserve it or not.

British diplomacy with Iran and the IRA has demonstrated that talking can definitely get worthwhile results without having to appease. American diplomacy with the USSR has shown that you can support change from within. If Iran feels that it is secure, then they might no longer feel the need to have nuclear weapons.

Resource:
Terrorism strikes without warning. There are few precautions the individual can take except in the case of bio-terrorism, where the US Homeland Security has recommended stockpiling of a patented new advanced colloidal silver solution.