Rice dangles chance of normalizing relationship with Iran

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2008-01-24 05:06pm

Linka to Reuters wrote:DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday she believed the nuclear stand-off with Iran could be resolved diplomatically but that Tehran must not be allowed to become a nuclear weapons power.

Just one day after getting agreement on a draft U.N. Security Council resolution against Tehran, Rice offered the incentive of a "more normal relationship" and expanded trade if Iran gave up sensitive nuclear work, according to the prepared text of her speech to the World Economic Forum in Switzerland.

"Ultimately, though, we believe that we can resolve this problem through diplomacy," Rice said according to the text, which was distributed by conference organizers.

"If Iran would suspend its uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities - which is an international demand, not just an American one - then we could begin negotiations, and we could work over time to build a new, more normal relationship," she said.

Rice said this new relationship could be defined not by fear and mistrust but growing cooperation, expanding trade and exchange, and the peaceful resolution of differences.

In a conciliatory note after weeks of anti-Iranian rhetoric by the Bush administration, Rice said the United States had no desire for Iran to be a "permanent enemy".

"Iranians are a proud people with a great culture, and we respect the contributions they have made to world civilization," she said.

But she said Washington had real differences with Iran's government, from its pursuit of a nuclear weapon to support for terrorism and what the United States sees as Tehran's destabilizing policies in Iraq.

Rice said that agreement reached between foreign ministers of major powers in Berlin on Tuesday for a third sanctions resolution showed that the world remained united over not wanting Iran to become a nuclear weapons power.

"We will continue to hold Iran to its international obligations," said Rice.

Iran tried to start a normalization process under Khatami and Clinton. Lets see if this goes anywhere. ("Only Bush could go to Tehran." does have sort of a nice catch to it.)

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2008-01-24 05:16pm

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't an investigation (either by the UN or the IAEA) conclude that there's nothing going on but trying to build civvie reactors?

And yes I understand that the Bush Administration is dumb enough to use the same trick twice.

Sidewinder · Post by **Sidewinder** » 2008-01-24 08:24pm

About time. Hopefully, both parties will support opening diplomatic relations with Iran instead of obsessing over who and where the President's dick has been.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-24 08:29pm

I love the way Kerry was virtually crucified in 2004 for proposing diplomatic relations with Iran and possibly a program of supplying them with uranium so they wouldn't have to start their own enrichment program. And now, the Republicans have come up with brilliant ideas like offering to supply processed uranium so they won't have to start up their own enrichment program, and offering to open diplomatic relations.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2008-01-24 09:14pm

Sidewinder wrote:About time. Hopefully, both parties will support opening diplomatic relations with Iran instead of obsessing over who and where the President's dick has been.

Er... to be fair. Clinton sorta gave the shaft to Iran. Dual Containment wasn't exactly the best strategy to take if you want to normalize relations and restore peace to a shattered region. And ignoring Khatami's attempts to shore up his internal support by breaching headroom with Clinton with his "exchange of civilizations" concept didn't exactly do America, or Iran, any favours.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2008-01-24 09:16pm

Uhuh. The only thing we should have to do with iran is making them our testing ground for combat nuclear weapons. (i always loved that Russianism)

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-01-24 09:43pm

Yeah, because that'd totally be an outcome worth the costs.

J · Post by J » 2008-01-24 09:53pm

MKSheppard wrote:Uhuh. The only thing we should have to do with iran is making them our testing ground for combat nuclear weapons. (i always loved that Russianism)

Better nuke China and a few other Asian countries while you're at it since they're the ones buying most of Iran's oil, and if Iran is a glowing crater their customers are going to be competing for our oil.

PeZook · Post by **PeZook** » 2008-01-25 08:44am

What, so they suddendly aren't a bunch of vicious bloodthirsty fanatics who want to eat US babies raw?

Has something changed while I was looking the other way?

Sidewinder · Post by **Sidewinder** » 2008-01-25 09:58am

PeZook wrote:What, so they suddendly aren't a bunch of vicious bloodthirsty fanatics who want to eat US babies raw?

Has something changed while I was looking the other way?

Since George W. Bush stupidly let Iraq transform into a quagmire comparable to Vietnam, the US has learned-- the hard way-- that tough talk and macho posturing doesn't promote American interests very much.