perhaps the palestinians should take the position that each home constructed by israelis in the occupied territory belongs to a specific palestinian refugee family.
My sliver of hope is that John Kerry finds his Vietnam Veterans Against the War legs and takes on this fight. In the early 1970's. - after joining that genocidal war - he spoke truth to power.
It may be just my imagination getting away from me.... However, I imagine Kerry standing up for a nuclear free Middle East and then working to expand the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to also address global warming.
It seems somewhat useful to take a moment and ask what could be the motives of the US and Israel (and Iran) if, in fact, it is relatively clear that Iran is not working towards the development of nuclear arms. The US and Israel have excellent intelligence and while it may not be compelling to much of the world, what if this is the case?
I have surmised (out of whole cloth, admittedly) three possible motives, one for each country.
1) The US desires that Iran agree to help stabalize Iraq and use its influence with the Shites of Iraq to help retain the present government and status quo in Iraq. After all, for various reasons the so called "success" of our destruction of Iraq remains very important to the US and without the help of Iran the weak government structure of Iraq may unravel.
2) Israel does not want to see another country in the middle-east be a counter-weight to its military and economic dominance in the area. So, perhaps, Israel is pressuing Obama to take the MEK off the list of terrorist organizations. Above ground support for the MEK in the US and Europe will allow Israel to conduct a long-term war of attrition against Iran and significantly limit Iran's ascendency. While this is a strange concept, how do we explain that Governors Dean and Richardson are both lobbying to legitamize the MEK? After all these guys are not foreign policy wonks. And keep in mind that two administration officials recently disclosed to the NY Times that Israel is presently working with the MEK and were together responsible for the killing of Iran's nuclear scientist (which makes me think Obama is resisting pressure to take the MEK off the list of terroist organizations). Clearly, another benefit to Israel is that the settlements and the Palestinian statehood resolution are off the front pages.
3) And what about Iran? What are its motives for not being more transparent and opening up its various sites for complete inspection by the UN? My guess, and only a guess, is that the Iranian goverment is relatively unpopular and is tapping into nationalist sentiment to boost its domestic support. Iran may be gambling that there will not be an attack or, if there is an attack, it will be limited in its ability to damage and kill. Iran could have other motives, such as a desire to have Israel and the US agree to normalize relations with Iran (and not support the MEK) in exchange for Iran helping to retain the status quo in Iraq.
May Israel be focusing on Iran's nuclear program (and its potential for developing nuclear weapons) so that the world does not focus on Israel's nuclear program and then pressure Israel to agree to a nuclear weapons free middle-east? A nuclear weapons free middle-east seems like such an obvious and constructive solution. Such a pact could lead other nations to follow suit (India and Pakistan perhaps) and may encourage Israel to rely more on its neighbors for peace and secuirty and less on its military might.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
facilitating?
perhaps the palestinians should take the position that each home constructed by israelis in the occupied territory belongs to a specific palestinian refugee family.
My sliver of hope is that John Kerry finds his Vietnam Veterans Against the War legs and takes on this fight. In the early 1970's. - after joining that genocidal war - he spoke truth to power.
It may be just my imagination getting away from me.... However, I imagine Kerry standing up for a nuclear free Middle East and then working to expand the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to also address global warming.
Imagine - you may say I am the only one...
Professor Cole,
It seems somewhat useful to take a moment and ask what could be the motives of the US and Israel (and Iran) if, in fact, it is relatively clear that Iran is not working towards the development of nuclear arms. The US and Israel have excellent intelligence and while it may not be compelling to much of the world, what if this is the case?
I have surmised (out of whole cloth, admittedly) three possible motives, one for each country.
1) The US desires that Iran agree to help stabalize Iraq and use its influence with the Shites of Iraq to help retain the present government and status quo in Iraq. After all, for various reasons the so called "success" of our destruction of Iraq remains very important to the US and without the help of Iran the weak government structure of Iraq may unravel.
2) Israel does not want to see another country in the middle-east be a counter-weight to its military and economic dominance in the area. So, perhaps, Israel is pressuing Obama to take the MEK off the list of terrorist organizations. Above ground support for the MEK in the US and Europe will allow Israel to conduct a long-term war of attrition against Iran and significantly limit Iran's ascendency. While this is a strange concept, how do we explain that Governors Dean and Richardson are both lobbying to legitamize the MEK? After all these guys are not foreign policy wonks. And keep in mind that two administration officials recently disclosed to the NY Times that Israel is presently working with the MEK and were together responsible for the killing of Iran's nuclear scientist (which makes me think Obama is resisting pressure to take the MEK off the list of terroist organizations). Clearly, another benefit to Israel is that the settlements and the Palestinian statehood resolution are off the front pages.
3) And what about Iran? What are its motives for not being more transparent and opening up its various sites for complete inspection by the UN? My guess, and only a guess, is that the Iranian goverment is relatively unpopular and is tapping into nationalist sentiment to boost its domestic support. Iran may be gambling that there will not be an attack or, if there is an attack, it will be limited in its ability to damage and kill. Iran could have other motives, such as a desire to have Israel and the US agree to normalize relations with Iran (and not support the MEK) in exchange for Iran helping to retain the status quo in Iraq.
Any thoughts?
May Israel be focusing on Iran's nuclear program (and its potential for developing nuclear weapons) so that the world does not focus on Israel's nuclear program and then pressure Israel to agree to a nuclear weapons free middle-east? A nuclear weapons free middle-east seems like such an obvious and constructive solution. Such a pact could lead other nations to follow suit (India and Pakistan perhaps) and may encourage Israel to rely more on its neighbors for peace and secuirty and less on its military might.