Ahmadinejad is widely considered deeply corrupt and pretty wacky by Iranians. And he seem desperate to regain power and the goodies that come with it. Is he really someone that either the Iranians or Americans really want in what would be sensitive and challenging negotiations?
7
President Trump has done more to deal with the left over political trash than the last number of presidents who routinely just kept kicking it down the road. Trump is breaking the gridlock of American foreign policy mediocrity. America is standing tall and taking control of itself and its destiny. Iran is realizing that they can't push Trump around and that Americans are a whole lot smarter than they use to be.
14
Smart move .The Iranians will get all sanctions lifted. Trump will get a red white and blue pinwheel.
85
And America will get nothing.
5
Why would Iran flirt with direct talks with Trump? No brainer;
Because Trump is the world's worst negotiator.
And having seen how Kim Jong-un has gotten everything he wanted out of the weakest American President in decades, Iran understands that this will end up rather good for them.
122
@David
Most likely. Trump just wants enough that he can brag about accomplishing something, even if he hasn't. He called the talks with Kim a total success despite failing to get N. Korea to stop openly producing nuclear weapons. I bet if Iran makes a show of stroking Trump's ego we could return to essentially the same agreement we already had with Obama, and Trump gets to pretend it's his.
12
@David
What did Kim get again, other than photo ops?
8
@QED Much needed stature and legitimacy on the world stage. The ability to manipulate American policy towards him and his dictatorship. An improved hand in regional negotiations. All without having to sacrifice so much as one bullet in weaponry while continuing their development of WMDs.
Just that. That's all.
10
Trump's sanctions are working. Iran is desperate to end or at least soften the sanctions before the people revolt and the mullahs flee. Let's see what happens rather than ridicule the president.
17
The smart move from Iran would be to directly talk to Trump, offer him the exact same deal they agreed to, but it would have Trump’s name on it instead of Obama’s. Trump would agree in a heartbeat.
106
On Sept. 24, 1996, the United States and the world's other major nuclear powers signed a treaty to end all testing and development of nuclear weapons. Do you believe all nations having nuclear capabilities are being good boys and girls?
Man will self destruct by a global nuclear holocaust. May God protect us from our selves.
First, there is no middle ground with Trump. He either loves you or hates you. It's all visceral emotion. And he goes from one extreme to the other in the blink of an eye. That's what happened with Little Rocket Man; from evil incarnate to soul mate in a quick flash of personal chemistry.
Second, with Trump it's all about the public presentation -- the ceremony, the glitz, the positive media attention. Substance counts for nothing. Outside of perhaps trade, Trump has no firm ideas, no real knowledge and certainly no principles. For him the transactional media event is the only game.
If the Iranian leadership can look past its anger, its wounded pride and rigid ideology, it has a golden opportunity to cut a deal with Trump. Trump has in effect made the Iranians the same offer of a high level, high visibility personal peace parley that he made to Kim Jung-un. A similar improbable love-in is possible.
The ever insecure Trump craves to be seen as the brilliant iconoclastic great leader who achieved the unattainable and pacified the Iranians. Visions of a Nobel Prize still dance wildly in Trump's head. And it would pave the road to an electoral victory in 2020.
The global situation is primed for this to happen. The Saudis, with their impulsive and brutal princeling, have become a burden to the US -- a steady source of embarrassment -- plus we no longer need their oil. Bibi in Israel is fighting for his political life; he can only fume and rage impotently.
The door is open.
4
This is when the MAGA-base’s president could have used some credibility. But he’s bankrupted that account, too.
1
Of course they want to talk directly to Trump. Trump is stupid and they will win any negotiations with him.
If you don't believe me, ask Kim, Xi and Putin.
Dan Kravitz
15
@Dan Kravitz Dan... Exactly my sentiments...beginning w no preconditions for negotiating.
3
@Dan Kravitz, we’re still negotiating with N Korea and China, so I have no idea what you think they got from Trump. Russia has additional sanctions, a dead nuclear treaty and armed Ukrainians that Obama refuses to arm and pressure on Germany to drop their gas pipeline project with Russia. So again, what are you taking about?
That is a great idea. All they have to do is to flatter Trump and then they can make a deal that will benefit them more than the one Obama approved. Trump is the world's worst deal maker.
6
Ahmadinejad thinks that Trump would be a rational negotiator, measuring costs and benefits in the hard headed practical manner of a merchant or industrialist. But Trump is basically an entertainer who measures success from ratings, audience approval, and his audience wants Iran to change from an adversary to a friend or supplicant of not just the U..S., but Israel and Saudi Arabia, and the Arab kingdoms. The fact that Iran is willing to talk will tell Trump that his hard line approach is working and that he needs to keep it up until the entire regime begs for relief. So, I do not expect talks for a while, yet. Even then, I don't think that Trump can negotiate anything different than did Obama in the ways that would satisfy people like Netanyahu or Mohammed bin Salmam.
7
@Casual Observer yes. "if you are a star.." "look at the ratings", "Quite a chant." and so on. the banality of evil, indeed.
As long as we are fantasizing about the meeting of two of the world's greatest fundamentalist comics, Ahmadinejad and Trump, MY version (think BBC sitcom) has them at some posh diplomatic affair--and Bibi N. as a fancy waiter cameo keeps reappearing (serving from the right because he can), delivering slamming verbal wins for Trumpco, followed by canned standing applause from the TrumpTroops and prerecorded Clockwork Orange like displays of Ultraviolence in test markets (merch?). Maybe repeating weekly shtick with other great world leaders? Duterte--a pistol. Cant get the Sultan of Brunei's team off the phone with tie-ins to Chick-Fil-A; and that Brazil guy--a natural... at some point only live human sacrifice can get a show high enough ratings to be renewed... get Putin on the horn
ok unlikely, so is the whole scenario
3
Good luck. Trump is not interested in anything substantive, he does not possess the integrity and is way too narcissistic to understand anything other than flattery or bro love, and his foreign policy team needs a boogey man to feed the military industrial complex. Hopefully I’m wrong.
Talk is always better than bullets. However we do have some vested interest in US Congress as well as in the Iranian Parliament who would oppose any interaction between Iran and the US. In Iran they could be overruled by Khamenei but in US Congress AIPAC has the veto power - just look at the voting records of both parties when it comes to Israel.
The President on his own can’t even push back on a first term Congresswomen and uses the Israel card in his statements and speeches to gain a foothold to criticize her.
Iranians speaking with President is a good thing and Ahmadinejad may be correct that they can make a comprehensive deal with this President as he would do a profit and loss calculation to come up with the deal.
What do we have to lose, probably another war in the Middle East? It’s worth the risk, Senator Rand should serve it right and start the process.
PEACE.
3
But the hardliners in the US don't like the idea of Iran-Trump talk.
Their patience is wearing thin. They want war on Iran now.
«In The Times interview, which lasted more than an hour, Mr. Ahmadinejad said that Tehran and Washington should directly resolve the litany of disputes that began with the 1979 revolution, the seizure of the United States Embassy, the taking of American hostages, the mutual accusations of regional meddling and all the rest.» I hope Mr Fassihi will forgive me, but until such time as a transcript of the interview - preferably in translation, my Farsi, alas, is not the best - in its entirety is published, I shall find it difficult to credit that Mr Ahmadinejad stated that the «litany of disputes» (betwen Iran and the US) began with the 1979 revolution and the seizure of the US Embassy. Mr Ahmadinejad - and presumably Mr Fassihi, as well - know that the disputes began at least 26 years earlier, when the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh was overthrown through a combined US-UK operation known in the former as «Operation Ajax» and in the latter as «Operation Boot». The notion that the problems between Iran and the US date from actions carried out by the former some 40 years ago may resonate with a US audience largely ignorant of the facts, but anyone acquainted with the history of region will find it hard to swallow....
