Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 08:25 PM
Original message
Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift
Source: Guardian UK

Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift
Symbolic gesture gives assurances that US does not want to topple Islamic regime

Robert Tait and Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 29 January 2009 00.05 GMT
Article history


Obama administration officials have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks, the Guardian has learned.

The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November. It would be in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.

Diplomats say Obama's letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an "axis of evil".

It would be intended to allay the suspicions of Iran's leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/28/barack-obama-letter-to-iran
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. If true, which sounds like it is, this would be really great. This would really
send a message to the rest of the world that our foreign policy actually CAN change when a new President is elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Hopefully Ahmadinejads radical tone will become more moderate with our new administration..
I can understand getting what you give. Bush was far more radical than Ahmadinejad could ever even pretend to be. He is a well educated and very intelligent man. A Muslim scholar and Persian intellectual. I think Ahmadinejad and Obama are as alike as they are different. I think they will find they share many common grounds. Both are deeply dedicated to the democracy of their governments. Both are teachers. Both have the potential to be the historically great Statesmen of our time. Our countries also have a lot in common. Our values on human rights and even principle of our Constitution can be traced back to ancient Persian Empire and Cyrus the Great. At the time of the founding of our country. The Cyropaedia(Education of Cyrus)by Xenophon was required reading for diplomats and statesmen. Granted it was more of a romanticized tales of Cyrus the great than historically accurate. The love of a boy for his grandfather and his grandfathers love of him. That turns to a Kings love of his people and their love of him. I thinks Iran's becoming a democracy would fulfill an idealized last will and testament of Cyrus the Great. He consider all the people of his Kingdom to be his children. Democracy would provide an actual means for his children to inherit and rule the Kingdom he built and made the envy of the world. In that context the 1953 overthrow of the democratically elected government was grievous wrong that even violates our values of spreading democracy to the world. Iran had that democracy and we took it from them. We subjected them to the rule of a King while thinking that to be unsuitable, unacceptable, and substandard for ourselves. If we can apologize for our wrong doings in allowing slavery. We can apologize for our wrong doing in this injustice to Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
curious one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. We need friends around the world, no more enemies for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. If we are going to resume our friendship. We both must be able to admit that we have done -
each other a great many wrongs. We must both agree to stop this viscous cycle that keeps us separate and untrusting of each other. It is imperative that we both be honest in seeking the truth of these misdeeds, trespasses, and transgressions against each other. That we be able to forgive each other of our past wrongs against each other. That we seek means of avoiding doing each other wrongs in the future. That we discuss our differences intelligently with honor and integrity as equals. That we settle those differences to a mutual satisfaction. To preserve that equality. Then we can truly be "friends."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. Bush moved Iran to the right with his rhetoric and bullying

Hopefully Obama can help shift it to something more reasonable
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. If anyone can meet them in the middle. It's Obama. I have faith in him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kitty1 Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. Israel is going to be so pissed.;.Obama just lit a match....
in the ME as far as Israel is concerned. This Gaza business is just the beginning. Things could get pretty ugly between this administration and the Israeli one.
Iran must be gleeful over this and sticking their middle finger up in gesture to Israel.
Now that Obama is playing nice and polite with the Iranians, it's anyone's guest as to how things will play out.
Personally, I think this reply on Obama's part is appropriate and necessary to ease any tensions.
I'm sure the administration is not so stupid though as to accept everything that comes out of Iran at face value. They'll have to tread carefully here because of Iran's support and command over Hamas and Hezbollah. As a state that advocates terrorism, it's a precarious situation. But then , the U.S. govt supports it too when it's beneficial so they're in the same arena.
Israel will probably make some heavy handed ultimatums to the U.S. and if they don't comply, Israel may just take matters into their own hands soon.
Maybe cause an international incident of some kind which of course involves Iran. A provocation at sea. Something like that. I'm guessing in the next few weeks, something will occur to stir the pot over there. Break up the little tea party going on right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Fuck Israel.
Note that I do NOT say fuck Israelis - they deserve much better leadership than the bloodthirsty expansionist murderers in charge right now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
15. In a similar vein, I do NOT say fuck DU - we deserve much better posters.
But I guess we deal with the posters we have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. But without US backing (especially in military aid and sales), just how powerful is Israel?
If one is wise, one does not bite off the hand that feeds one.

If one is wiser, one takes a good long hard look at one's self and makes the changes that are required to not just survive but thrive in the world that is, not the world that one wants (to paraphrase a former US government war criminal).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. Tehran calls on US to apologise for past 'crimes'
Edited on Wed Jan-28-09 11:29 PM by struggle4progress
By Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran and Daniel Dombey in Washington
Published: January 28 2009 22:47 | Last updated: January 28 2009 22:47

President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad on Wednesday called on the new US administration to apologise for what he called the “crimes they committed against the Iranian nation” if it truly sought a change in relations.

His comments came just a day after the Arab television channel al-Arabiya broadcast an interview with Barack Obama in which the US president said Washington needed to be willing to talk to Tehran and explore “potential avenues for progress”.

In a speech in the western city of Kermanshah, Mr Ahmadi-Nejad said Iran would welcome change in the US position provided it was “fundamental”, adding that his government would “patiently” look into the new president’s actions.

“Those who talk about change should know change is to apologise the Iranian nation to help make up for their black record and crimes they committed against the Iranian nation,” he said ...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/de7f9b18-ed8a-11dd-bd60-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Apologize?
You've got to be kidding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. The 1953 CIA coup that put the Shah in power, would be a good start
Edited on Thu Jan-29-09 12:48 AM by IndianaGreen
In 1953 the CIA engineered a coup to topple democratically elected leader Mohammad Mosaddeq and put the Shah in power. Everything involving US-Iran relations originated with that coup, whose goal was to secure Iran's oil for British and American oil companies.

