OSC: Iran Reaction to Possible US Interest Section
The USG Open Source Center reports on reactions in Iran to the possibility of the opening of a US interest section, i.e. a muted embassy, in Tehran.
OSC Report: Iran -- Reaction to Mottaki's Comments on Possible US Interest Section
Thursday, July 10, 2008 . . .
'Iran -- Muted Reaction to Foreign Minister's Positive Comments on Possible US Interest Section Iranian officials and conservative media outlets have been unusually silent following Foreign Minister Manucher Mottaki's statement that Iran might consider a US interest section in Tehran, suggesting the issue is still undecided by the leadership. Reformist media have characterized Mottaki's remarks as a "green light" for diplomacy with the West.
In contrast to initially unfavorable reactions by officials to a 23 June Washington Post report that Washington was debating having an outpost in Tehran, on 3 July Mottaki said the idea of an interest section would be "considered" if it were officially proposed, and that Iran "welcomes relations" with the US at tourism and cultural levels (Iranian Student News Agency). Although officials including Majles Speaker Ali Larijani had been quick to criticize the initial reports of US consideration for an interest section, thus far officials have remained largely silent about Mottaki's remarks. Media Increasingly Receptive, Suspicions Remain
Reformist media have noted possible benefits of an interest section, but largely absent from the debate are conservative media that originally charged the US aimed to establish an intelligence base and create unrest inside of the country.
The E'temad and Mardom Salari dailies defined Mottaki's remarks as a positive step in US-Iran ties, calling it "another green light" by Tehran to Washington (3 July).
Although E'temad-e Melli questioned how successful a US interest section in Tehran would be given Iran's "complicated" relationship with the US, it admitted that such a move would "increase the level of communications and cooperation." Referring to the delay in the third round of talks between senior US and Iranian diplomats on Iraq, it stated that there is a "need to renew diplomatic channels" (5 July).
Citing instances of Hamas and Syria negotiating with Israel, the moderate Kargozaran daily argued that accepting the offer would not be construed as "political weakness or diplomatic backwardness," particularly at a time the international community is "increasingly falling in line with America." It said it would be "wise to watch for every diplomatic green light from whatever quarter" (3 July).
In a possibly related development, the head of the judiciary, Ayatollah Hashemi-Shahrudi, announced the creation of a new Foreign Visits Monitoring Committee, set up to monitor trips made by foreign delegations to Iran, stressing that any invitations or requests for foreign delegations to visit Iran would have to be studied and approved by this committee first (Javan, 29 June).'

|
Facebook





1 Comments:
You mentioned solar street lighting in Baghdad. Here is a company that provides such a product, Carmanah, based in B.C., Canada.
http://www.carmanahlighting.com/
They claim their lighting to be cost effective. In looking at their products and the claims for cost effectiveness, here is a summary:
- Installation costs are much less than electric lighting -- no need to run wires, dig trenching, connect to grid.
- Running costs are less -- no electricity bill.
- Maintenance costs are less -- bulbs (actually, LEDs) last much longer, maybe 10 years. Maintenance consists of replacing batteries every 5-10 years.
The cost of a light pole with solar panel, battery and LEDs is higher, but in the USA at least, the net cost to a municipality is significantly lower.
Extrapolate this to Baghdad, and what would be the advantage?
- you cannot take out street lighting by taking out a power line, transformer or power station.
- Cost per pole is higher, maintenance costs are probably less than the USA, so that is a disadvantage.
- However, when talking about maintenance costs, if lights are taken down repeatedly, destroyed, etc, solar lighting probably comes out ahead.
- The downside might be that the lights are an attractive magnet for vandals -- to steal them and move them elsewhere.
Otherwise, I think solar lighting is an ideal situation for Baghdad.
If you look through the Carmanah website, you will see that the US DOD is one of their biggest customers. In particular, they have bought a lot of solar lighting for airstrips. An advantage, says the USAF, is that they can be installed fast and then picked up and moved to another location. Makes you kinda think, doesn't it.
Solar lighting has been sold to airports in South America as well -- cheap and easy to install. I imagine that it is hugely preferable to stick these in the ground versus running powerlines under and along runways and taxi strips.
Post a Comment
<< Home