Interview with Condi Rice

July 20th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

CNN published the transcript of an interview with US Secretary of State ‘Condi’ Rice. In the interview she acknowledges that US policy towards Iran has changed somewhat but says that the administration did not flip-flop (or alter its policy drastically).

“I acknowledge that what we have done is to make a step that we think demonstrates to everyone our seriousness about this process,” she said. “But what has not changed is that the United States is determined to have negotiations only when Iran has suspended its enrichment and reprocessing. That’s when the United States can join. ”

William Cohen, CNN World Affairs Analyst explained that “the Baker-Hamilton commission nearly two years ago had recommended that the Bush administration initiate discussions with Iran. So, this has been an ongoing process with the Bush administration.” Rice, he said, “has been in the forefront of this, trying to find a way that we could sit down and actually have these kinds of discussions. But there has been a confluence of events, namely, the Israelis conducting that exercise in the Mediterranean, looking very much like a preparation for a strike against Iran, their strike against Syria recently against I suspect at a nuclear site, the fact that they seem to be moving more and more toward a military solution, or action, against Iran.”

Europe’s influence too is important: “That, coupled with strong support coming from our European friends, the Brits, British, and the French in particular, that all kind of puts us in a position of saying now is the time to discuss this with them.”

Rice too explained that Europe plays a significant role: “And in fact, what Bill Burns will do is he will go to demonstrate the unity of the P5 plus one, as we call it, Russia, China, and the three European countries. He will go to demonstrate that we are unified. He will go to affirm that the United States fully backs the package.”

So, the Bush administration is willing to talk to Iran, and it’s making this increasingly clear, but it will not – it seems – be one-on-one talks (as Barack Obama seems to be willing to do). No, Europe and other countries are taken into consideration. Rice and Bush favor a multilateral approach.

Furthermore, while some have said that the US should talk to Iran without preconditions, Rice makes clear that there can be no direct talks unless Ahmadinejad et al. agree to suspend their nuclear program. That too is important. Iran first has to show that it’s prepared to compromise and reach out.

The Bush administration has received quite some criticism in recent days from hawks who believe that the US should not talk to Iran, nor reach out to the Mullahs. Realists within the Republican Party, however, have been more positive about these developments. Then there are others – mainly Democrats – who believe that the new approach is only a step in the right direction but not more. They want the US to talk to Iran directly and without any preconditions. As it is, though, it could very well be argued that the new US approach makes a lot of sense.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.