Long before it was “popular”, John Edwards was calling for a New Strategy for Iran (and the War on Terror in general)
Long before the NIE Report, threw water on the GOP’s fiery rhetoric about the looming dangers of Iran, Edwards was saying we must learn the lessons of the Iraq War — NOT Repeat them in Iran!
Long before the cynical Rumsfeld Memos were leaked (proving Edwards right), John Edwards was busy “reframing” the Global War on Terror, calling it “a ‘bumper sticker’ slogan Bush had used to justify everything …”
Did Edwards get Media Attention and fanfare for his insightful and stateman-like leadership — NO, but he DID help to change the national conversation!
So Much so, that insiders in NIE (National Intelligence Estimate), seem to have taken his advice that: “We’ve got to stand up to Bush and Cheney and the Neocons …”
Even though Bush knew of the NIE Report Conclusions, as early as August this year:
At a press briefing this morning, President Bush said he was told by his Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell “in August” that “we have some new information” regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
In spite of knowing there was No imminent threat of Nukes from Iran, Bush continued to trump up the neocon agenda, of looking under chairs and in closets for the next generation of WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Delusion)!
Indeed as recently as mid Oct, Bush was raising the spectre of World War III:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President George W. Bush warned on Wednesday a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War III as he tried to shore up international opposition to Tehran amid Russian skepticism over its nuclear ambitions.
More “bumper sticker” sloganeering — no doubt! Thanks goodness for the voices of reason and sanity within the NIE, for deciding to go public, with there previously internal Report. True Patriots, I’d say, inside government, taking a stand against — more Neocon manipulation of the American People! Bravo!
So what were the Conclusions of the sea-change Report from the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)?
November 2007
National Intelligence Estimates (NIE)
Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities
Key Judgments
We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.
…– We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years.
– We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.
– We continue to assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Iran does not currently have a nuclear weapon.
– Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005. Our assessment that the program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously.
…
We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely.
– We judge with moderate confidence Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame. (INR judges Iran is unlikely to achieve this capability before 2013 because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.)
All agencies recognize the possibility that this capability may not be attained until after 2015.
http://media.npr.org/documents… (pdf)
—-
So what are the implications for the Bush Agenda, and for those Presidential hopefuls, who want to pick up where Bush left off? NPR has a few thoughts on the implications this NIE news:
npr
NIE Report May Block Military Force Against Iran
by Mike Shuster
Morning Edition, December 5, 2007 – The emergence of the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran is presenting a major challenge to the policies of the Bush administration.
The report’s primary conclusion – that Iran halted a secret nuclear weapons program four years ago – appears to raise barriers to the use of military force against Iran and raise questions about whether economic sanctions are even justified.
…President Defends Iran Policy
As justification for continuing his Iran policy, the president cited the NIE’s judgment that Iran chose to shut down its covert nuclear program in 2003 because of international pressure. The president said he wants that pressure to continue.
But in 2003, there were no economic sanctions against Iran. The U.S. refused to engage with Iran and dismissed the European decision to negotiate as fruitless.
…Recently, the administration has been talking about even tougher sanctions, all the while suggesting the possibility of military attack.
But the first casualty of the NIE’s conclusions appears to be the military option. Many experts think it is impossible now. Bruce Riedel, who spent 30 years in the CIA, is among them. Riedel is a scholar with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
“There is no possible way that the United States could now use unilateral military force in the wake of this estimate. I don’t think the political calculus in this country or that of our allies abroad would tolerate it,” he said.
http://www.npr.org/templates/s…
—-
Interesting. And indeed hopeful. Maybe the world can begin to recover from the disastrous policy of endless preemptive war! Maybe America CAN return to our core values, that most of us believe, in afterall? Let hope so.
John Edwards has been calling for ENDING the policies of preemptive war and the application of “smart power”, as early as May of this year, and recently as November, in a Major Speech CNN’s Wolf Blitzer called “important”:
John Edwards: Situation Room-Nov 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
—-
Here’s are some of the key points of this important Edwards Foreign Policy speech. Funny how today’s current events, are once again proving, “John Edwards IS Right, again!”
Learning the Lesson of Iraq: A New Strategy for Iran
Nov 5, 2007
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
John Edwards:
This is a critical moment. As a nation, we stand today at a fork in the road with Iran. We have a real choice about the direction we’ll take. One path will replay the last seven years. It leads toward a dark future of belligerence, aggression, and war.
We need a new direction — one that will defuse the Iran threat, rather than aggravate it, one that will make America safer, not make the world more dangerous.
To understand exactly what the administration is trying to do with Iran, we need to go back to the beginning of the Bush Administration and look at how they took us to war with Iraq.
In the spring of 2002, the nation was struggling to recover from the devastating terrorist attacks of 9/11. At the same time, a group of Bush Administration neoconservatives, like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, were strategizing for ways to start a war with Iraq. And suddenly, instead of reacting to 9/11 by working to protect America from terrorists, they saw a political opportunity to promote their right-wing ideological agenda and demonize anyone who disagreed with them.
Here’s what you have to know about these neocons — they think might makes right, every time. They believe in domination, not debate. They think America should use our military power to impose our will wherever and whenever we want. They use a sledgehammer when we should use a scalpel.