Henri
3
Should the media drive the news, or report the news. It seems the NYTimes, with it's coverage, is driving. Very sad.
Saying that, it seems somewhat disingenuous not to recall reporting in this paper when the agreement was signed in 2015. Many believed the agreement to be bad, on both sides of the isle. The problem being that it didn't stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons by Iran, just delay their manufacture. If you believe Iran was honest about the delay. Many here, because of their hatred for Trump, believe Iran about everything. That is a mistake. Iran has been supplying weapons to NK, Syria, and moving in on Iraq. They promised not to enrich uranium to weapons grade, but immediately claimed they would do last month.
I agree that Trump should not have backed out without getting buy in from other UN countries (knowing full well that Russia and China would veto), or at least having the discussion. But I do believe the coverage here gives Iran ideas.
As Iran’s economy gets strangled by the sanctions, Iran has less and less to lose and will be inclined to take ever more provocative actions leading inevitably to the war no one, with the exception of maybe Israel and Saudi Arabia, seems to want. There are solutions, options, other than war but we are fast running out of time.
6
It appears that president Trump is beginning to see that his approach to Iran is unlikely to lead to a positive result and may in fact damage his prospects for reelection and has the potential for accidents to spark a war that may be hard to contain.
The opposition of the UAE to the position of the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to blame Iran for the damage to the tankers and the UAEs subsequent withdrawal from the Yemen conflict point to weak support for Trump's maximum pressure approach with outright opposition by the EU, Russia and China as well as many other countries.
Trump wants to talk. However, Bolton has no loyalty to Trump and would push for maximum damage to Iran based on his past statements and published articles. Trump needs to sideline Bolton and appoint a more open minded and diplomatically skilled person to head discussions with Iran. Senator Rand Paul would certainly be an improvement. Bolton's dislike of foreign minister Zarif may lead to Trump favoring talks with Ahmadinejad. That could tamp down tensions until January 2021, but appears implausible of delivering a deal as strong as JCPOA, which is was authorized by the Security Council. Bilateral negotiations between the U.S. and Iran on matters that are inherently multilateral appears unlikely to produce lasting results.
3
@Vid Beldavs I doubt that is what President Trump sees. I met several great guys from Dubai the other day and we were chatting. It came up that I was in the first gulf war, and I rather expected them to react negatively. To the contrary, they all enthusiastically thanked me and declared that, “now President Trump needs to go wipe up those other rats in Iran.”
Things in reality rarely have any resemblance to their portrayal in the media.
Yes, Iran should talk and be partner with the US in providing security in the Mid East, just like we were under the Shah, but no self-respecting person will negotiate with a man with Mr. Trump’s character.
There is no logical animosity with Iran and the US. They should do business with each since both can benefit from this friendship. The US has over 100,000 soldiers in the Mid East, this is huge cost to the US taxpayers. The US by outsourcing the security of the Mid East to the Iran just like President Nixon did with the Shah both sides will greatly benefit. Iran needs US, the US by being friend with Iran can save billions if not trillions.
Most Americans might not know that Iran and Persia are the same, and until not long ago, maybe 1500 years ago all of the mid-east was Persia.
Iranians/Persians are extremely proud people and you cannot force them like you can with other nations.
We have not attacked any country outside of our borders in 270 years. For us dignity has more value than life itself or money!
Almost all Iranians belong to Shia sect of Islam, meaning martyrdom is an honor. Accomplishment and victory are not as glamorous as is dying for your cause.
Iranian people regardless of what you might think of its government are very young, educated and highly secular and pro-west. There is a great potential here for Iran to be next Japan of Mid eat or even all Muslim world!
17
Iranians who advocate talking to Caligula may be making a very smart move. If they can bluff and procrastinate and hold him off until it's close to the 2020 election, he will cave easily in order to be able to SAY he has a deal with Iran. He would cave because he really doesn't care about anything except being elected in 2020. He could care less about the situation with Iran and nuclear weapons, or where caving in to Iran might leave America in the future. Just as long as Caligula is elected in 2020, he could care less about anything else.
The same logic goes for Kim Jong Un over nuclear weapons, and for President Xi over Chinese-American trade. If these world leaders can hold out till the 2020 election is approaching, I believe they'll be rewarded by being able to have Caligula cave. All so he can win the 2020 election. Nothing, nothing, nothing else matters to him except himself, and he clearly wants 4 more years, if for no other reason than that it will delay multiple potential prosecutions for multiple felony crimes. It's always all about Donald.
9
I think Donald would say, "It's such an honor to meet with you."
5
I have no love lost for the Iranian mullahs, hijacking the wonderful Persian civilization, with their unyielding, Muslim extremism, in 1979.
However, I lay the blame of this escalating tension squarely on the shoulders of Trump, for his vandalism of the five country agreement, which was to slow down Iran's nuclear ambitions, just to spite his arch-enemy Obama!
With an incomplete agreement among five key players, but a decent start, Trump could have used his charm to tighten the agreement instead of throwing it under the bus!
And here we are, the irresistible force meeting the immovable object!
4
@Kenell Touryan
Why is it in our or anyone else’s national interest to allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons at some time in the future. The Iran Deal just delays future acquisition. But doesn’t preclude it. Pres Trump sees future acquisition as unacceptable. Lets hope he follows through.
5
@Peter I Berman Iran as a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty would continue to be subject to IAEA inspections. If the IAEA determines that Iran is undertaking nuclear weapons development the Secretary General of the UN would be notified who would inform the Security Council. Sanctions authorized by the Security Council in 2010 had no time limit. In effect Iran can continue to be prevented from developing nuclear weapons based on Security Council decisions.
4
Oh, I see. The IAEA, in the event of a subsequent violation, would then prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons just as they prevented North Korea from acquiring such weapons.
I think Mr. Ahmadinejad truly seeks advice from Mr. Trump on how to take over a country. Itˋs „The Apprentice“ on world stage level...MAGA for all!
3
What do Ahmadinejad and Trump have in common? They both hate America. Should be an interesting meeting.
1
Iran is a country of many political views. There are hardliners and liberals. But it’s the hardliners who have the say. The re-imposed US-sanctions have not led to an implosion, as Bolton and Pompeo have hoped. They have instead united Iranians across the country, who feel angry and betrayed.
Yet some hardliners entertain the idea of speaking to Trump. Former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad even spoke to the NYT for a hour. But the firebrand is a thorn in the regime’s side, and has an eye on a comeback in 2021.
Highly critical of the leadership, he is said to have indirectly stoked the anger against the regime that triggered violent protests in December 2017.
It’s unlikely that any talks between Trump and Iranians would yield any results. He insists the previous deal was too generous and gave Iran a free hand to develop missiles and meddle in the Middle East. He wants to use “maximum pressure” to bend Iran to his will.
The Supreme Leader has ruled out a meeting with Trump, saying the US should never have been trusted in the first place. It’s unclear if President Rouhani would do so. Anyone of a lower rank won't be good enough for Trump.
One day the US and Iran would have to resolve their old grievances: The US orchestrated a coup in 1953 and ousted Iran’s democratically elected prime minister; Iranians stormed the US embassy in 1979 and held its personnel hostage for 444 days; In the 1980s the US backed Saddam Hussein in the bloody Iran-Iraq war against Tehran etc.
3
One thing I'm certain of, is that our foreign policy is entirely for sale. It's no coincidence that Trump is butting heads with any country that has a legislature or some open dialog to answer to in foreign policy negotiations... but he is have great relations with dictators and governments that are autocratic and don't have transparency to answer to. It's because in the latter countries, they can simply buy a Trump property at an inflated rate, and fill a few Trump resorts with reservations... and get favorable policy.
Germany can't do that. They can't just hand Trump a bunch of cash and get Trump on board with climate change... but Saudi Arabia can pay for favorable response to killing a journalist... Israel can pay to have an embassy moved in spite of how it affects American security, and retain a positive relation even as they snipe health care workers and rock throwing kids... and Russia can continue to meddle in our elections and wage the Third World War while no one but them really knows its going it.
