Friday, December 07, 2007
What odds for Peace on Earth?
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
There are many glad tidings for the holiday that celebrates Peace in the World. To begin locally, our area has another record – we have the most dangerous site for pedestrians and bicyclists in the city – the intersection of 33rd Street and Park Avenue. You might ask how that piece of news qualifies as good, and I will tell you, forewarned is forearmed. Know when and where not to jaywalk, and where to drive defensively.
Segueing into the big world, the same thought applies to the Venezuelan election, where strongman President Hugo Chavez lost by 49 to 51% his bid for a lifetime presidency. Venezuelans know democracy. After wining independence from Spain in 1819, New Granada split into Venezuela, Ecuador and eventually Panama. Strongmen ruled until 1959, and their democratic successors did not flourish. Army officer Hugo Chavez tried a military revolt in 1992, but failed, and did not gain elected presidency until 1999. His Democratic Socialism has drawn followers, but not enough. Democratic Socialism, with nationalized industries and increased social care and support for other Latin American socialist revolutionaries is causing budgetary imbalances that worry the ordinary voter. Whether Chavez, who tearfully submits to the popular judgment, will really stop striving to rule the Latin world remains moot. But, forewarned, etc…
Contrast that to Putin, whose United Russia Party won a sweeping parliamentary victory, setting the stage for a parliamentary election of a president of Putin’s choice for four years, after which he will be reelected. As good as a dictatorship, nyet? Apparently the Russians, after 16 years of democratic ups and downs, are willing to go with the native son who produces oil prosperity for many. Meanwhile, news on Iran. The US National Intelligence Estimate declares that the Iranians stopped working on a nuclear device in the Fall of 2003. That’s good news, but the National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley warns that Iran’s ability to acquire a nuke remains a serious problem, and Secretary of Defense Gates warns that the Revolutionary Guard continues to stir up the Iraqi Shias. How do the other players take this news to the bank? As expected, President Ahmadinejad homes in on the idea that his country has been misjudged since 2003, when President Bush labeled it, along with North Korea and Iraq, as members of an “axis of evil.”
Parentheticaly, that was particularly painful to the Iranians, since the Persian Shias, opponents of the Sunni Talibans, had offered $500M to support the rehabilitation of Afghanistan (they spent over $2000 by mid-2006). Expectations are that the moderates in Iran will use this opportunity to resume the negotiations recommended in a “secret letter” of 2003 with offers of compromises, forwarded to the US by our Swiss go-betweens. It was rejected by Washington, as a probable forgery. Other reactions? From the UN, Washington insists that Germany, France, Russia and China still remain concerned about Iran’s nuclear potential. In the US Presidential contest, our NY candidates, the anti-Iran Clinton and Giuliani have dropped some stature (as have Bushite Republicans in general), while Barak, who wants to negotiate, has gained.
The big question is whether Iran is likely to negotiate in good faith. The Bush supporters claim that any concessions will be used by the Ayatollahs to work on uranium enrichment program and to build delivery vehicles, to enable resumption of nuclear weapon work on short notice. The positive thinkers maintain in Iran there is rising concern over the impact of the hardliner Ahmadinejad’s threats, the results of consequently incurred sanctions, and the risk of foreign military reaction. Add to it his neglect of the economy that has caused joblessness and boosted inflation. The concern is so wide-spread that Iranian moderates can and do protest and demand political reform without fear of retaliation. They note that the average Iranian is not angry towards Americans and wants peaceful settlement.
Why the anger toward the US government? Well, remember that the US engineered the revolution against the nationalist Prime Minister Muhammad Mosadegh in 1953 and put Reza Pahlevi back as Shah. The modernist Pahlevi was oppressive and offended the traditionalists, who revolted in 1989, under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, with students arresting and keeping captive 52 American embassy employees for 444 days, until after the 1981 installation of President Reagan. Meanwhile, taking advantage of the disruptions, Saddam Hussein had occupied some disputed Iranian oil territory, gassing Iranians and starting a war (supported by the US after 1983) that lasted until 1988, and cost up to a million Iranian lives. An opening for talks was offered by the Iranians late in the Clinton presidency, and in 2000 Secretary Albright made a public apology for the American roles in Iranian history, only to be greeted by the Ayatollahs with harsh accusations. Obviously, the Iranian internal strife goes on, but one should expect direct negotiations well before January 2009. Happy Holidays!
