My conversations with hard-liners and reformers inside Tehran also suggested something deeper: that under the right circumstances, Iran may still be willing to stop short of building a bomb. "Iran would like to have the technology, and that is enough for deterrence," says S.M.H. Adeli, Iran's moderate, urbane former ambassador to London.
And what of other overlapping interests? Let's start with Iraq, the one area where Washington does seem to acknowledge it needs Tehran's help, even as the administration continues to accuse Iran of delivering sophisticated makeshift bombs to Iraqi militants. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Shiite-dominated government "is of strategic importance to us," Rezai said. "We want this government to stay in power. Rival Sunni countries oppose Maliki. We haven't." It also stands to reason that in Afghanistan, Lebanon and the new "Hamastan" in Gaza -- all places where Tehran wields enormous influence -- an Iran that is encouraged to play a broader regional security role could become more cooperative.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Hmmm... interesting
Excerpted from: Iran Has a Message. Are We Listening? by Michael Hirsh in the Washington Post:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
That would be nice (Iran stopping short of building a nuclear weapon).
Now, why would having the technology without building a bomb be a deterrent? That makes no sense. Fear of retaliation deters. Inability to retaliate does not. This is just more sweet talking by the regime to convince its enemies not to attack until it is too late.
Post a Comment