The point is... Iran can pay, too... and eventually if they get that sit down negotiation some are calling for, Trump can be bought. And once Trump has been paid, he doesn't care about previous deals. He skips on contractors and walks from treaties like we breath air.
How is Israel and Saudi Arabia going to handle him bailing on them and what they bought, when Iran brings their cash to Trump's table and Trump, of course, accepts?
3
But only if talks can be televised live...
"Deal or no Deal"
PS
They'll have less flexibility after the next US election...
Trump's probably already told them that...
Trump may be a lot of crazy things, but the one thing he has constantly been, is anti-war. And that gives me some semblance of hope that we can come to some terms here.
I know many would just like to wipe these guys off the face of the earth for their decades long shenanigans, but that would take one problem and create 20 more that last 2 decades and cost us money and american lives we frankly don't need to lose.
2
The problem with seeking an accord with Trump is there is no way to make it stick. Depending upon his gut feel (aka: gas pains), he could change his mind and renege.
Trump is primarily governed by what serves his reelection and wallet. The stability of the world, war, and peace are simply tools for him to increase campaign contributions.
Rising tensions lead to higher oil prices, but Trump is undoubtedly shorting the market before he raises tensions.
In Trump's world, America is just another casino he can bankrupt to suit his needs.
7
@Senior Citizen
Well said! You should be a professional writer or better yet, a journalist. Also, of course, I totally agree with all the points you are making about Caligula. You have him pegged! Congrats!
3
It’s pretty sad when I have to believe Irans leader makes more sense than ours. I truly believe trump is looking for a reason to declare war on Iran.
2
@LI Res
Caligula has already shown his fear of Iran. He aborted the in-progress attack at the 11th hour a few weeks ago. Why? As always SELFISH interests. Nothing else matters to him.
Everybody has his number now! He cares about nothing other than winning the 2020 election. NOTHING else matters at all, not world peace, not nukes, not brutal acts of inhumanity by Putin, Duterte, Kim and Xi, not children in cages... NOTHING matters to him but himself!
Tucker Carlson (Faux Noise) convinced Caligula that attacking Iran would result in him losing the 2020 election. Ever since then Iran is home free... there will be no serious attack against Iran between now and the 2020 election. After that, all bets are off (hopefully he won't be elected!)
5
Good Luck to the Iranians after seizing the British Ship. Now Trump has a EU ally. And probably European support. If they dont want a fight; Trump would be happy to sit this out until Britain buys US oil.
3
"He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision."
That's a HUGE logical leap you're making there, Mr. Ahmadinejad.
5
@MattL1
He's such a TERRIBLE businessman that he bankrupted his businesses 4 or 5 times! He's a terrible businessman.
How did he make his money? Inheritance, tax cheating (well-documented b the NY Times), money laundering (he paid a fine for that at one of his casinos), etc.
The 2 biggest industries most prone to money laundering: Real Estate and Casinos. Know anybody in both of those fields?
3
Please don't dignify former Iranian President Ahmadinejad. He does not speak for anyone in Iran. His presidency was an exercise in personal opportunism. He has been accused of malfeasance, and threatened with house arrest. There may be "hard liners" that are ready to talk to the United States, but Ahmadinejad is trying to make himself relevant again. It is a dangerous game. We had Iranian official Sadeq Qotbzadeh during the hostage crisis in 19709-2000. He appeared on TV and hinted that he had the power to release the hostages. It was a lie. He had no power and he was eventually executed. Mr. Ahmadinejad is flirting with the same fate.
6
The supreme leader better hold his position against dealing with Trump. Like the majority of the U.S. and much of the rest of the world, many things seem to be on hold pending our next election. That is, assuming Democratic in-fighting, gerrymandering and cyber/social media interference doesn't make Trump's reign last until 2024 in which case, it will be a grim scenario for much of the world, except perhaps for Russia who might have financial control over or perhaps photos and videos to keep Trump in line.
2
For the first time in a very long time, Iran feels truly vulnerable. The sanctions show how easily their only source of keeping the Islamic Theocracy functioning (oil) can be be shut down and not since Reagan have they been concerned that a US President might use devastating military force against them, and no doubt the militarily powerful country of Israel would lay on additional fire power.
Thank you Mr. President for having some guts to do what is needed to take down a terrorist nation. But don't count on cowardly Social Europe for any help. They're too busy thinking up the next government give a way.
21
@Rocky
The strain is showing but this is a regime that sent unarmed and untrained people to attack entrenched Iraqi soldiers as cover for their own attacking troops. Do not expect fanatics to give in just because their population is suffering. As long as the Revolutionary Guard remains to secure the power of the mullahs, this strategy is unlikely to achieve what you think it can.
6
@Rocky Getting way ahead of yourself aren't you there, Rocky. This is an article almost entirely based on the views of an ex-President of Iran. Think President Carter commenting on what the US ought to do in 2019.
3
@Rocky
Nothing has happened.
When something does happen (and hopefully not a war), then perhaps you'll have something real to comment about.
Remember the Nobel peace prize?
2
As much as I believe that Trump has taken the wrong tact with Iran, its even more disconcerting thinking about the Fool in Chief negotiating with them.
Based on what's happened with North Korea and its continuing nuclear weapons program, we can expect Trump to claim victory after any discussion with Iran, no matter the outcome and no matter the lack of any real progress.
Expect the Iranians to continue to develop a nuclear stockpile while they play Trump like a fiddle. Why else would the hardliners want to talk, except to take advantage of Trump's never ending vanity.
12
Trump will not agree to sit down with anyone from Iran unless that person states that Trump is a wonderful, intelligent leader and pledges to bow down to him.
10
“Mr. Trump is a man of action,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said..... “He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision."
LOVE LETTER INCOMING!
Kim reportedly jealous. Re-targeting nukes.
10
'Mr. Khamenei has described Mr. Trump as an evil trickster and has prohibited talks with him under any circumstances.'
Why such a terrible opinion of him?
Did Mr. Khamenei lose money investing in Trump's development projects and casinos? Or he was a subcontractor on one of his construction projects?
Or he had relatives enrolled in Trump University that did not have a chance to graduate?
11
We should always be willing to have a dialogue. It's better than war. Of course Iran is in a corner economically. I don't think a war would last that long because they don't have the resources to fight it. I don't think there are many in the US who want another war in the ME. No one wants nuclear weaponized Iran. We had an agreement that at least deferred that. If we can talk to North Korea, we should be willing to talk to these guys as well.
@dairyfarmersdaughter
"I don't think a war would last that long because they don't have the resources to fight it."
Famous last words! Funny both the Russians and the US said the same thing about Afghanistan!
Russia withdrew in utter defeat. The US has been in Afghanistan for almost 18 years (since 2001). It's a very poor country. Iran is much more wealthy due to oil resources.
3
Two thoughts come to mind:
1) The Iranians have seen the Chinese successfully negotiate with President Trump and realize they might well get most of what they want by sitting down and talking; and,
2) Whatever happens regarding the current situation, now or in the medium-term future, the Iranians are committed to acquiring nuclear weapons, and there is little we can do to stop them.
4
@BayArea101
What did the Chinese get?
They are still talking and expect them to continue talking with the tariffs in place and supply chains rearranging themselves. They take a couple of years and it is happening while the Chinese think that they are stalling on the negotiations until 2020 when Trump would lose the election. They may find the next President if it is not Trump might carry through the same policy.
1
Amazing how many people here are incapable of intelligently reading an article. By a majority of the comments, it is obvious the meaning of this article went way over their heads. Instead of focusing on how great it would be to have both countries talk, they need to only unload on Trump. I guess that is what Trump Derangement Syndrome means.
