Post by jgaffney on Oct 23, 2008 11:36:58 GMT -5
Everyone is aware of Obama's gaffe in the early primary debates, where he said that he would meet with antagonistic countries "without preconditions." The campaign hurriedly backed away from that when they realized the backlash that it would produce from people who are knowledgeable about foreign relations. The addition of Biden to the ticket was probably in response to this weak spot in Obama's resume.
Then, we have Biden's remarks that the new administration would be "tested" early by one of the antagonistic countries, like, maybe, Iran or Russia, and that we should stand by the Obama administration because the response would not be immediately clear. The campaign immediately started backing away from that comment by announcing that any new administration would be tested. However, Biden's remarks were clear, that he meant the Obama administration would be tested. No doubt, he still sees his new boss as lacking in foreign policy skills.
This week, Iran has given us a peek at how they see any high-level discussions with the US by releasing a list of their preconditions. The WSJ has this:
Barack Obama's declaration that, if elected, he would be willing to sit down and talk to Iran "without preconditions" has been widely discussed in this country. It's a key policy difference between him and John McCain, who rejects unconditional talks with Tehran.
So what does the Islamic Republic think? The enterprising reporters at the state news agency recently asked a high-ranking official for his opinion on talks with the U.S. As it turns out, Iran has its own "preconditions" and they don't suggest a diplomatic breakthrough, or even a summit, anytime soon.
Mehdi Kalhor, Vice President for Media Affairs, said the U.S. must do two things before summit talks can take place. First, American military forces must leave the Middle East -- presumably including such countries as Iraq, Qatar, Turkey and anywhere else American soldiers are deployed in the region. Second, the U.S. must cease its support of Israel. Until Washington does both, talks are "off the agenda," the Islamic Republic News Agency reports. It quotes Mr. Kalhor as saying, "If they [the U.S.] take our advice, grounds for such talks would be well prepared.
Iran is one of the toughest and most urgent foreign policy problems the new U.S. Administration will face. If Mr. Obama ends up in the Oval Office on January 20, he may find that solving it will take more than walking into a room and talking to Iranians "without preconditions."
I think the new Obama administration would learn very quickly that the bad actors in the world would not defer to Obama's power of persuasion quite like the media has. It's still a very dangerous world out there, and any leader who promises to cut back on defense spending will immediately be perceived as weak. There are people in the world who are ready and willing to exploit any perceived weakness, to our disadvantage.
Then, we have Biden's remarks that the new administration would be "tested" early by one of the antagonistic countries, like, maybe, Iran or Russia, and that we should stand by the Obama administration because the response would not be immediately clear. The campaign immediately started backing away from that comment by announcing that any new administration would be tested. However, Biden's remarks were clear, that he meant the Obama administration would be tested. No doubt, he still sees his new boss as lacking in foreign policy skills.
This week, Iran has given us a peek at how they see any high-level discussions with the US by releasing a list of their preconditions. The WSJ has this:
Barack Obama's declaration that, if elected, he would be willing to sit down and talk to Iran "without preconditions" has been widely discussed in this country. It's a key policy difference between him and John McCain, who rejects unconditional talks with Tehran.
So what does the Islamic Republic think? The enterprising reporters at the state news agency recently asked a high-ranking official for his opinion on talks with the U.S. As it turns out, Iran has its own "preconditions" and they don't suggest a diplomatic breakthrough, or even a summit, anytime soon.
Mehdi Kalhor, Vice President for Media Affairs, said the U.S. must do two things before summit talks can take place. First, American military forces must leave the Middle East -- presumably including such countries as Iraq, Qatar, Turkey and anywhere else American soldiers are deployed in the region. Second, the U.S. must cease its support of Israel. Until Washington does both, talks are "off the agenda," the Islamic Republic News Agency reports. It quotes Mr. Kalhor as saying, "If they [the U.S.] take our advice, grounds for such talks would be well prepared.
Iran is one of the toughest and most urgent foreign policy problems the new U.S. Administration will face. If Mr. Obama ends up in the Oval Office on January 20, he may find that solving it will take more than walking into a room and talking to Iranians "without preconditions."
I think the new Obama administration would learn very quickly that the bad actors in the world would not defer to Obama's power of persuasion quite like the media has. It's still a very dangerous world out there, and any leader who promises to cut back on defense spending will immediately be perceived as weak. There are people in the world who are ready and willing to exploit any perceived weakness, to our disadvantage.