Posted: 1:08 am
June 30, 2008
DOES Barack Obama intend to break the united front that the Bush administration has built to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions? The question, posed by US allies in Europe and the Middle East, shows the growing concerns about Obama's contradictory remarks on the issue.
Initially, Obama announced that he'd seek unconditional talks with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Later, he changed that to talks with "appropriate Iranian leaders" and tried to skirt the "unconditional" bit of his pledge by saying that some "preparatory work" might be needed before he'd sit with an Iranian interlocutor.
What isn't clear is whether Obama would insist that Iran respect the unanimous decision of the UN Security Council to stop uranium enrichment.
The new UN compromise package, presented by the European Union foreign-policy czar Javier Solana to the mullahs this month, is structured around the demand that Iran stop enrichment as prerequisite for dialogue.
Tehran, however, insists that the enrichment issue is "closed for ever" - clearly hoping that an Obama administration would endorse that position. If the US is likely to drop that key demand soon, there's no reason why Iran should meet it now.
Obama, in other words, pulled the carpet from under Solana's feet while the mullahs watched and chuckled.
European anxiety about possible US defection under a President Obama is reflected in an op-ed published last week by British Foreign Secretary David Milliband. In it, he insists that diplomatic efforts backed by UN resolutions shouldn't be interrupted or sidelined.
By ignoring the European Union and the United Nations, Obama would only encourage the Khomeinist leadership's most radical factions.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy also worries that an Obama administration might "give the mullahs what they want." Francois Heisbourg, who helped author Sarkozy's new national-defense review, warns that Obama's position could undermine confidence in US leadership.