And here’s what you need to know about George Bush’s foreign policy — it’s written by these neocons, lock, stock, and barrel.
So after 9/11, instead of focusing on the terrorist threat, George Bush started promoting a radical new neoconservative doctrine he called, quote, “preventive war” — which would soon become part of his argument for war in Iraq.
Here’s what they mean by preventive war — if we see a possible threat, we go to war; we don’t exhaust diplomatic, political, and economic options, we go straight to war. Under this Bush doctrine, military force is no longer the option of last resort.
…
Harry Truman once said, “There is nothing more foolish than to think that war can be stopped by war. You don’t ‘prevent’ anything other than peace.”That’s exactly right. Think about it — you don’t prevent wars by starting them. It would be ridiculous if it weren’t so dangerous.
This George Bush policy instead is, almost literally, “shoot first, ask questions later.”
…
So let me be clear.
We should take Iran very seriously. And as commander-in-chief, if I ever learn that any nation is threatening an imminent attack, I will do what’s necessary to protect America.
But the one thing we absolutely should not be doing is launching another so-called “preventive war” with Iran. American and the world possess a powerful arsenal of diplomatic and economic options that have not yet been used, let alone exhausted.
…
We need, in short, a new strategy for Iran. My plan for Iran has five principles.
(1) End the doctrine of preventive war
First and foremost, we need to ensure that the preventive war doctrine goes where it belongs — the trash-heap of history. As he has done with so much else, Vice President Al Gore got it right about the preventive war doctrine.
…
(2) Use smart sanctions against Iran
The second principle is to use bolder and more targeted economic sanctions to force Iran’s leaders to understand that they cannot continue to buck the will of the international community without destroying their ability to be the modern, advanced nation they so desperately want to become.
There are smart sanctions that will achieve results, and there are reckless sanctions that will backfire and play into a policy of military attacks. The Bush-Cheney sanctions Senator Clinton supports are the most radical, unprecedented, and belligerent sanctions possible. These reckless sanctions will escalate tensions between the U.S. and Iran — the thing Bush and Cheney most want — and have other unintended consequences, such as higher oil prices.
…
(3) Offer carrot of possibility to re-join the world community
The third principle of my plan is to use “carrots” — diplomatic measures to convince Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions and re-join the world community. We should draw Iran into compliance through incentives including increased refinery capacity and a regional fuel bank that Iran could use for peaceful purposes.
And we need to use the possibility of bringing Iran into multilateral economic organizations, including the WTO, as a carrot for change.
…
(4) Open Diplomatic Communication with Iran
The fourth principle of my policy is to reengage with Iran.
Even Republicans like Senator Hagel are now urging the president to open up communications with Iran. Communication is not a concession. After all, we talked to our great enemy, the Soviet Union, at the height of tensions during the Cold War.
…But we must always negotiate from a position of strength.
…
(5) Get other Nations to apply pressure
And the fifth and final principle is to reengage with other major nations on the challenge of Iran.
We must work with China and Russia on the problem of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Both nations have economic relationships with Iran on trade and energy. But both nations also have a strong interest in stability in the Middle East. And neither nation wants the nuclear club to expand. In the first year of my administration, I will convene a conference with my Secretary of State and representatives from the “E.U. 3” — Great Britain, France, and Germany — Russia, China and Iran, to discuss a way out of the stalemate of the Bush Administration.
The strategy I’ve described to you today is the right way to keep America strong while keeping the peace.
It is the right way to force Iran to forgo its nuclear ambitions.
And it is the right way to restore America’s historic role as a leader of the world community — through a combination of strength, vision, and reengagement with the world.
America needs a president who can guide America through a dangerous world, with the wisdom of history by our side.
America has gone through similar challenges before.
http://johnedwards.com/news/sp…
—-
Edwards’ smart, targeted, and visionary Foreign Policy are among the many reasons, he has my support, in his bid for President.
This new NIE Report should cause a few changes a few Cover Stories, both in the Administration and among some Presidential Hopefuls. The GOP Hopefuls were intending to run against the Bogey Man in Iran, against those “new” WMD — Weapons of Mass Delusion. And senator Clinton was planning on running by looking as tough as the GOP on Iran and Iraq, thus her support of the Lieberman-Kyle Vote.
NOW what will they do and say in light of the NIE Report? Anything?
Will any of them admit mistakes?
Will any of them take a more Humanitarian perspective, on Global problems as Edwards has long advocated for?
Or will Candidates do what they alway do — and act like “Status Quo” Bureaucrats — ignoring the relevant Facts, and just continue with “Business as Usual”! … Pssst: Iran is NOT the “clear and present danger” you all were making it out to be!
We need to give 3rd world countries Hope — NOT Hate. America needs to pull the world’s citizens to our side of the fence — and NOT push them to the other side of the fence!
We need a Statesman like John Edwards, restoring the Moral Authority of America again, and not squandering it away with more preemptive misguided military intrusions!
Until America uses our power smartly, and stops all the bullying on the block, we will never be able to lead on other critical Global Issues like Global Warming, and Aids, and Tribal Conflicts, and poverty, and Hunger, and Thirst.
As a Country we ARE Better than what the World has seen lately — it’s high time we showed them, what most Americans are really about.
But that will take real progressive Leadership, who has those goals as the core of his agenda. IMO, that will take John Edwards at the helm.