Ahmadinejad says Western pressure empowers Iran

[maddezmom]

Source: AP

Ahmadinejad says Western pressure empowers Iran
TEHRAN, Iran — An impasse in nuclear talks between world powers and Iran would only hurt the West by making Tehran push harder to advance its technology, according to the latest remarks by the Iranian president.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comments can be seen as a veiled threat that Iran would go ahead with enriching uranium to a higher level should negotiations with the international community fail.

"Cooperation with Iran is in the West's interest" while pressures on the Persian nation would only make the country "more powerful and advanced," Ahmadinejad said, according to a statement posted late Sunday on the presidential Web site.

The remarks come after President Barack Obama said Iran is running out of time to agree a U.N.-brokered plan to ship its low-enriched enriched uranium out of the country for further processing.



Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iRqjZV1Meppj40hTs8IBOv4DdsQwD9C0HA702

[RC]

1. I've thought the same thing for quite some time.

Quit leaning on Iran and they won't feel the need to defend themselves so much. Iran is another case of us, U.S. making our own enemies.

[pampango]

2. PW Botha said the same thing about apartheid in South Africa years ago.

He always contended that the more pressure the West put on South Africa to eliminate apartheid, the more united South Africans would be behind the policy, because they wouldn't appreciate international "meddling" in domestic affairs. In the short run, that may have been the case. In the long run, he was obviously wrong.

[bstender]

3. an important difference being

one was pressure to abandon a political ideology, the other is pressure to abandon the ability to defend yourself from naked military aggression.

[pampango]

4. And South Africa, according to Botha, was defending itself against naked interference in their

internal affairs. South Africa developed nuclear weapons as a means to prevent this. It didn't help in the long run and the apartheid government disappeared into the dust bin of history without military action. SA has since dismantled its nuclear weapons and joined the Nonproliferation Treaty.

I believe Iran is pursuing nuclear technology to provide an alternative energy source to its finite amount of oil. It is a member of the NPT and has never claimed to intend to build nuclear weapons (unlike North Korea). The government of Iran has much more to fear from its own people in the long run (as did the South African government) than it does from the outside. I know there is the scenario where Iran has to build nuclear weapons because Israel (or the US) might attack it for building nuclear weapons.

Dictators and heads of minority governments know that pressure from the outside can cause a lot of trouble for them. Their main interest, as with most politicians, is maintaining power. They control the security forces so, at least in the short run, they have little to fear from internal resistance. Posturing about interference from outside both sounds vaguely patriotic and removes the one immediate source of instability for the regime in power. Mugabe, Kim, the Burmese junta and many others, all use warnings about "interference in our internal affairs" as a tactic to deal with threats to their power. In most cases their "warnings" have little to do with what is good for the citizens of their countries, but what is good for them.

South Africa was a good example of why this kind of government is right to be concerned about "interference" from outside. It contributed to the increase in internal opposition to the apartheid government that eventually led to its downfall. Similarly, Iranian government leaders are right to worry about international "interference". They are having a difficult time controlling domestic opposition as it is.

[bstender]

5. legitimacy

ok, but nevertheless, ahmadinejad can point to something every Iranian supports, namely, their survival. Botha did not.

> "there is the scenario where Iran has to build nuclear weapons because Israel (or the US) might attack it for building nuclear weapons."

rather, they need to build nuclear weapons bc Israel/US _IS_ attacking it, continuously for 40 years. not pursuing nuclear weapons is rather suicidal for Iran it seems to me...like bringing a knife to a gunfight. The Iranian people are well aware of this real and present threat from two nuclear armed states pursuing an illegitimate colonial agenda.


i agree with your statement about domestic opposition and politicians' primary desire to maintain power, in general, but

> "Iranian government leaders are right to worry about international "interference". They are having a difficult time controlling domestic opposition as it is."

is not accurate. the Iranian people are much more behind their govt. than the recent western election attack suggests. not that they do not have to maintain their legitimacy in the eyes of their people, far from it, but they are succeeding at present, especially in the foreign policy arena.

[Psephos]

6. "Iranian people are much more behind their govt. than the recent western election attack suggests"

Just a thought, but you might want to cut back a little on the medical marijuana. ;)