A Sane View of The Diplomacy vs. War Options with Iran: Watch Trita Parsi on Last Night’s Daily Show
Perhaps, one of the wisest, most common sense observations that I have heard to date regarding the current situation with Iran can be heard in the following clip from the extended interview of my good friend, Trita Parsi, President of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), last night on Jon Stewart’s show. Here is the quote:
You don’t get democracy to be born out of a war, I think that we should have learned that by now…and where there is a war, it enables governments to further do away with civil liberties of their populations…The pro-democracy movement [in Iran] is yelling and screaming “Don’t go to war”. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like the media is picking that up.
Here is Part 2 of the interview (which the quote comes from)
In Part 1 of the interview, which was the actual footage shown on air, Trita presents some insightful counter-arguments to the current push for military action against Iran. Trita’s new book, The Single Roll of the Dice, documents the history of U.S. diplomacy with Iran from 2003 to present and how internal domestic interests and unlucky timing prevented any progress.
|The Daily Show with Jon Stewart||Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Exclusive – Trita Parsi Extended Interview – Pt. 1|
- Parsi: Assassination to scuttle talks (globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com)
Six Former European Ambassadors Buck The “Fear-Only” Approach to Iran. They Believe World Still Needs To Engage
What grabs headlines are the constant reports of Iran’s expansion of its nuclear program – including Iranian officials’ announcement just this week of a tripling of Iran’s enrichment potential. However, a more even keeled, unemotional approach was taken in an op-ed yesterday in the LA Times. Six former European ambassadors (who might actually know a thing or two about understanding and dealing with real-life, living and breathing Iranian diplomats and politicians) call for continued engagement with Iran. Instead of hyperbole, they calmly review some of the actual facts with regard to Iran’s nuclear program and indicate that by all accounts, Iran appears to have adhered pretty well to the requirements of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (to which Iran is a signatory – unlike some other countries). The main thrust of their argument, however, is that even while it is important to be watchful of Iran, the world should continue to attempt to engage with them.
“Of course, a dilemma lingers in the minds of most of our leaders. Why offer the Iranian regime an opening that could help it restore its internal and international legitimacy? Should we not wait for a more palatable successor before making a new overture?
This is a legitimate question, but we should not overestimate the influence of a nuclear negotiation on internal developments in Iran. Ronald Reagan used to call the Soviet Union the “evil empire,” but that did not stop him from negotiating intensely with Mikhail Gorbachev on nuclear disarmament. Should we blame him for having slowed down the course of history?
The five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany should certainly keep the focus on matters of political and human rights, but they should also try harder to solve a frustrating and still urgent proliferation problem. By doing so, we would reduce a serious source of tension in a region that longs more than ever for tranquility.”
Read the full story here: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ambassadors-iran-20110609,0,2564096.story
- Iran to triple uranium enrichment (jta.org)
- World powers concerned over Iran nuclear programme (alternet.org)