19
the US had talks with Iran 6 years ago. had a pretty good platform of a deal from which to bring Iran back into the international community. Only problem was that Israel, led by Netanyahu, was against any kind of interaction. McConnell made it almost impossible for further talks, making it extremely hard for Kerry to inform the American public about the details of the agreement, flinging around untruths whenever he could. Like Kushner's grand Palestine/Israel peace deal, any negotiation with Iran will be backroom directed by Iran's enemy neighbors.
There is no win for America when the Trump administration shows its hand before talks. Obama wanted to help the people so they could take control of their country but Trump only wants a paper tiger victory for his own aggrandizement. Iran has his number.
25
@MKKW
Iran provides support to terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah in addition to further destabilizing actions throughout the region. You are simply restating a flawed strategy. Why was it a well thought out plan to deliver billions of dollars and sanctions relief to a country that hates America?
This country is a bad actor of the worst order and these actions will continue under the current regime. Innocent citizens must be supported when they push back against this type of regime.
Where was Obama during the Green Movement when innocent people were fighting for their civil rights against an oppressive regime?
We cannot allow Iran to advance its military program to the point that they will be significantly more dangerous.
4
@Garth ~
At best, Trump takes us two steps backwards, especially if Obama was involved, and one step of his very own forward.
Well, he's trying to get the forward step. Anything been really SIGNED AND APPROVED yet?
Commonality of interest and emotional bent. Two meanings of "bent."
1
The hardliners likely argue that to make peace with America under Trump would not only end the crippling embargo but also do much to legitimize him, granting him more political capital so as to further damage the Republic and disrupt the globe, hastening the US hegemonic decay.
5
It's looking a lot like Trump is going to be around for another 5 and a half years. It would probably be wise for Iran's unelected, illegitimate, Twelver, religious-fanatic dictators to reach out to him. Look to Kim Jung Un for guidance.
7
@MIKEinNYC History Happens.
Iranian would not find a more stupid negotiator than Trump. Just throw a few flatteries along the way, Iranian would get pretty much what they want.
10
@Charles
Why would you say that? Trump has been pretty hard lined with China. He hasn't fallen over for them. While he opened a dialogue with north korea he hasn't lifted any sanctions on them without results first.
Where are you getting your wisdom that he would just fall over for these countries?
3
@Charles
Try it and see how far It gets. That is how Trump operated with Kim. he knows how that works. Mitt tried it only to get a dinner in a public restaurant to get laughed at.
2
I totally agree. Before we know it, trump will be “in love” with another one.
2
Iranians did negotiate with the US and signed an agreement.
Why dont they want to negotiate and sign another agreement?
Did we break the agreement that we have signed with Iran along three closest our allies?
10
@F The agreement was favorable to them. It was not good for the world. It allowed Iran to continue to march towards regional domination, threaten Israel's existence and hence, towards a potentially really bad war. The consequences could be worse than Syria. We made a mistake. We gave up all of our leverage to stop them. Why shouldn't we try to fix it?
10
@Zeke
Israel's existence is not threatened. Israel, though they have never admitted to it is sitting on enough nukes to take out the whole region more. Plus Israel has been a militaristic country since their founding and knows nothing else. So stop with the poor Israel nonsense. The only thing Israel wants is American $ and American Jewish $. All the while they laugh at us and especially at American's Jews who they hate and deride. How do I know this? I work with Israeli companies all the time and they are very upfront with who they are and how they think.
3
@Zeke ~
THAT agreement was about nuclear power and weapons. It didn't say "and you can go support terrorists and attack people you don't like".
Although in many ways the US has done that for decades.
You want a 200 page agreement with details about political issues?
Lots oif luck.
1
Dealing with Trump buys time...to build a bomb. Of course, with any detente and any political capital Trump gains from it, you run the risk of his re-election in 2020. Tough decision for the Iranians.
4
These people understand and respect only one thing: the might and power of an iron fist. So we should show them ours. Talking to these people is useless.
11
@Brewster Millions
You are dead wrong, and do not understand Iran. You must be watching Fox News for this misinformation. Iran will make enormous sacrifices to resist pressure. Not only that, but our "Iron Fist" is about as solid as solder. Iran can withstand these sanctions, and it will as long as the U.S. tries to exercise force.
1
The 2nd paragraph of this story says, "...40 years of animosity with the US..." Actually it's been closer to 65 years of animosity with the Iranians. In 1954 Kermit Roosevelt was given permission by President Eisenhower to orchestrate a CIA overthrow of Iran's 1st democratic government on behalf of private oil interests. The Shah (king) was then installed as head of Iran. The Shah rammed bamboo up under the fingernails of people in the political opposition and executed some of them. The 23 years of animosity boiled over in 1979 with the Iranian Revolution.
10
That was then. We also had pretty rough relationships with Germany and Japan a few years before that! Some countries and people’s can move themselves forward more than others.
2
I don't doubt Trump's advisors are as worried about the president's meeting with the Iranians one-on-one as they were at the prospect of him doing the same with Mueller.
They know Donald has a vaporous intelligence and is easily manipulated —the same precedent as obtained when Reagan met Gorbachev in Reykjavik.
That said, I admire the Iranian strategy: telling Trump to put his money where his mouth is is a positive thing. Bravo on them.
6
There is no such thing as “negotiating” with trump...
You either give him exactly what he wants or the “negotiating” falls apart... or you can always try and charm him and bribe him, then he’ll fold like a cheap suit.
Either way, there is no negotiating, it’s cave in or bribery.
Even if the Iranians are serious about talks, his complete and total lack of knowledge about anything, his extremely short attention span and his arrogance would hamper any real attempt to negotiate... But I’m sure he’d be happy for another photo opportunity, so he could tell his cult how he brought about world peace twice.
10
Talking to Trump worked out well for the North Koreans, Russians and China.
They got everything they wanted and the US got nothing.
6
@mungomunro
Did Russia sign the JCPOA Trump withdrew from? Did they get everything they wanted from Trump when they did that? What else did they get? Whisper's about having more 'flexibility' after the election? Oh, never mind that was Saint Obama.
4
@GregP Russia and China wanted more influence in the world which they got when Trump decided to ceded most of the planet to them.
1
@GregP No, just someone who cared about governing, rather than bragging rights.
That’s smart. Strike while the iron’s hot. The USA, now more than ever, is happy to support dictators that support the party line. Iran is a logical addition with the age of oil coming to an end and the house of Saud soon reverting to a full medieval kingdom.
8
It is quite apparent that the Iranians have learned little about the Trump administration. My recommendation to them: Invite Trump to Iran. Hold a parade in his honor with a red carpet, tanks and planes. Negotiate storm off, agree to negotiate again and do whatever you wish thereafter.
7
The constitution’s provisions regarding the president’s power to negotiate international treaties and agreements, with the “advice and consent” of congress, is somewhat complex. In some cases, the treaty must be ratified by a supermajority (2/3) of the senate. In others, ratification requires simple majorities of both the house and the senate.
Assuming, that revoking or rescinding an existing treaty or agreement requires congressional ratification, was it constitutional for Mr. Trump to unilaterally rescind the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran?
I am certainly not a constitutional scholar, but I’ve been amazed by the number of times the president has unilaterally rescinded international treaties, trade agreements, levied tariffs, etc.
If Trump does meet with the Iranians, in truth, what power does he have?
I’m guessing he believes he has absolute power.
And that is frightening.
With the house controlled by the Democrats, can we expect King Donald to be reined in?!?
1
@Tom W
The JCPOA was not a Treaty and was never submitted to any body of Congress for their approval. That's why its a JCPOA Obama knew he would never get it through even a non partisan Congress. Why? Because it was never a good deal that's why.
2
@GregP ~
From the focal point of the deal, uranium and plutonium, things were documented as being adhered to.
ANd the other signers didn't seem to agree with Trump ... again.
