Hands Extended for Friendship
Iran and US laying the groundwork for direct talks?
Obama’s statement on his inauguration day will probably turn into a catch phrase sooner or later: United States will extend a hand to those who are willing to unclench their fist. Joseph Biden, US Vice President has also mentioned that Iran may either continue its current course and face pressure or abandon its nuclear program and receive incentives.
In response to these unequivocal messages, Tehran has constantly asked the United States to carry out true changes. By this, Tehran has not only sent back the ball into US court, but also avoided winking to U.S. green light until the situation is stable. Both parties have acted conservatively so far in order to test the opponent’s reaction; something experienced before, though this time Obama has asked for direct talks.
During Bush’s term and in talks over Iraq, Iran and United States had the most serious possibility for negotiations. However, neither deemed it as a chance for direct talks on their own relations. In Republicans’ last months in the White House, opening an interest section in Tehran and Rice’s attendance in group six’s talks with Iran in Geneva were regarded by Americans an act of good will. Inside Iran, the government’s response to these gestures was considered as one of indifference, while others accused it of over-enthusiasm.
But this time, despite clear signals sent by Washington, Tehran has insisted on actual steps to not be accused of any defective policy. Meanwhile, Tehran hinted its willingness during Islamic Revolution’s 30th anniversary. Ahmadinejad’s reference to direct talks with Washington on the brink of Islamic Republic’s 4th decade was considered as a diplomatic turn in Tehran-Washington’s complicated relations, a knot that needs to be untied more than ever.
Ahmadinejad has stated that the "The Iranian nation is ready for talks, but in a fair atmosphere with mutual respect". Meanwhile he has mentioned that changes should be "fundamental and not tactical". Parliamentary Spokesman Ali Larijani has also asked for clear proposals from the Americans.
The need for negotiations
The talks are supported by the European Union, United Nations, and countries such as Russia whose foreign affairs are somehow dependant on the outcome of negotiations between Iran and the United States. Clinton has stated that the future missile defense shield plan depends on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Meanwhile, UN Secretary General has urged the United States to begin talks with Iran on its nuclear program sooner.
Recent developments show that this time the Iranian president will respond differently to Obama. Ahmadinejad has asked for mutual respect as the starting point of negotiations and has announced Iran’s readiness to begin the talks. The US president and his Department of State also talk of seeking ways to sit at a table with Tehran.
The diplomatic ping-pong between Tehran and Washington will not have an end different from Bush’s era if both sides merely rely on time-consuming diplomatic efforts. Meanwhile, the both sides may have been trying to lay the groundwork for direct talks.
In response to these unequivocal messages, Tehran has constantly asked the United States to carry out true changes. By this, Tehran has not only sent back the ball into US court, but also avoided winking to U.S. green light until the situation is stable. Both parties have acted conservatively so far in order to test the opponent’s reaction; something experienced before, though this time Obama has asked for direct talks.
During Bush’s term and in talks over Iraq, Iran and United States had the most serious possibility for negotiations. However, neither deemed it as a chance for direct talks on their own relations. In Republicans’ last months in the White House, opening an interest section in Tehran and Rice’s attendance in group six’s talks with Iran in Geneva were regarded by Americans an act of good will. Inside Iran, the government’s response to these gestures was considered as one of indifference, while others accused it of over-enthusiasm.
But this time, despite clear signals sent by Washington, Tehran has insisted on actual steps to not be accused of any defective policy. Meanwhile, Tehran hinted its willingness during Islamic Revolution’s 30th anniversary. Ahmadinejad’s reference to direct talks with Washington on the brink of Islamic Republic’s 4th decade was considered as a diplomatic turn in Tehran-Washington’s complicated relations, a knot that needs to be untied more than ever.
Ahmadinejad has stated that the "The Iranian nation is ready for talks, but in a fair atmosphere with mutual respect". Meanwhile he has mentioned that changes should be "fundamental and not tactical". Parliamentary Spokesman Ali Larijani has also asked for clear proposals from the Americans.
The need for negotiations
The talks are supported by the European Union, United Nations, and countries such as Russia whose foreign affairs are somehow dependant on the outcome of negotiations between Iran and the United States. Clinton has stated that the future missile defense shield plan depends on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Meanwhile, UN Secretary General has urged the United States to begin talks with Iran on its nuclear program sooner.
Recent developments show that this time the Iranian president will respond differently to Obama. Ahmadinejad has asked for mutual respect as the starting point of negotiations and has announced Iran’s readiness to begin the talks. The US president and his Department of State also talk of seeking ways to sit at a table with Tehran.
The diplomatic ping-pong between Tehran and Washington will not have an end different from Bush’s era if both sides merely rely on time-consuming diplomatic efforts. Meanwhile, the both sides may have been trying to lay the groundwork for direct talks.