Claudia Rosett At PJ Media: ‘The Upside Of Russia’s Threat To Trash The Iran Nuclear Talks:’
Reaching out to the leadership in Iran is risky, but Rosett seems to think it isn’t worth the risk at all:
‘I’ve been in Vienna for the first two rounds of these talks, Feb. 18-20 and March 18-19, and there’s no sign that this diplomatic process is going to stop Iran from getting the bomb. Rather, Iran is making some temporary and reversible concessions, while continuing to enrich uranium, and refusing to give up its ballistic missile program or abandon construction of a heavy-water de facto plutonium-factory reactor near Arak’
Zavid Jarif seemed pretty clear about Iran’s right to enrich as of March 20th, 2014. This will be tough to bridge.
Putin’s pursuing an ethno-nationalist petro-empire and our most common interest would still be in preventing Islamist terrorism (Iran funds terrorism, mind you). Is the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus alliance worth bargaining with? Meanwhile, the Saudis and Israelis are taking their own precautions, given Iran’s right next door.
Many Chinese interests line-up against ours.
Robert Kagan at the Washington Post: ‘President Obama’s Foreign Policy Paradox:’
Per Kagan: You wanted isolationism, withdrawal, and a light footprint, America, you’ve got it and you don’t seem pleased:
‘For many decades Americans thought of their nation as special. They were the self-proclaimed “leader of the free world,” the “indispensable nation,” the No. 1 superpower. It was a source of pride. Now, pundits and prognosticators are telling them that those days are over, that it is time for the United States to seek more modest goals commensurate with its declining power. And they have a president committed to this task.’
So, what next?