2
@GregP
“The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is a detailed, 159-page agreement with five annexes reached by Iran and the P5+1 (China France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) on July 14, 2015. The nuclear deal was endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231, adopted on July 20, 2015.”
You’re right. The JCPOA wasn’t a treaty, but the statement above certainly seems to indicate it was an international agreement. The constitution does mention international agreements and process whereby they are ratified.
Then did President Obama overstep his constitutional authority?
2
They know they will never have a president so easy to dupe again.
10
They duped Obama and his entire administration.
7
The Iranians aren't stupid. Even the hardliners. They can see how well dealing with Trump has gone for Kim Jung un. Kim's primary goal was to be elevated to the level of the United States. Trump gave him that, and threw in suspension of joint exercises with South Korea (without consulting our allies) and got zero in return.
All Ahmadinejad has to do is send Trump a flattering letter and they'll be BFF.
7
I gave the Iranians more credit than they deserve. If they go back to the negotiating table with Trump after he tore up the first agreement, they might as well take a gun to their heads.
2
How sensible and pragmatic Iranian officials sound,
especially when compared to ours!
That's why we're the "model?"
4
I have often quoted Thomas J. Watson, the Founder of IBM who famously said:
“ … it's very difficult to build and very easy to destroy.”
The Iranianisms should be encouraged and supported to discuss détente with the US.
If this fails, it would prove that the Deal Maker in Chief prefers to destroy than to build and is not a statesman nor a leader.
3
I lived in Iran in 1972 and generally found the Iranian people to be hospitable and polite. Not all to be sure but that is true of any group of people.
When I was there the Shah was feared and hated, but the society at large had a very robust secular element despite the Islamic religion. It was also a rather prosperous country compared to the North African countries where I grew up.
I would dearly like to see us start talking to them and resolve our differences. In my view we have more in common with them than we do with Saudi Arabia.
Still as others have noted, the North Korea thing seems to have borne little fruit. It is a lot to imagine that rapprochement is around the corner.
12
@gpickard
The Iranian people have never been the problem. It is the 20% extremists that control the government.
2
@Anil Just like here. . .
2
The Iranian economy is in a severe state of economic meltdown without the pressure exerted by Trump, nothing with change. Giving Iran unbridled power to produce nuclear weapons in 10 years, while having the financial capability to support terror groups has been an insane policy. For once, give Trump credit for bringing this rogue nation to the negotiating table. Even a clock is correct twice a day.
8
@Edward
A nuclear Iran would be an Iran with whom it would be impossible to negotiate any improvements. That was why the nuclear deal that was agreed was restricted to just averting the regime's development of them for 10 to 25 years. It was a deal that was working for Iran and it was prospering.
The problem was not with the deal itself. It was the most restrictive and best monitored deal ever made. The problem was that the regime remained a bad actor and it's enemies all want it gone and the deal did not do that. So the hope that became the conviction of a better deal based upon persisting with the sanctions grew up.
Had the U.S. persisted in pursuit of a deal that would have effectively ended the regime as a bad actor, then it surely would have worked--was never confirmed by any rational evidence. Today, we do not know what is going to happen.
1
@Edward
How about giving Obama and Kerry some credit?
They had already come to the negotiating table and signed a deal that by all accounts (and inspections) was being adhered to.
And speaking of rogue nations, Iran has not confiscated land nor annexed any and kept people under subjugation for a few millenia now. Nor has it killed and cut up the body of journalists.
The reason that you think Iran is rogue is undoubtedly because of its support for Hamas, a political party that has said that it will adhere to an agreement that the PA signs with Israel that is in generally along the lines of UN security council resolution 242. Furthermore, it says that it will then agree to a permanent armistice with Israel. Why not take it up on its offer?
5
@Edward
Trump hasn't achieved anything yet, though, other than making the lives of ordinary Iranians miserable and burning any goodwill they might have towards the US.
The JCPOA was the result of hard-fought diplomacy, and it provided a decent level of protection against Iran getting a nuclear weapon, which apparently is undesirable. It's not an insane policy at all.
Regarding support for terrorism, the US's close friends in Saudi support the same and worse than Iran does; let's not pretend this is about exerting some form of moral influence in the region.
Let Trump accomplish something material before he gets credit.
4
Having seen Trump "negotiate" with Kim Jong-Un I'm sure they realize they can get everything they want for little in return following this strategy.
8
@Dave Allan
So you think Strategic Patience had better results? Of course you don't. Know that another name for Strategic Patience is? Kick The Can Down the Road. Who did he kick the can to? Mr. Trump.
2
Maybe the administration could rehire the professionals in the State Department... and we could get back on track with normal and constructive relationship with Iran, and other countries too!
7
OK this is an easy one. Get the old Iran nuclear agreement and erase Obama's name and put Trump's name on it and Iran just has to say this is the new agreement just sign. It's not like he will read it.
16
@James That would you wrapped a thank you trophy in gold foil.
Hey, you never know.
No reason to be hopeful, but at least a sign. I recall someone on the Arab side saying it’s better to negotiate with Begin because he’s a hawk. So when you have a deal, you have a deal. That the idea of talking with US is even mentioned is something. Probably best by a hard liner than a moderate.
Maybe one day someone on the Palestinian side will step forward. The Israelis that do keep getting burnt.
3
They probably know Trump is all pump and no substance...make him look/feel good and he'll happily hand you the house.
4
Enemies do indeed make for strange bed-fellows. Who would think that Ahmadinejad would put forward an olive branch toward peace, white doves and white flags aflutter? I have no love for this former Iranian leader, quite the contrary. But he does have a point. Maybe, just maybe, Trump would agree to "talk" if the "cost benefits" and "business" were the impetus. What would be the difference to meet with the heads of Iran than having a tete-a-tete with Kim? After all, Kim come Hades or high water wants to be a nuclear power, and no one will stop him - or so I believe. Whereas we were almost there with the Iran Nuclear Deal until war-mongering Bolton and Pompeo along with Netanyahu distracted the much-distractible Mr. Trump.
2
Iranians should offer Trump an option to build a Trump branded hotel and golf course in tony north Tehran and things will probably get a lot easier for them.
4
So, sanctions are working, and they are starting to cry for relief. Funny they called The Times instead of The State Department?
This shows this is nothing but a propaganda play to get Europeans to play ball.
In another six months, they will be ripe for talks. Now?
Let'em suffer.
3
They are not stupid, they know the “art of the deal” and the “artist”. They get what they want and he gets to brag about it.
2
I can see it now, Trump International Hotel - Tehran.
2
Ahmadinejad is another one of those insane Twelvers who believe that walking among us is a twelfth imam named Al Mahdi and they wait for Al to show up with Jesus to redeem the world. Don't believe me. Think that no one can be that dumb? Look it up. Start with Wikipedia.
2
The idea of engaging with the Trump administration is led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the ex-president known for his hard-line anti-American bombast.
Oh sure, that guy, Ahmadi-Nejad, the one with the perpetual, insincere smirk who lies through his teeth (although obviously unconvincingly) and from either side of his deliberately provocative mouth. The man operates on an entirely different set of presumptions, it seems, than the rest of civilization and does so with glee.
Ah, no. No one wants to talk to you. Keep that islamic revolution rolling, Mahmoud!!!
2
The short guy in the members only jacket? He is still around? He is as crazy as little Kim. Maybe The three bozos can have a three way.
2
I hope that the Iranian “hard-liners” re-think this.
By agreeing to meet with the American president, all they would be doing is to give the toddler-in-chief the worldwide stage which he craves. The attention is a narcotic.
He snapped in two President Obama’s 2015 nuclear agreement. Granting Donald Trump would only serve to keep him on the front pages of all of the world’s newspapers. He has nothing to contribute. Nothing.
Don’t take the bait, Iran. It’s all about him. Don’t forget that.
