The Iranian contradiction in the North Korean negotiations

 

Like it not we find that we’re having to get used to the paradoxes, contradictions and confusions of the Trump era.

None is more apparent than his attack on the landmark Iran de-nuclearisation agreement, fashioned by the Obama Administration and the Iranian government. President Donald Trump wants to unwind it, even though it has the 100% support of the UN Security Council which in an unanimous vote enshrined the agreement in international law.

At the same time he is trying to lure the North Koreans into a de-nuclearization policy, at the least into a nuclear freeze to stop it developing its rocket science any further, so that it’s incapable of hitting the US with a nuclear-tipped missile.

But, given Iran, why should the North Koreans go along with such a deal?

Why should it make such a deal when it knows there is a chance that the US might renege on this at a future date, as Trump wants to do with Iran?

The Western politicians and pundits seem to have no historic memory – of when the US reneged or slowed down on the implementation of previous agreements.

President Bill Clinton fashioned a superb agreement, only to be left in the lurch by a Republican-dominated Congress that effectively undermined the deal by refusing to implement the commitment to end sanctions and to liberalize trade.

If the Republicans hadn’t sabotaged that deal it is likely that North Korea would have no nuclear bombs today and would be happily warming itself on electricity from a safe light-water nuclear reactor that Clinton organized to be constructed- and now remains half built, a sad testimonial to what might have been.

If Trump wants a deal with the North he will have to shelve his onslaught on Iran.

He will have to stop his demonizing of the country and his drive to get the Arab countries to arm more and stand up to it. He has just consummated a large arms deal with Saudi Arabia meant for this purpose.

The Arab countries are in a mess.

Egypt is under the hammer of a vicious dictator, Syria is ablaze, Iraq is on its back following the US/UK invasion, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states have provoked a serious crisis with Qatar, and Saudi Arabia is killing thousands of innocents in Yemen. Only Jordan remains reasonably normal.

Is the effort to demonize Iran an attempt to re-build a false unity among the broken-backed Arabs by backing Iran into a corner?

Ironically, in the time of President Jimmy Carter, an attempt was made to bolster the regime of the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, to make sure Iran could militarily – as a proxy of the US – dominate the Gulf. Indeed it helped it get going on its nuclear bomb research.

The Islamic revolution changed all that.

The US felt beholden to the deposed Shah, giving him refuge in the US. Iran became a fundamentalist theocracy, a rallying place for those of a militant tendency, whether they be Shi’ite or Sunni.

Their first item of business was to see the Shah returned to Iran for a trial that would have encompassed everything from corruption to the abuse of human rights. Instead of this the US and many of its European partners chose to go nose to nose, magnifying every disagreement.

Then Saddam Hussein led Iraq into an eight-year war of attrition against Iran that was finally mediated to a standstill by the UN, leaving neither country a victor.

The US under President Ronald Reagan had provided Iraq with arms and the fruits of its aerial reconnaissance. Most of the West turned a blind eye to Saddam’s use of chemical weapons – which Iran refused to use. The war, fought on Iranian territory, consumed tens of thousands of innocent lives.

One way of paying back was for Iran to fund fundamentalist militia, in particular Hezbollah, that would use its armed strength to try to undermine Israel, make Lebanon more militant and to aid the Palestinians.

Later, other Iranian-backed militia entered war-torn Iraq and fought against the American occupiers. Iran itself fought against Al-Qaeda. Later still, its militia came to the aid of the Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Hassad.

All this Iranian activity is understandable although not agreeable. But this is what can happen when the US and its allies back a country into a corner.

The de-nuclearization deal could have been be a step to slowing Iran’s military forays, but Trump’s animosity is forestalling that possibility.

For the next three months the issue is: Can Trump learn from the history of American mistakes? For now he continues to deal destructively with Iran on the one side while he attempts to deal constructively with North Korea on the other, unaware of the contradiction.

How can he reassure North Korea that a deal they sign won’t be broken?

That is the question.

Copyright: Jonathan Power.

 

 

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Officially, the drones were not identified. By simply thinking critically – which journalists and selected experts no longer do – there may be a good reason for that. And this article will never be mentioned in Denmark… Drones over Denmark. No damage. No trace. No answers. Yet the headlines scream “Russian threat,” and Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen speaks with a certainty that defies logic: “We don’t know they were Russian—but we know Russia is the biggest threat to Europe.” It could be nobody else – unless you make an interest analysis which I did two days ago. This is not security policy. It’s theatre. And the audience is being played. Let’s rewind. These drones—unphotographed, untracked, unclaimed—appear and vanish like ghosts. Airports shut down. Panic spreads. Military budgets swell. And the narrative hardens: Russia is behind it. But what if that’s not just wrong but deliberately misleading? Here’s a hypothesis for...
And why the world, especially the EU, must now declare itself independent of the United States. UN’s 80th anniversary This year, the United Nations celebrates the 80th anniversary of its founding. The UN was formed after the scourge of the Second World War, in which 70 to 85 million people were killed and many countries were destroyed. That war came on the heels of the First World War, which also killed between 15 and 22 million people. After the Second World War, especially after the use of nuclear weapons by the United States, which marked a turning point in the history of warfare that could result in the end of civilisation as we know it, humanity decided to move away from the era of empires and big power politics and usher in a new era of peace, freedom and cooperation. These were the principles enshrined in the UN Charter. The United States...
Drones over Nordic airports. No damage. No trace. No answers. Most assume Russia—but what if that’s not so? Why is there so much we are not told? This article explores the strategic ambiguity behind recent drone incursions and asks: Who else might benefit from sending drones into NATO airspace? From Ukraine’s surprising drone supremacy to Russia’s possible signalling, the silence itself may be the loudest message. These are the kinds of questions decent, intelligent investigative journalists and commentators could easily research. Why don’t they? Did you, dear reader, know or think of this? That the most powerful weapon in today’s conflicts might be the one that leaves no trace – and no answers. Just enough fear to justify the next move? Recently, drones have repeatedly appeared over Nordic airports and near some military facilities. They cause no damage – for which reason the designation “hybrid attack” is misleading but serves a purpose. These...

