Subject: Fw: Asia Times, April 13, 2012
From: "fariborz fatemi" <[email-masked]>
To: "fariborz fatemi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:43:01 -0700 (PDT)

ASIA TIMES

April 13, 2012

[Re Surrender now, or we'll bomb you later, Apr 10, Iran talks have right mix for history, Apr 12,
 and Nuclear chess in Istanbul, Apr 13] These three articles are an astute analysis of what is myth and what is reality concerning Iran's nuclear program. Asia Times Online should be commended for printing them. And they should be required reading for they counter the daily dose of speculative fiction, outright misinformation and plain nonsense coming from the Western media, think-tanks, and the Israel-can-do-no-wrong crowd in the United States Congress. 

Western powers including Israel have acknowledged that Iran has not decided to build a bomb, does not have one, and is years away from having an effective delivery system. In fact, the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, said last February that "the Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons." Deep mistrust and enmity have characterized America's relations with Iran for over 30 years. As an example, during the Bush/Cheney administration, US diplomats were not even allowed to speak with their Iranian counterparts. 

If there is to be any success in talks,
 statements that prejudice and inflame, should stop. If both sides believe that the other side has no intention of negotiating in good faith, then meeting is a sham. Negotiations should be just that, negotiations. Neither side wins everything, but both sides win something. "Demands," idle threats, are not the language of diplomacy. And domestic intransigence on both sides, that would like to see the talks fail, should be isolated from negotiations. With so much suspicion, confidence building measures are desperately needed. 

Two years ago, believing they had the blessing of America, Brazil and Turkey negotiated a deal concerning Iran's nuclear program. A deal that, if accepted
 by Western powers, had the potential to put an end to the constant threats and hyperbole surrounding that program. With the president of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff, visiting President Obama, and the talks pending in Turkey, why not seize the moment and revive that deal? Brazil is trusted by the Iranians as an even-handed friend. Iran wants recognition of its right under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to a nuclear program. The US and its allies want to make sure the program is not a weaponization program. Strict transparency is the issue and Iran has publicly said it will provide more transparency if Western powers show they are as serious about negotiations as they are about sanctions. Is this not a good place to start by accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative?

Fariborz S Fatemi

United States