21
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18 Iranians are not responsible for not keeping Trump in power; they are responsible for their own national interest, and if it means taking to the toddler-in-chielf, there's no reason they shouldn't do it. You don't like Trump? Vote him out yourself in 2020.
22
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18
It's a good play for the hard liners--if any relief from sanctions results, they may very likely end up with a political advantage over moderates like Mr. Zarif.
5
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18 Vote Trump and the Republicans out of office November 3, 2020 -- and this show will be over.
2
This actually shows that the max pressure approach may be working. The Iranians are now considering talking - something that they said they would never do with Trump.
The biggest issue that needs to be addressed - which was not addressed in the JCPOA - is Iran's taking over other countries through proxies. This is leading to direct war with Israel. That war could be devastating to the region, as it would likely take place across anywhere Iran has a proxy - Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, as well as Iran and Israel. The media mostly focuses on Iran's compliance with the deal. But Iran is compliant because the deal was in their favor, and allowed them to continue its Greater Persia strategy to expand and build an existential threat to Israel.
This war would likely lead to a massive refugee crisis into Europe, perhaps larger than what we saw with Syria.
I know Trump is awful in many ways. But he is perfect for dealing with actors in the Middle East. Stopping Iran now, via sanctions and pressure, would likely prevent a greater war down the road. Plus, if we want a two-state solution to ever become a reality, it won't happen while Iran poses an existential threat to Israel, and views a Palestine state as another potential puppet from which to launch attacks. They've given Hamas about $100 mill over the past two years alone.
5
@Zeke America needs her professional State Department team, who were one way or another removed from office -- to be replaced by people with little or no experience or ability.
1
@M John Kerry gave up all of our leverage. How do we convince Iran to stop marching towards war without any leverage?
The deal was classic appeasement. Thanks to our State Dept.
2
Should be easy for Iran to talk to Trump. Iran just needs to say he is the greatest president of all time and he is really smart and then sit down at the negotiating table and get what you want.
13
This is a big dilemma for Trump. On the one hand he would get the media attention he craves, as he did in North Korea, for accomplishing something in world affairs, proving he is not so stupid nor a pathetic puppet to the highest bidder.
On the other hand, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kushner, Miller, Bolton, Pompeo, and Sheldon Adelson will be yanking on his sleeve, to carry their water at his expense.
Enter Putin on the side of the Iranians. What to do, what to do, Donald will have to decide if he is a toady to the Israel-Saudi axis like everyone suspects, or a true diplomat brave enough to make a historial deal.
7
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad isn't stupid. Donald Trump is. The Iranians have a much longer and deeper understanding of history, and a much higher tolerance for pain and suffering than Americans do. Ahmadinejad must see that this is a supreme opportunity to run circles around the "stable genius" who currently occupies the White House. After all, look at how Trump's great, good friend, Chairman Un, has played the American Pretender-in-Chief.
17
@Todd Kenneth Dwyer
I beg to differ.
The man, speaking not too long ago at Columbia University said, with a smile: "There are no homosexuals in Iran."
That's just plain stupid.
1
@Moehoward
Seriously, Moe, your point? (Seriously).
As much as I love the Squad, when it comes to sitting down to talk turkey with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I’ll take Donald Trump any day.
4
@John Doe
Yes, just look at his tremendous success in denuclearizing North Korea!
@Rex7, notice that they haven’t blown anything up other than Kim’s ego which a world already full of swelled egos can easily stand more of provided it’s not with released carbon dioxide gas. Gosh, maybe we’ve stumbled onto a new form of sequestration!
1
In order for Iran to get Trump’s love and adoration they must first develop weapons like North Korea did.
3
Unlike Israel, India and Pakistan, Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has no nuclear weapons.
Unlike America, Iran didn't invent and use nuclear weapons nor does it have 48% of the worlds nukes.
Unlike Japan, Iran doesn't have tons of enriched weapons grade nuclear material and has never been atomic bombed.
Unlike France, Iran has been the target of decades of covert and overt regime change existential war by America, Israel and the United Kingdom.
Unlike Saudi Arabia , Iran was not the origin home of 15 of the 9/11/01 hijackers, Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and ISIS.
Donald Trump is a pathological liar whose withdrawal from the JCOPA aka the Iran Nuclear Deal despite Iran's compliance has America on the verge of conflict with Iran on behalf of Israel and Saudi Arabia without any Congressional debate investigation authorization and declaration.
5
@Blackmamba
The JCPOA was agreed to "w/o any Congressional debate instigation authorization and declaration."
Blackmamba--Iranian militants, with the blessing of the Ayatollah Khomeini, seized the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 and held our diplomats hostage for 444 days. That's an act of war.
@sharon5101 now why would they do that? What happened in Iran in 1953?
1
Trump should address the Iranian people directly to encourage them to overthrow their illegitimate, unelected, religious-fanatic dictators who oppress women and gay people, who regularly threaten Israel with annihilation, and who execute more people than any other country in the world.
It's always better to overthrow a government from within than from without. Saves us a lot of trouble.
This is an illegitimately constituted state. They should immediately be tossed out of the United Nations.
If the Mafia took over Italy by force would anyone have anything to do with them? Would they be UN members? Same thing here.
5
@MIKEinNYC Iran has a democratically elected president and legislature that operate in conjunction with their unelected religious counterparts, so... good luck with that.
Maybe you're thinking of Saudi Arabia, which is *actually* a totalitarian autocracy where the only law besides what the Saud royal family decrees is to fall back to the Quran - Sharia law, in other words.
Oh, wait, I forgot, Trump got to touch MBS' glowing orb, so we're friends now. Silly me.
3
@Tom
Their president was elected from a slate of candidates specifically set forth by the phony-baloney ayatola. No matter who from that slate got elected, The victor would be the ayatola's man. As far as a woman running goes, forget about it.
1
@MIKEinNYC this kind of sounds like the way the USA is going. Thank god we have the 2nd amendment to do serious rioting if need be.
Iran lies at the center of what was, for millenia, the Persian Empire. Persia has existed for more than 2500 years. They were competent in matters of international diplomacy in times when they dealt with the Egyptian pharoahs and the emperors of Rome.
All indicators point to them still being competent.
For our ignorant, irrational Mr. Trump to attempt negotiating with the Iranians is akin to Don taking on Michael Jordan in a game of one-on-one basketball.
The idea is absurd and frightening.
Mr. Trump is in so far over his head. When are powerful Republican leaders going to face reality and stop the unfit Mr. Trump from doing more damage to American international relations?
4
@Tom W
They're not Persians any more. They were run over first by the Greeks, then the Romans, then the radical, fanatic islamists, then by the Mongols.
Being heir to an ancient "empire" means little when you can't get your house together.
1
@Moehoward
The history of Iran, which was commonly known until the mid-20th century as Persia in the Western world, is intertwined with the history of a larger region, also to an extent known as Greater Iran, comprising the area from Anatolia, the Bosphorus, and Egypt in the west to the borders of Ancient India and the Syr Darya in the east, and from the Caucasus and the Eurasian Steppe in the north to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman in the south.
Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 7000 BC.
2
Iran was our close ally during the second world war and extremely important in our fight against Hitler. Americans should admit that in our fight against the old expanding Soviet Empire, America got a little frisky in trying to reign them in and step on a lot of people and governments in the way - Iran and it's government at the time of the Shaw, etc. Now that they get their 'we stormed their Embassy moment' maybe it is time to talk to an old ally.
I suspect that if Iran had a reporter for the Washington Post in Turkey - who was Iranian - they wouldn't wind up killing him and chopping up his body and throwing him away with the fish and demand the United States turn its head if we still wanted to get their cheaper oil. Yes, the Persians can be brutal, but we can always deal with an old ally.
So let's send the Dennis Rodman of Presidents to Tehran and see what he can do. What's the worst he can do: Maybe they'll just say 'send him back.'
3
Smart move on the part of the Iranian hardliners. Who would be more qualified than them to recognize our egotistical fool President and exploit him?