Recent Articles

Jan Øberg behandler i artiklen en lang række faktorer, som ligger til grund for den måde vores samfund er organiseret på – og derfor også for konflikter. Artiklen introducerer således sammenhængen mellem familien, foreninger, regeringer, NGO’ er, nation, stat, nationalstat og alliancer for på denne måde bedre at kunne forstå konflikter og i sidste ende blive klogere mht. at løse disse. Øberg, der er fortaler for global bevidsthed, hvilket skal ses i lyset af den øgede globalisering, skelner mellem kulturkamp og kulturdialog. Endelig behandles begrebet magt og magtesløshed: giver magt ret til at udøve magt – fordi man mener at have ret? Litteraturliste og arbejdsspørgsmål efter artiklen. Ordene vi bruger om verden I satellitperspektiv kan man godt tale om den menneskelige familie eller menneskeheden. Udtrykket understreger, at der eksisterer – eller burde eksistere – et fællesskab fordi vi alle er mennesker og sammen bebor denne klode og ingen anden. Og...
Kapitel 2: Forskellige sider af Europa og USA…fortsat 2.5 Militære relationer I forbifarten har vi allerede sagt nogle ting om USA’s militære situation. Kig lige en gang til på afsnit 2.3. Nu skal vi uddybe det militære forhold mellem USA og EU. Der er en række ligheder mellem visse europæiske landes og USA’s militær. Næsten alle er med på en eller anden måde i NATO, direkte som medlem – selv Island, der ikke har et forsvar – eller indirekte i Partnerskab for Fred. USA og Canada er med i OSCE (på dansk OSSE), Organisationen for Sikkerhed og Samarbejde i Europa, der tæller over 50 lande. USA samt England og Frankrig er kernevåbenstater og de har styrker til intervention langt borte fra hjemlandet, om end USA’s er tifold større. Alle har også en omfattende våbeneksport og bruger den som et middel til at tjene penge og få loyale venner på, det...
Background Christian Harleman and Jan Oberg conducted a fact-finding mission to Burundi between November 26 and December 6, 2003. (See websites about the country here). The first TFF mission took place in March 1999. Unfortunately, since then it has not been practically possible to implement the co-operation with Burundi’s Ministry of Education and Burundian NGOs that was planned at the time. The 2003 mission had three purposes. First, to do fact-finding in general about the situation and, in particular, the progress under the Arusha Peace Process. Second, to explore the possibilities for co-operation between the government and relevant NGOs on the one hand and TFF on the other, in order to develop and deepen the existing competence in fields such as conflict-understanding, reconciliation and peace-building. Finally, third, to find out whether it would be possible, in co-operation with the Swedish Rescue Services Agency (Statens Räddningsverk), to establish a health care unit that...

