Iran Sees 'Positive Signs' as Military Option is Ceded
Iran has good reason to see “positive signs” in the atomic proposal delivered by the EU’s Javier Solana. Iranian chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said, “The proposals had some positive steps in them and some ambiguities which should be removed.”
The outright removal of military strikes as a potential consequence for Iran’s continued belligerence is without doubt chief among the ‘positive steps’ from the Iranian perspective. Reportedly, the deal not only rules out military action, but also seeks to terminate some existing sanctions - including the resumption of pare parts supplies for Iran’s military air fleet - in place for sponsoring global terrorism, not nuclear belligerence. Coupled with Russian and Chinese continued opposition to any new UN sanctions as a potential penalty for Iran, there is not much leverage left for the West to negotiate with. The West has negotiated itself into a state of unthinkably inert weakness with regard to applying pressure on the regime to cease their nuclear weapons program.
Larijani added that, after reviewing the documents in detail, Iran hopes to “have another round of talks and negotiations to achieve a balanced and logical conclusion.” There is already an imbalance from a Western perspective, as any teeth in the proposal have been effectively and voluntarily removed. Even still, the Iranians look for little more than a new round of talks, which translate into more time. Time is Iran’s most precious commodity, and they have managed it well.
Even though Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice may have ‘demanded’ that Iran respond to the deal in “weeks, not months”, that too will readily fall by the wayside under international pressure if Iran gives the outward appearance of talking, discussing and ‘working’ toward an agreement.
Meanwhile, true to form, the price of oil dropped by a third of a dollar immediately on Larijani’s favorable response to the surreal package offered Iran, just as it spikes immediately on belligerent threats from the mullah regime. Iran uses its Oil Weapon to better fund their nuclear weapons drive. Iran also uses the West’s desire for conflict avoidance to string out talks, ensuring a constant supply of time free of measurable consequence.
The Iranians are certainlynot in a mode of conflict avoidance. Ahmadinejad himself, a messianic president seeking to ‘pave the way for the return of the 12th Imam’, openly acknowledges the conflict as a “historic war between the oppressor and the world of Islam,” while the West continues to attempt to impart on the same that it has not declared a ‘war on Islam.’ The two are not mutually exclusive.
In a war that has been declared upon the West by the most violent Islamists – from al-Qaeda to the Iranian regime – the West continually cedes ground to their enemy in efforts to be seen by the rest of the world as reasonable.
In the face of an enemy – again, from Iran to al-Qaeda - that openly declares hatred for and war upon Jews and Crusaders (Christians), the West refuses to reciprocate with an equally racist/religious declaration of war upon all of Islam. This is the difference between the West and Islamists. Maintaining the possible consequence of military action is decidedly not a declaration of war upon Islam. However, ceding ground to the Iranian terror masters through the removal of the military option is clear appeasement in a war we did not declare.