3
The Iranians probably believe that if they shower him with praise, give him a military parade, stroke his ego and offer him the chance to do a hotel deal that he can be had.
2
Iran and Trump and Israel Should agree to make the West Bank some kind of "international zone" with overlapping governments setting policy and establishing security there. No "national sovereignty" for any one group/entity there, but rather a collaborative government addressing each party's requirements. As in the UN Security Council, veto powers guaranteeing no one party will be ganged up on by the others-- in other words provision for Palestian limited (no military) self-government, freedom from arbitrary Israeli incursions etc., guarantees for Israeli security; absolutely no weapons permitted there that could pose a threat to Israel.
With such an arrangement Iran could disavow Hezbollah, and then from there the major stumbling blocks to comprehendive Middle East peace would be removed.
Guaranteed protections for all Islamic, Christian and Jewish observance would be put in place throughout the region, and economic cooperation and investment would follow, building infrastructure and combatting poverty.
All this could be accomplished within weeks, and the broad outlines perhaps just a matter of days.
9
@Anon
I like this idea from a sane grown up rational adult. Everyone has contributed to the problemt, but this does not have to go on forever. Sane negotiators must be found, and religions must be kept down to a dull roar
4
@Anon Worked great for the Danzig Corridor in the 20s and 30s. What could possibly go wrong?!?!
Even Iran knows Trump will do anything for a photo op with another "Ultimate Boss of Bosses" of any country (their various real titles are all so pleasant, yes?). He thinks it's his destiny to join the club, and wants to learn the secret handshake.
2
Better they find an ally on Fox and have THEM talk to Trump.
5
Because they know he's an idiot and can be had.
41
@Steve Ax Absolutely!!!!
3
The Iranians know a sucker when they see one.
57
Photos of anti-American rallies and of the 1979 U.S. Embassy take-over don't get us anywhere. The vast majority of Iranians yearn to be a part of the West.
29
@Amir Agree, but will their leadership/governments allow western influence?
They know how bad he is at negotiation. What could possibly go wrong?
7
I imagine negotiating with trump is like making the dog think you threw the ball.
All the Iranians have to do is offer him some gulf side property for a trump branded resort and they'll get the sanctions lifted and keep their nuclear program.
46
If the Iranians seriously think Trump is a person with any business acumen, this negotiation is doomed from the start.
4
I am no fan of the government of Iran, but we should talk to them.
You have to talk to your enemies. This is how you stop being enemies someday.
11
@Starman We *did* talk to them. We had an entire agreement with them. Trump tore it up and threw it out.
7
The Iranians realize that Donald Trump is a sensible leader who shows restraint to enter into a direct conflict with them, preferring instead to kindle an economic and peaceful relationship. if Hillary Clinton was president we would already be in all out war with Iran, millions would die. Thank God for Donald Trump, the only president able to tame hostile leaders and win the favor of the world, without firing a shot
5
I loved your sarcasm!
5
@Scott I hope that's satire - if Hillary Clinton was president, we'd still have an agreement keeping Iran's nukes in check, its success would have emboldened Iran's moderate bloc and kept them content domestically, and there would be no crisis in Hormuz *to* resolve in the first place.
Donald Trump doesn't "tame" hostile leaders - he befriends and allies himself with despots and autocrats because they're of like mind, like Iran's former president Ahmadinejad - who Iranians gave the boot to in favor of someone who *actually* forged a path to peace with us at the time.
7
@Scott .
Oh yes, he's definitely "sensible." It was certainly sensible to remove the US from a deal Iran was complying . It was definitely sensible for him to then arbitrarily re-impose sanctions on Iran, strangling their economy. It was also sensible for him to fly a drone within Iran's international water's, which was then shot down. It was sensible for him to then hold off on attacking (showing restraint as you call it) Iran, with a conflict HE started, because let's face it, he's such a great guy. So yea, good luck to the Iranians speaking with such a great a sensible leader.
1
The alpha male of the pack is old and dying. His dominance is being challenged. This is going be interesting.
2
@MS Which pack, theirs or ours?
1
“Mr. Trump is a man of action,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said in a lengthy telephone interview with The New York Times. “He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision."
Spoken by someone who obviously hasn't done his homework on Trump's business history.
4
@Panthiest Read: "He's a crazy demagogue who flaunts the rule of law, just like I was when I was president. We should be friends."
What could possibly go wrong? "Nobody negotiates like Trump, he's the world's greatest negotiator, you're going to get tired of all the winning folks". Seriously though: ff course Iran wants to negotiate with him. He's the most incompetent negotiator in US history.
5
Iran should absolutely negotiate with Trump. Look at how it went for North Korea. He just wants to claim a win. Iran would probably get better terms than Obama gave them under the JCPOA.
4
Of course. It's obvious to the hardliners that the Grifter in Chief can be rolled. Putin does repeatedly. Kim does it again and again.
If we want America to be respected again internationally, we need to get rid of this "deal" maker. In 2020, vote for anybody but Trump.
4
I am unfamiliar with the customs in Iran, but...might we hope for another sword dance video?
2
@SolarCat No they are Arabs, Iranians are Persians. We do not dance with foreign leaders
Yes but ….
The real 100 pound Gorilla in the room is the ongoing fight (mostly by proxy) between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
The USA and Iran could (maybe) have successful talks, but it won’t stop Saudis spreading their despicable violent religious beliefs that brought us 9-11, or Iran from fighting to own more influence in the region and protect it's version of Islam.
Until these two rivals finally talk and come to peaceful agreement, the wars and violence won’t end.
3
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Trump have a lot in common. They are both bigots.
5
40 years of animosity against Iran is as worthless as what America is again doing to our neighbor, Cuba.
3
It’s finally dawning on them that all you have to do is stroke Mr. Trump’s ego and he’ll be your friend - easy as pie!
4
Talks would be good if Trump had a brain, but he’s a silly clown. He will demand that Iran satisfy every right wing idea afloat in social media, that Iran now to right wing Israeli demands, and to the Sunni Arab rulers in the Region and generally make a silly mess of it all.
4
The first 4 comments say it all. No one need say another word because Trump is that simple.
1
It's only natural that Ahmadinejad would be enthused about boarding the Trump train, just like Duterte, Kim, Putin, MBS, and Bolsonaro. Birds of a feather flock together, and a man's measure can be read from the company he keeps.
2
Normal U.S. President Democrat/Republican: hip hip hooray! trump: meh. Iranians mirroring North Koreans trumping our deplorable chump.
1
Flattery will get them everywhere! Trump will roll over; it’s the CIA you have to worry about!
3
I think such a meeting would help greatly. Trump would love it! Just think of the photo ops.... another coup for Trump to appear in the history books as the rare US prez who's made a formal visit to Iran, etc. Trump will love all the clicking camera...the pomp and circumstance...and as we've seen with him in similar instance, he'll probably 'buddy up' with their leaders. Trump is a blowhard but when push comes to shove, and esp during an in-person meeting, he backs away a bit. Does anyone in the US really want us to increase the rhetoric with Iran? I think not. Let's try to smooth things over, even IF the person to do so on the US side is Trump.
1
Trump wins again.
2
@Michael Livingston’s I'm getting so sick of winning.
Trump will concede everything for a photo op.
The Art of The Charade
Cameras.... lights.... fake negotiation !!
58
@Socrates, but you have to concede that he at least got the photo op no one else could. Perhaps humility is a new word for Democrats to reacquaint themselves with on their own and not give the Reps the satisfaction of having to hold the page open for you and point out something totally unbeknownst.
2
DON'T GO FOR THE BAIT. Iran (and Russia and North Korea) are not stupid. They play the long game. And, they play the president like a fiddle...... AND - we wouldn't have an "impending crisis" if the president had just left everything alone.
