 |
|
Interpreting Iran "freeze" tea leaves. Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, writes:
News of Iran potentially suspending enrichment for six weeks as a good will gesture to get talks going are sending shockwaves in the system. ...
In his interview with Jomhourie Eslami, [former Iranian foreign minister and foreign policy advisor to the Supreme Leader] Velayati argued that the Bush Administration wanted Iran to reject the P5+1 proposal in order to strengthen the case for sanctions and military action. In his view, Iran must work diplomatically to show the world that it isn't interested in war and that through diplomacy this could be achieved. Iran has in essence won recognition for its right to enrichment, he argued, and could as a result negotiate from a stronger position, unlike other regional powers that negotiated out of weakness and were humiliated by the West accordingly.
Iranian state TV have also aired discussions in the past weeks in which the P5+1 proposal has been discussed in a more open way than in the past, in which benefits of compromise have been debated.
Some may draw the conclusion that the sudden shift in Iran's position is a reaction to the recent bluster and threats of war. Several factors dispute this interpretation. [...] Iran's reaction to the P5+1 proposal has been remarkably different than its reaction to the earlier proposal. Note also the relative silence from Ahmadinejad. This preceded the recent spike in bluster between the US, Israel and Iran.
A more likely scenario is that the Iranians are doing this to:
1. Eliminate the risk for any US attack -- however small/large that risk may be -- for the remainder of the Bush Administration.
2. Initiate a process that ...would pave the way for a more robust diplomatic channel between the US and Iran that would be initiated now, but wouldn't bloom until the next [U.S.] President takes office. ...