On the morning of August 19, 1953, a crowd of demonstrators operating at the direction of pro-Shah organizers with ties to the CIA made its way from the bazaars of southern Tehran to the center of the city. Joined by military and police forces equipped with tanks, they sacked offices and newspapers aligned with Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq and his advisers, as well as the communist Tudeh Party and others opposed to the monarch. By early afternoon, clashes with Mosaddeq supporters were taking place, the fiercest occurring in front of the prime minister's home. Reportedly 200 people were killed in that battle before Mosaddeq escaped over his own roof, only to surrender the following day. At 5:25 p.m., retired General Fazlollah Zahedi, arriving at the radio station on a tank, declared to the nation that with the Shah's blessing he was now the legal prime minister and that his forces were largely in control of the city.

Although official U.S. reports and published accounts described Mosaddeq's overthrow and the shah's restoration to power as inspired and carried out by Iranians, this was far from the full story. Memoirs of key CIA and British intelligence operatives and historical reconstructions of events have long established that a joint U.S.-British covert operation took place in mid-August, which had a crucial impact. Yet, there has continued to be a controversy over who was responsible for the overthrow of the popularly elected Mosaddeq, thanks to accounts by, among others, former Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and Zahedi's son, who later became a fixture in the Shah's regime. Those versions of events virtually ignored the possibility that any outside actors played a part, claiming instead that the movement to reinstate the Shah was genuine and nationwide in scope.

Now, a new volume of essays by leading historians of Iranian politics, the coup, and U.S. and British policy presents the most balanced, detailed, and up-to-date assessment of this landmark event to date. Based on new documentation and extensive interviews of participants, Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran (Syracuse University Press, 2004) offers an abundance of new information, analysis and insights into the staging of the overthrow as well as the historical, political, and social context which made it possible.

Among the book's main conclusions is that Iranians and non-Iranians both played crucial parts in the coup's success. The CIA, with help from British intelligence, planned, funded and implemented the operation. When the plot threatened to fall apart entirely at an early point, U.S. agents on the ground took the initiative to jump-start the operation, adapted the plans to fit the new circumstances, and pressed their Iranian collaborators to keep going. Moreover, a British-led oil boycott, supported by the United States, plus a wide range of ongoing political pressures by both governments against Mosaddeq, culminating in a massive covert propaganda campaign in the months leading up to the coup helped create the environment necessary for success.

However, Iranians also contributed in many ways. Among the Iranians involved were the Shah, Zahedi and several non-official figures who worked closely with the American and British intelligence services. Their roles in the coup were clearly vital, but so also were the activities of various political groups - in particular members of the National Front who split with Mosaddeq by early 1953, and the Tudeh party - in critically undermining Mosaddeq's base of support. The volume provides substantial detail and analysis about the roles of each of these groups and individuals, and even includes scrutiny of Mosaddeq and the ways in which he contributed to his own demise.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB126/index.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. Most certainly not. Just ask all the families of people killed by SAVAK, the Shah's
secret police that was supported by the CIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Exactly
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Iran_KH.html

The notorious Iranian secret police, SAVAK, created under the guidance of the CIA and Israel, spread its tentacles all over the world to punish Iranian dissidents. According to a former CIA analyst on Iran, SAVAK was instructed in torture techniques by the Agency. Amnesty International summed up the situation in 1976 by noting that Iran had the "highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture which is beyond belief. No country in the world has a worse record in human rights than Iran."

When to this is added a level of corruption that "startled even the most hardened observers of Middle Eastern thievery", it is understandable that the Shah needed his huge military and police force, maintained by unusually large US aid and training programs, to keep the lid down for as long as he did. Said Senator Hubert Humphrey, apparently with some surprise:

"Do you know what the head of the Iranian Army told one of our people? He said the Army was in good shape, thanks to U.S. aid-it was now capable of coping with the civilian population. That Army isn't going to fight the Russians. It's planning to fight the Iranian people."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-09 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. Soft-spoken line from Washington may terrify Tehran
Ahmadinejad's ferocity underlines the potency of the new policy of seeking to influence rather than oust the ayatollahs
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
Thursday 29 January 2009 00.05 GMT

... The ferocity of Ahmadinejad's response does make one thing clear: the Tehran hardliners are more terrified of a moderate and charismatic new voice from Washington than all the sabres rattled by the Bush administration ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/28/us-iran-new-foreign-policy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
13. Israel doesn't want peace with Iran. We'll see if Obama is Israel's puppet. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shardik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
16. Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift
Source: Guardian

Officials of Barack Obama's administration have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks, the Guardian has learned.

The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November last year. It is in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.

Diplomats said Obama's letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an "axis of evil".

It would be intended to allay the ­suspicions of Iran's leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.



Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/28/barack-obama-letter-to-iran
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prometheus Bound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Letter contents
1. Washington does not want to overthrow the Islamic regime, but merely seeks a change in its behaviour.
2. Iran should compare its relatively low standard of living with that of some of its more prosperous neighbours, and contemplate the benefits of losing its pariah status in the west.
3. Although the tone is conciliatory, it also calls on Iran to end what the US calls state sponsorship of terrorism.


Well this sounds like a nice enough start provided the wording is respectful rather than patronizing.

It would be awfully nice to see the US and Iran as friends again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-29-09 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. "merely" is a weak term.
I wish they would not say "merely." Like, saying, "I merely want to torure these guys so I can look like a tough guy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 03:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC