U.S. and Iran: Rouhani Is No Pussycat

By Steve Weissman, Reader Supported News

25 September 13

e are encouraged that President Rouhani received from the Iranian people a mandate to pursue a more moderate course," President Barack Obama told the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday. "Given President Rouhani's stated commitment to reach an agreement, I am directing John Kerry to pursue this effort with the Iranian government, in close cooperation with the European Union, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China."

Rouhani followed suit as if pre-arranged. "Iran's nuclear program – and for that matter, that of all other countries – must pursue exclusively peaceful purposes," he declared. "Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran's security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions."

"I listened carefully to the statement made by President Obama today at the General Assembly," he went on. "Commensurate with the political will of the leadership in the United States and hoping that they will refrain from following the short-sighted interests of warmongering pressure groups, we can arrive at a framework to manage our differences."

Iran, he said, "is prepared to engage immediately in time-bound and result-oriented talks to build mutual confidence and removal of mutual uncertainties with full transparency."

With that, the talks will go ahead, but not with a sterile debate about Iran's intent. As I tried to make clear in my last column, Obama and his European allies show far more concern over Iran's potential capability to build a bomb should it ever chose to break out of regular inspections and continual monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). They want the IAEA to have greater access than Iran now permits. They want the world to know at any time the extent of Iran's capacity to create highly-enriched bomb-grade uranium (90% U-235). And they want to reduce or eliminate Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched to near 20% of the fissionable U-235, which – at least theoretically – the Iranians could further enrich to bomb-grade.

Rouhani completely denied the validity of these concerns, blaming them on "propagandistic and unfounded faith-phobic, Islamo-probic, Shia-phobic, and Iran-phobic discourses," which he spent much of his speech lambasting in the harshest terms. Unfortunately, the UN's English-language interpreter made a thoughtful speech absolutely turgid, and the only transcript I could find in time came from, of all places, The Times of Israel.

"The so-called 'Iranian threat' has been employed as an excuse to justify a long catalogue of crimes and catastrophic practices over the past three decades," Rouhani declared. Among these he cited "the arming of the Saddam Hussein regime with chemical weapons and supporting the Taliban and Al-Qaida." Without naming either Obama or the United States, he also condemned the imperial bullying in Washington's constant refrain, "The military option is on the table."

Nonetheless, Rouhani committed himself to resolve the nuclear issue "through reliance on hope and prudent moderation, mutual respect, and rejection of violence and extremism." With crippling sanctions and the threat of military options in mind, what better alternative did he have? "Our national interests make it imperative that we remove any and all reasonable concerns about Iran's peaceful nuclear program," he said. But he was not simply crying uncle. Other nations would have to accept and respect "the right to enrichment inside Iran" and the country's "enjoyment of other related nuclear rights."

"Nuclear knowledge in Iran has been domesticated now and the nuclear technology, inclusive of enrichment, has already reached industrial scale," he said. "It is, therefore, an illusion, and extremely unrealistic, to presume that the peaceful nature of the nuclear program of Iran could be ensured through impeding the program via illegitimate pressures."

Under Rouhani's brief leadership, the Iranians have already demonstrated both the limits and the possibilities of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's newly declared "heroic flexibility." They greatly reduced their controversial stockpile of near 20% enriched uranium by turning nearly half of it into fuel rods for the country's medical reactor, which makes the uranium permanently unavailable for weapons. The Iranians say they will convert the remaining stock as well.

As the indispensable Juan Cole brought to attention, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization has also publicly stated a willingness to negotiate the grade of enrichment. "The right to enrichment is a sovereign right which we will not relinquish," he told reporters. "However, the grade and extent of enrichment can be discussed at the (upcoming) talks."

Obama's flexibility sounded far less heroic. "We are not seeking regime change," he declared. "And we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy." But he left no doubt that the U.S. would use "all elements of our power, including military force," to "ensure the free flow of energy from the region to the world" and stop "the development or use of weapons of mass destruction." Though not, of course, by Israel.

Obama said all this right before he dismissed "the notion of American empire" as no more than "useful propaganda." And he never once mentioned Iran's right to enrich uranium, which could become the number one stumbling block in negotiations.

That remains the last, best hope of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his amen corner in the U.S. – those Rouhani called "warmongering pressure groups." Beyond closing down Iran's most advanced enrichment facility at Fordo, which Rouhani could well agree to do, they want Iran to halt all uranium enrichment, remove all enriched uranium from their territory, and stop the manufacture of plutonium. Until all this happens, says Netanyahu, "the pressure on Iran needs to be stepped up, not let up."

So, the talks are on, and so is the fight within the United States and among its allies.

A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France, where he is researching a new book, "Big Money: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How To Break Their Hold."

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.