Sunday, June 18, 2006

Iran, what's good for the goose is good for the gander

The Bush administration has seen fit to demonize the current Iran regime and has deemed them unfit to have any nuclear ability. Well, considering that there are a few countries who have nuclear abilities (India, Russia, Pakistan, Israel) and I cannot say that in this political and military climate in the US (military meaning the pro-military mentality in the general public with the abnormally strong nationalistic sentiments of the 'us vs them' kind), I feel particularly safe. I am very concerned for the future of not only this country, but the rest of the world, truly. Here are excerpts from a Noam Chomsky article in the Guardian.
A near-meltdown seems to be imminent over Iran and its nuclear programmes. Before 1979, when the Shah was in power, Washington strongly supported these programmes. Today the standard claim is that Iran has no need for nuclear power, and therefore must be pursuing a secret weapons programme. "For a major oil producer such as Iran, nuclear energy is a wasteful use of resources," Henry Kissinger wrote in the Washington Post last year

Thirty years ago, however, when Kissinger was secretary of state for President Gerald Ford, he held that "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals".
Last year Dafna Linzer of the Washington Post asked Kissinger about his reversal of opinion. Kissinger responded with his usual engaging frankness: "They were an allied country."

Iranians are surely not as willing as the west to discard history to the rubbish heap. They know that the United States, along with its allies, has been tormenting Iranians for more than 50 years, ever since a US-UK military coup overthrew the parliamentary government and installed the Shah, who ruled with an iron hand until a popular uprising expelled him in 1979.
The Reagan administration then supported Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran, providing him with military and other aid that helped him slaughter hundreds of thousands of Iranians (along with Iraqi Kurds). Then came President Clinton's harsh sanctions, followed by Bush's threats to attack Iran - themselves a serious breach of the UN charter.

Read the full article called: A Negotiated Solution to the Iranian Nuclear Crisis is within Reach
photo by John Soares


Blogger Kel said...

Excellent article, Ingrid. And I love the fact that Kissinger isn't even ashamed of his change of stance based on whether or not you are perceived as an ally.

9:45 AM  
Blogger Ingrid said...

what it is Kel is that I suspect everyone knows that the American public doesn't get riled up or upset over something like that. I mean, it goes to the heart of this attitude that only whomever is considered 'good or bad' will reap the rewards of approval. Ethics, fair treatment across the board does not count. In a way, it is good that there is a counter to the US' imperialistic surge, unfortunately, I am not totally reassured that the 'counters' are sane themselves...but..I figured Iran was worthy of some history lessons which most people never got.. in poli sci, I am more of the 'historical perspective' type

12:44 PM  
Blogger El Mas Ching√≥n said...

Great post!

5:02 PM  
Blogger Ingrid said...

Thanks Robbie, btw..I could tell that your expertise came through with your post on the real estate in San Diego..have you not been working on your book? You're doing a lot of (great!) posting lately..

8:37 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home