As NBC Nightly News reported last night, the Bush Administration has confirmed reports that Undersecretary of State William Burns "will attend a weekend meeting with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator. The meeting is part of ongoing efforts to persuade Iran to stop its nuclear program." Burns, however, "will reportedly be there, not to negotiate, but to listen." Several media outlets this morning examine the motives behind what is perceived as clear shift by the Administration one that is said to have infuriated the President's conservative allies. The Washington Post reports Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice "pushed for the move in a meeting on Monday of Bush's top aides, and Bush's support suggests he increasingly is determined to put aside a possible military strike in an effort to reach a deal to end Iran's nuclear program in his final six months in office." While Administration officials yesterday insisted that "the same bottom line" remains, the Post says "the diplomatic lines have become sufficiently hazy that if negotiations start in earnest, Iran will also be able to claim a diplomatic victory."
In a news analysis, the Financial Times says the decision to send Burns to this weekend's talks "would have been a big one for any president during the past three decades," but for Bush, "the volte face was a significant one." Though Bush "ultimately decided to go along with the arguments of many of his underlings," the Times says it "is not an outcome that will necessarily please Vice President Dick Cheney, who was already unenthusiastic" about a recent deal with North Korea.
McClatchy refers to a "major shift," while ABC World News called Bush's decision "a major turnaround," and added that while the White House "is insisting this is not negotiating...the fact is, they are sitting down at the table with the Iranians, and that's a first for the Bush Administration." In its analysis, the New York Times sees a "double policy shift": First, the Administration "has decided to abandon its longstanding position that it would meet face to face with Iran only after the country suspended its uranium enrichment." And second, "an American partner at the table injects new importance to the negotiating track of the six global powers confronting Iran." The Financial Times and AFP run similar reports this morning.
Obama: Bush Coming Around To His Views The Hill reports "the White House on Wednesday adamantly denied" Barack Obama's "claim that the US is negotiating with Iran by sending a high-level diplomat to a meeting with an Iranian official this weekend." Obama said that "by sending...Burns to Geneva to meet with the Tehran emissary, the White House has 'shifted course' from refusing to negotiate with the country, the Illinois senator said in a statement." While "White House press secretary Dana Perino declined to address Obama's comments specifically, she told reporters repeatedly that there has been no change in policy and there will be no negotiations with Iran unless the country suspends its enrichment of uranium, an act that would be verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)."
ABC World News noted the White House's objection to Obama's words, but added that "the fact is, they are sitting down at the table with the Iranians," which "is essentially what Barack Obama has been proposing." In fact, former Ambassador John Bolton "said this is like getting an Obama administration six months early. Now, the White House says this is very different. But it sure sounds like it's heading in that direction."
No comments:
Post a Comment