AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Walking a nuclear tightrope
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/915346.html
Quote:For several years the European Union countries, backed by the Bush administration, tried to formulate a "carrot-and-stick" policy toward Iran. They offered it benefits and diplomatic, economic and technological incentives, including nuclear ones, if it would agree to stop enriching uranium. This approach worked for a year and a half during the term of the previous president, Mohammed Khatami. But in 2005 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president and reshuffled the deck.

In his approach to Iran, Putin is actually improving on the European carrot-and-stick method. When it comes to Israeli and international demands, if there is a chance Iran will listen to anyone, it will listen to Moscow. Russia's message to Iran is: You have a right to enrich uranium for civilian needs, but you don't have to do it now. Russia supports you, but you are liable to lose our support if you are too stubborn.

For Russian diplomacy to be effective, it is accompanied by a double game and ambiguous statements. Russia joined the sanctions imposed on Iran by the UN Security Council, but for the time being opposes additional sanctions. All these steps were meant to preserve Russia's deterrent power against Iran. This is a policy of walking a tightrope, which is like riding a wild horse. Though there is a chance the rider will succeed in restraining the horse, he is also liable to lose the reins, and with them, control.
"bh", that's a nice article, but you forgot one thing. You forgot to also give us your sterling opinion along with it. That is part of the rules here. You can't just throw out something and not give your take on it. I get on Patrick about this , so I would be remiss if I did not do such with you.

After all, your opinion is of great value here.
The neat part is that Putin is playing two games at once here: the game of "restraining Iran" and the game of pitting Iran against the West.
And depending on how the event unravel, Putin can chose which game to win. The guy is showing symptoms of brilliance.

--

But keep in mind that the Iranian nuclear program -- this is what we are most concerned about -- is really not based on Bushehr, and we have no reasons to think that Putin is in position to slow the Iranians. And if Debka is right today about the Red Line having been crossed, it is not a line in the still non-functioning Bushehr reactor.

Quote:DEBKAfile Exclusive: Olmert sounds alarm: Iran has crossed red line for developing a nuclear weapon. It’s too late for sanctions

This is the message prime minister Ehud Olmert is carrying urgently to French President Nicolas Sarkozy Monday and British premier Gordon Brown Tuesday, according to DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources.

Last week, Olmert placed the Israeli intelligence warning of an Iranian nuclear breakthrough before Russian president Vladimir Putin, while Israel’s defense minister Ehud Barak presented the updated intelligence on the advances Iran has made towards its goal of a nuclear weapon to American officials in Washington, including President Bush.

Olmert will be telling Sarkozy and Brown that the moment for diplomacy or even tough sanctions has passed. Iran can only be stopped now from going all the way to its goal by direct, military action. . .
John L Wrote:You forgot to also give us your sterling opinion along with it. That is part of the rules here.
John, my opinion was too obvious. There is standard point in US media - Putin is ready to please Iran at any price, because it harms US interests...
Israel is the most concerned state in this situation and article in Haarets is an answer on this point.
I hadn't posted articles from Asia Times and similar media, I found article in Israeli media purposefuly. I'm sure you understood it without my comments.

mv Wrote:The neat part is that Putin is playing two games at once here: the game of "restraining Iran" and the game of pitting Iran against the West.
Pitting? What for? It's already done without his participation. Do you beleive Ahmadinejad and Bush would be friends without Putin's intrigues?
bh Wrote:
John L Wrote:You forgot to also give us your sterling opinion along with it. That is part of the rules here.
John, my opinion was too obvious. There is standard point in US media - Putin is ready to please Iran at any price, because it harms US interests...
Israel is the most concerned state in this situation and article in Haarets is an answer on this point.
I hadn't posted articles from Asia Times and similar media, I found article in Israeli media purposefuly. I'm sure you understood it without my comments.

Comrade, nothing is 'too obvious' unless you directly state it.

Let me point you to the rules, which you should have already read. And here is Rule #7.


Quote:7. Do not begin a thread without first expressing an opinion of what your position happens to be with relation to the subject. Simply cutting and pasting a subject that does not require any origional thought or time does not help promote discussion. Threads that are started in the above manner are subject to being removed from the forum floor.

If you will note, I always lead by example, by adding my comments to new threads I begin.
John L Wrote:
Quote:7. Do not begin a thread without first expressing an opinion of what your position happens to be with relation to the subject. Simply cutting and pasting a subject that does not require any origional thought or time does not help promote discussion. Threads that are started in the above manner are subject to being removed from the forum floor.

If you will note, I always lead by example, by adding my comments to new threads I begin.


OK, rules are rules...
bh Wrote:Pitting? What for? It's already done without his participation. Do you beleive Ahmadinejad and Bush would be friends without Putin's intrigues?

Of course not. But Ahmadinejad would have been a bit more restrained.
Well, it is quite clear to me that Putin is playing a masterful game. He supports Iran in various ways (missiles, defense, reactors), but sometimes he seems to qualify this, and withhold or limit some of this things that Iran might like. He teases the West along (an Iran too, seemingly) but he also supports activities which annoy the US. As a fringe benefit, he receives accolades in Russia for reinstating Russia's grandeur. Or, is that the main benefit? All of this is cheap for him to do. A few tens of AA missiles, a bit of reactor help, some promises, some posturing. From the standpoint of the US, it is not clear how serious to take the Russians. Is it a new Cold War, or a bluff? Iran capitalizes on this by bluffing even further. A country which would like to not play the "bluffing game" is compelled to prepare for stringent precautions. This may be an expensive way to call the bluff, if it is a bluff.
Quote:Though there is a chance the rider will succeed in restraining the horse, he is also liable to lose the reins, and with them, control.

IMHO, that is the ultimate truth/peril here for Russia.

The Persians are gaming everyone bh ... and I fear it won't end well. The last time you guys tried this sh*t, the threat was 90 miles off our shores ... this time it's right on your border. And back then it was leveraged off of something as 'benign' as ideology. This time Islam plays the major role. Have you guys gotten wiser over the years ... or just a hellava lot more desperate? Shock