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan Øberg behandler i artiklen en lang række faktorer, som ligger til grund for den måde vores samfund er organiseret på – og derfor også for konflikter. Artiklen introducerer således sammenhængen mellem familien, foreninger, regeringer, NGO’ er, nation, stat, nationalstat og alliancer for på denne måde bedre at kunne forstå konflikter og i sidste ende blive klogere mht. at løse disse. Øberg, der er fortaler for global bevidsthed, hvilket skal ses i lyset af den øgede globalisering, skelner mellem kulturkamp og kulturdialog. Endelig behandles begrebet magt og magtesløshed: giver magt ret til at udøve magt – fordi man mener at have ret? Litteraturliste og arbejdsspørgsmål efter artiklen. Ordene vi bruger om verden I satellitperspektiv kan man godt tale om den menneskelige familie eller menneskeheden. Udtrykket understreger, at der eksisterer – eller burde eksistere – et fællesskab fordi vi alle er mennesker og sammen bebor denne klode og ingen anden. Og...
Kapitel 2: Forskellige sider af Europa og USA…fortsat 2.5 Militære relationer I forbifarten har vi allerede sagt nogle ting om USA’s militære situation. Kig lige en gang til på afsnit 2.3. Nu skal vi uddybe det militære forhold mellem USA og EU. Der er en række ligheder mellem visse europæiske landes og USA’s militær. Næsten alle er med på en eller anden måde i NATO, direkte som medlem – selv Island, der ikke har et forsvar – eller indirekte i Partnerskab for Fred. USA og Canada er med i OSCE (på dansk OSSE), Organisationen for Sikkerhed og Samarbejde i Europa, der tæller over 50 lande. USA samt England og Frankrig er kernevåbenstater og de har styrker til intervention langt borte fra hjemlandet, om end USA’s er tifold større. Alle har også en omfattende våbeneksport og bruger den som et middel til at tjene penge og få loyale venner på, det...
Background Christian Harleman and Jan Oberg conducted a fact-finding mission to Burundi between November 26 and December 6, 2003. (See websites about the country here). The first TFF mission took place in March 1999. Unfortunately, since then it has not been practically possible to implement the co-operation with Burundi’s Ministry of Education and Burundian NGOs that was planned at the time. The 2003 mission had three purposes. First, to do fact-finding in general about the situation and, in particular, the progress under the Arusha Peace Process. Second, to explore the possibilities for co-operation between the government and relevant NGOs on the one hand and TFF on the other, in order to develop and deepen the existing competence in fields such as conflict-understanding, reconciliation and peace-building. Finally, third, to find out whether it would be possible, in co-operation with the Swedish Rescue Services Agency (Statens Räddningsverk), to establish a health care unit that...
Read More
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Jan Øberg behandler i artiklen en lang række faktorer, som ligger til grund for den måde vores samfund er organiseret på – og derfor også for konflikter. Artiklen introducerer således sammenhængen mellem familien, foreninger, regeringer, NGO’ er, nation, stat, nationalstat og alliancer for på denne måde bedre at kunne forstå konflikter og i sidste ende blive klogere mht. at løse disse. Øberg, der er fortaler for global bevidsthed, hvilket skal ses i lyset af den øgede globalisering, skelner mellem kulturkamp og kulturdialog. Endelig behandles begrebet magt og magtesløshed: giver magt ret til at udøve magt – fordi man mener at have ret? Litteraturliste og arbejdsspørgsmål efter artiklen. Ordene vi bruger om verden I satellitperspektiv kan man godt tale om den menneskelige familie eller menneskeheden. Udtrykket understreger, at der eksisterer – eller burde eksistere – et fællesskab fordi vi alle er mennesker og sammen bebor denne klode og ingen anden. Og...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Kapitel 2: Forskellige sider af Europa og USA…fortsat 2.5 Militære relationer I forbifarten har vi allerede sagt nogle ting om USA’s militære situation. Kig lige en gang til på afsnit 2.3. Nu skal vi uddybe det militære forhold mellem USA og EU. Der er en række ligheder mellem visse europæiske landes og USA’s militær. Næsten alle er med på en eller anden måde i NATO, direkte som medlem – selv Island, der ikke har et forsvar – eller indirekte i Partnerskab for Fred. USA og Canada er med i OSCE (på dansk OSSE), Organisationen for Sikkerhed og Samarbejde i Europa, der tæller over 50 lande. USA samt England og Frankrig er kernevåbenstater og de har styrker til intervention langt borte fra hjemlandet, om end USA’s er tifold større. Alle har også en omfattende våbeneksport og bruger den som et middel til at tjene penge og få loyale venner på, det...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Background Christian Harleman and Jan Oberg conducted a fact-finding mission to Burundi between November 26 and December 6, 2003. (See websites about the country here). The first TFF mission took place in March 1999. Unfortunately, since then it has not been practically possible to implement the co-operation with Burundi’s Ministry of Education and Burundian NGOs that was planned at the time. The 2003 mission had three purposes. First, to do fact-finding in general about the situation and, in particular, the progress under the Arusha Peace Process. Second, to explore the possibilities for co-operation between the government and relevant NGOs on the one hand and TFF on the other, in order to develop and deepen the existing competence in fields such as conflict-understanding, reconciliation and peace-building. Finally, third, to find out whether it would be possible, in co-operation with the Swedish Rescue Services Agency (Statens Räddningsverk), to establish a health care unit that...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Former UN Under-Secretary-General with special responsibility for peacekeeping operations TFF associate August 20, 2003 YRINGHAM, Mass.- Ralph Bunche was born in Detroit 100 years ago today (August 7, 2003). His passionate determination to get results did not extend to seeking credit for them, so his work is better remembered than he is. Of all his many accomplishments – civil rights pioneer, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, chief drafter of two chapters of the United Nations charter, negotiator of the armistices that ended the first Arab-Israeli war – Bunche said he was proudest of developing what came to be known as peacekeeping. Setting up the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in Palestine in 1948, Bunche formulated the principles that have governed peacekeeping operations ever since. In the 1956 Suez crisis, working with Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold and Lester Pearson of Canada, he organized the first peacekeeping force, the United Nations Emergency Force...
– nästan 11 månader Till Sofia nästan 11 månader # 1  Till Sofias huvudsida Till alla Privata Foto-Serier
Till Sofias huvudsida