Story Summary
by Rami G. Khouri
Sometimes things happen so slowly that the casual observer misses them, and one such occurrence is the slow evolution in the United States’ position in its faceoff with Iran.
Two important things seem to have occurred since the spring: Washington seems to have taken control of the Iran situation from Israel’s hard-line prime minister who had been pushing the U.S. toward imminent war, and there seems to be more flexibility among top echelons of the American establishment on the realistic and achievable goal of any negotiations with Iran, which will require simultaneously addressing issues of concern to Iran beyond the nuclear file that has been the main preoccupation of the United States and Israel.
So an important sign of rational change in the U.S. is a more serious assessment of the pros and cons of attacking Iran – an exercise that was not carried out when the United States and Great Britain decided to attack Iraq in 2003 .
Based on my discussions around the United States during the last month, I have a sense that a slow but important shift in American attitudes toward Iran continues to see diplomacy as being the best route to achieving the legitimate goal of preventing Iran from producing a nuclear weapon.
Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Columnist/2012/Oct-17/191661-refreshing-rational-us-views-on-iran.ashx#ixzz29YLWjDc3
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
Categories: Americas, Iran, United States
We can hope that this impression is correct (that UN foreign policy on Iran is now made in Washington and not Jerusalem). And let’s see what will happen after the elections…