Redstate

Dare I even say... *simplisme*?

By Moe Lane Posted in Europe | Foreign Affairs | Iran Policy | Obamafiles — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

If you're wondering why you haven't really heard about this before (Via Hot Air)...

Europe Fears Obama Might Undercut Progress With Iran
By Glenn Kessler

European officials are increasingly concerned that Sen. Barack Obama's campaign pledge to begin direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program without preconditions could potentially rupture U.S. relations with key European allies early in a potential Obama administration.

The U.N. Security Council has passed four resolutions demanding that Iran stop enriching uranium, each time highlighting the offer of financial and diplomatic incentives from a European-led coalition if Tehran suspends enrichment, a route to producing fuel for nuclear weapons. But Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, has said he would make such suspension a topic for discussion with Iran, rather than a precondition for any negotiations to take place.

European officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said they are wary of giving up a demand that has been so enshrined in U.N. resolutions, particularly without any corresponding concessions by Iran. Although European officials are eager to welcome a U.S. president promising renewed diplomacy and multilateralism after years of tensions with the Bush administration, they feel strongly about continuing on the current path.

...it's simple: European governmnents assumed that this year's election was going to be McCain vs. Clinton. Which is to say, they thought that either way the election turned out they could still count on American-European relations being run by somebody competent to do so. The possibility that this might not happen is apparently alarming them somewhat.

Read on.

This is the central problem, in three paragraphs:

European officials say they are not prepared to start negotiations on the package of incentives while Iran continues its enrichment activities. "Formal negotiations can start as soon as Iran's enrichment-related and reprocessing activities are suspended," declared a June 12 letter to Iran's foreign minister, signed by all six foreign ministers in the coalition, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

President Bush, during his farewell tour of Europe last week, pointed to the coalition as one of his foreign policy legacies. "I leave behind a multilateral framework to work this issue," Bush said. "You know, one country can't solve all problems. I fully agree with that. A group of countries can send a clear message to the Iranians."

But in a recent interview on CNN, Susan Rice, Obama's adviser, was blunt in her criticism of the current approach. "Before we will talk to them about their nuclear problem, they have to suspend their nuclear problem. That [is a] counterproductive precondition," she said.

Explanation of the first paragraph: Western Europe is both quite a good deal closer to Iran, and easier to [be] hit by that country, than the United States of America. The Iranian uranium enrichment program is thus not seen by them as being a domestic political soundbite aimed towards their college town demographic; it's a looming strategic problem. And they want it to stop looming.

Explanation of the second paragraph: President Bush recognizes this. He - like Senator McCain - has thus taken the European position, primarily because it's actually the sensible one anyway (the Iranian regime is not quite sane and certainly not trustworthy with regard to nuclear weapons), but also because doing so reassures a group of allies that we actually do respect their situation and needs. Diplomacy 101: don't tick off your allies if you don't have to.

Explanation of the third paragraph: the Obama campaign sees the Iranian uranium enrichment program as being a domestic political soundbite aimed towards their college town demographic. Said demographic is convinced that the rest of the planet hates the current President of the United States as much as they do, thus meaning that a 180 degree change in American foreign policy across the board will result in loud hosannas. Hence Susan Rice's rather arrogant and unilateral dismissal of legitimate European diplomatic concerns: she knows that most of her candidate's supporters are simply incapable of believing that the Europeans could possibly prefer Bush's method.

And that's pretty much where we're at. I do feel sympathy for the Europeans on this one, but I'd feel slightly more if they hadn't unwittingly contributed to this problem by never actually correcting the current narrative before now...

Moe Lane