Sunday, November 1, 2009


This blogger read this article a couple of weeks ago: 'Don’t strike deal with Ahmadinejad, pleads leader of Iran’s Green movement.' The article seemed somewhat incoherent... Essentially, this unidentified "leader of Iran's green movement" argued against any accommodation with the Iranian government on the nuclear issue. "A growing economic crisis and an uncrushable opposition will destroy President Ahmadinejad’s illegitimate government within four years, he said. “We are confident that Ahmadinejad will not be able to finish his term”

So this "green" argument is that an agreement with Iran on the nuclear issue will undercut the opposition to Ahmedinajad. Hmm, convenient for those (non-Iranians) opposed to a deal. However, no deal on the nuclear issue means increased sanctions on Iran (e.g. gasoline imports, etc.) and the increasing likelihood of a military strike on Iranian nuclear-related installations, which would be expected to take pressure off the regime (as people rallied around their government in response to foreign military intervention... something argued by other "greens" as a reason why the nuclear issue should not boil over!)

Note: this blogger has no issues with the parts of the article related to opposition to the regime and its impending (?) demise. What he does wonder about is the slipping in of the nuclear issue, in an attempt to imply that the internal opposition does not want an accommodation in that area.... an argument neatly convenient for those already beating the drums of war...

No comments:

Post a Comment