There are many glad tidings for the holiday that celebrates Peace in the World. To begin locally, our area has another record – we have the most dangerous site for pedestrians and bicyclists in the city – the intersection of 33rd Street and Park Avenue. You might ask how that piece of news qualifies as good, and I will tell you, forewarned is forearmed. Know when and where not to jaywalk, and where to drive defensively.
Segueing into the big world, the same thought applies to the Venezuelan election, where strongman President Hugo Chavez lost by 49 to 51% his bid for a lifetime presidency. Venezuelans know democracy. After wining independence from Spain in 1819, New Granada split into Venezuela, Ecuador and eventually Panama. Strongmen ruled until 1959, and their democratic successors did not flourish. Army officer Hugo Chavez tried a military revolt in 1992, but failed, and did not gain elected presidency until 1999. His Democratic Socialism has drawn followers, but not enough. Democratic Socialism, with nationalized industries and increased social care and support for other Latin American socialist revolutionaries is causing budgetary imbalances that worry the ordinary voter. Whether Chavez, who tearfully submits to the popular judgment, will really stop striving to rule the Latin world remains moot. But, forewarned, etc…
Contrast that to Putin, whose United Russia Party won a sweeping parliamentary victory, setting the stage for a parliamentary election of a president of Putin’s choice for four years, after which he will be reelected. As good as a dictatorship, nyet? Apparently the Russians, after 16 years of democratic ups and downs, are willing to go with the native son who produces oil prosperity for many. Meanwhile, news on Iran. The US National Intelligence Estimate declares that the Iranians stopped working on a nuclear device in the Fall of 2003. That’s good news, but the National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley warns that Iran’s ability to acquire a nuke remains a serious problem, and Secretary of Defense Gates warns that the Revolutionary Guard continues to stir up the Iraqi Shias. How do the other players take this news to the bank? As expected, President Ahmadinejad homes in on the idea that his country has been misjudged since 2003, when President Bush labeled it, along with North Korea and Iraq, as members of an “axis of evil.”
Parentheticaly, that was particularly painful to the Iranians, since the Persian Shias, opponents of the Sunni Talibans, had offered $500M to support the rehabilitation of Afghanistan (they spent over $2000 by mid-2006). Expectations are that the moderates in Iran will use this opportunity to resume the negotiations recommended in a “secret letter” of 2003 with offers of compromises, forwarded to the US by our Swiss go-betweens. It was rejected by Washington, as a probable forgery. Other reactions? From the UN, Washington insists that Germany, France, Russia and China still remain concerned about Iran’s nuclear potential. In the US Presidential contest, our NY candidates, the anti-Iran Clinton and Giuliani have dropped some stature (as have Bushite Republicans in general), while Barak, who wants to negotiate, has gained.
The big question is whether Iran is likely to negotiate in good faith. The Bush supporters claim that any concessions will be used by the Ayatollahs to work on uranium enrichment program and to build delivery vehicles, to enable resumption of nuclear weapon work on short notice. The positive thinkers maintain in Iran there is rising concern over the impact of the hardliner Ahmadinejad’s threats, the results of consequently incurred sanctions, and the risk of foreign military reaction. Add to it his neglect of the economy that has caused joblessness and boosted inflation. The concern is so wide-spread that Iranian moderates can and do protest and demand political reform without fear of retaliation. They note that the average Iranian is not angry towards Americans and wants peaceful settlement.
Why the anger toward the US government? Well, remember that the US engineered the revolution against the nationalist Prime Minister Muhammad Mosadegh in 1953 and put Reza Pahlevi back as Shah. The modernist Pahlevi was oppressive and offended the traditionalists, who revolted in 1989, under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, with students arresting and keeping captive 52 American embassy employees for 444 days, until after the 1981 installation of President Reagan. Meanwhile, taking advantage of the disruptions, Saddam Hussein had occupied some disputed Iranian oil territory, gassing Iranians and starting a war (supported by the US after 1983) that lasted until 1988, and cost up to a million Iranian lives. An opening for talks was offered by the Iranians late in the Clinton presidency, and in 2000 Secretary Albright made a public apology for the American roles in Iranian history, only to be greeted by the Ayatollahs with harsh accusations. Obviously, the Iranian internal strife goes on, but one should expect direct negotiations well before January 2009. Happy Holidays!
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 1:38 AM 