They know the wannabe dictator President salivates over meeting with them. He doesn't want to be in a club with NATO or the UN. He wants the back room at the country club with the real power mongers...... And, they know he negotiates on EGO, perceived POWER, and obsession with OBAMA - and they use it...... AND it plays into the president's hand because 1) he gets to stir crud up and then "pivots" and save the day by backing off and 2) he knows the GOP SENATORS WILL REMAIN SILENT.
And, sending letters to the president. He hasn't read a letter or a briefing in years (he can't even stay on a teleprompter without making stuff up - or seriously, not thinking).
6
At first pass, this seems like a good strategy. Flatter him! Tell him what a great & mighty leader he is! Tell him he’s so strong & smart! Say he’ll surely get a Nobel for this! Tell him he’s better than Obama, and then the Iranians can write their own ticket to whatever they want.
1
Clearly they have witnessed how to negotiate with a simpleton president:
1. Say nice things about him personally
2. Get away with whatever you want
2
Ahmadinejad seems to understand Trump. Flattery and feigned admiration just might be the grease Iran needs for some sort of new arrangement and sanctions relief. Kim Jong-un has given up nothing, seems to have gained some sanctions wiggle room (China and Russia), and lowered tensions simply by engaging with Trump. And Trump needs a foreign policy win, even if it's as bogus as his other claimed successes. I've read that Iran and Trump need to reach some sort of face saving "win - win" before getting down to business. This looks win - win enough to me.
Iran just needs to let trump build a tower, call the new (but same) deal, the The Terrific Trump Treaty, and get on with their lives. The one problem though is Saudi Arabia and Israel will be trying to out praise and out bribe Iran for trump’s affection.
2
Ahmadinejad must have observed how easy it is to manipulate Trump, and has the right idea for Iranian interests. However, he failed when he sent three letters containing 'long philosophical musings and governing advice'. He needs to write very short, simple letters praising Trump. That will get Iran the sweet heart deal of the century.
3
This ploy by hard line Iranian leaders as Trump will do a 180 at anytime witness his spin on Kim going from fire and fury to "in love" with the brutal dictator. It would be pragmatic for Trump to negotiate with Iranian leaders lowering the regional temp amid re-election pressures while Iran wants to end sanctions on the Iranian economy. The world powers do not want a conflict in that vital area and Trump wants a nobel peace prize and all the attention negotiations would bring on Trump hsi reason for getting up in the morning. Iran has been around for thousands of years Trump is in office 2 years and very unpopular here and abroad.
1
Make no mistake: Trump STARTED this.
For no good reason (as likely as not simply because it was another Obama success) and with no strategy for either the act itself or forward movement, Trump pulls out of the Iran Nuclear Deal. Then with warhawks Bolton and Pompeo chirping in his ears he makes demands and issues threats should his demands not be met.
VINTAGE TRUMP.....just vintage! My way or the highway, zero-sum, non-negotiable belligerence.
And now we will be left to clean up his mess as he walks into the sunset in 2020. Eight to five he won't forget to declare victory on the way out.
1
Some have seen how easily trump can be manipulated and are confident they can do well in negotiations.
I doubt very much that any Iranian, hardliner or reformist, would discuss anything with Trump prior to a complete removal of sanctions.
I believe Farnaz Fassihi is being overly optimistic. Talk is cheap, and even if negotiations were to occur they would have the same useless result as the numerous meetings between the U.S. and North Korea: Total failure, notwithstanding Trump's fatuous claims of victory.
One day the U.S. signs an accord, then the next president unilaterally withdraws from it, then his Secretary of State submits a 12-point ultimatum tantamount to Iran's outright surrender and humiliation. All the while, the U.S. is showering its friendly, barbaric dictatorships in the region with WMD and supporting Israeli threats to annihilate Iran.
Every Iranian I have spoken with -- most of them secular, reformist and generally anti-regime but fiercely nationalistic -- believes the United States is not to be trusted. Ahmadinejad, in particular, owed his initial election to the presidency to America's blatant betrayal of the reformist president Khatemi, so his motives in suggesting talks are cynical and highly suspicious.
The U.S. failed to unseat Assad despite creating ISIS to do its dirty work in Syria and Iraq. The U.S. has a lot to answer for, and it has to make the first unconditional concession: Terminate those crippling sanctions on ordinary Iranians, then the two sides can talk.
3
The cynic in me wonders if Iranian hard-liners are considering strengthening Trump before 2020, to ensure the demise of America.
2
If negotiations are begun, Trump lose a scapegoat. That is unless he walks out immediately.
I hate to say I told you so, but...
As I've written in several previous posts, there will be a high level summit between Trump and Rouhani in the next 12 months.
It will be brokered by either Japan or maybe a Gulf State. It won't result in an agreement, but will mark the beginning of extended talks.
By election time, Trump will be finally recognized for what he is...a man of peace, or at least of non-intervention.
Take it to the bank.
Okay, occasionally saying "I told you so." does feel pretty good.
7
@John We HAD a functioning deal already. It was working. All European powers and NATO *confirmed* that Iran was in compliance.
Trump blew it up out of ego and spite. Now he'll "negotiate" a "better" deal and take credit.
It's pathetic, and the rest of the world sees right through it -- unlike Trump's blinded followers.
8
@John
Rather like the extended talks with NK from which we have received only love letters and photo ops.
4
@David
Our allies will CELEBRATE a Trump/Rouhani summit. (Israel may not be too enthusiastic.)
If you think otherwise, you are suffering from TDS (Trump Derangement Sydrome).
1
This is a smart move by the ex-president of Iran and could net a productive end to years of antagonism between the two countries. The simple solution of course is to reinstate the agreement negotiated by the Obama Administration and retitle it 'The Trump Miracle Deal'. Don't laugh....it's a distinct possibility.
1
It would be better for everyone on this planet if the Iranians could have their sanctions permanently lifted. Their economic desperation is the reason they are again seeking nuclear arms. Better to make an agreement without violence now as opposed to continuing to let this pressure build until another meaningless war must begin.
As a child Iran was a respected member of the international community. I did not fully realize the history of the US/Iran relationship, I have a significantly different prospective now.
Once the Iranians stormed our embassy, held our embassy employees and ambassadorial staff for over 440 days I changed my opinions.
I have grown to dislike Iran and distrust any Iranian initiatives .
Having said that. If President Trump can talk to North Korea why not Iran ?
Talking is better than shooting and subterfuge.
25
I would also encourage you to look into the US-backed coup that deposed the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. The hard-line reactionary sentiment that led to the 1979 revolution and resulting theocratic government was contributed to in large measure by the actions of the CIA. If our government had not deposed the Iranian leader and emboldened the ruling monarch Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Iran might never have become what it is today.
14
@Tom ,Retired Florida Junkman
Tom, no history of US involvement in Iran is complete without acknowledging our help in overthrowing their duly elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossedegh, in 1953, orchestrated by the CIA. All about the oil.
Nor can we forget US support for a very unpopular and corrupt Shah of Iran. Iran is a very old civilization with a very complicated history. The seizing of the Embassy is an important part, but just one part of that history.
And talking is fine, but Trump is a lousy poker player. By jumping straight in to the negotiations and undercutting his NSC and Secretary of State, he has made it clear to NK that he is the only one to talk to. Trump has given away his biggest weapon, himself. And he got nothing in return.
Good negotiations have a strategy and the big guy/gal comes in to seal the deal. Trumping is just casting about like the fool that he is who does not have any understanding of all the issues, nor does he seem to care.
For every action there is a reaction. Trump seems overjoyed with the oversize letters he gets from Kim Jong Un and shows them off. Kim understands that the thing to do is flatter Trump.
The Iranians see this and figure why not?
6
@Tom ,Retired Florida Junkman
Iran overthrew a monarchy and replaced it with a democratic republic just like the US did. Yet today the US and England are close allies even if historically their geopolitical ambitions were not in our best interest. I think lasting peace with Iran will happen and it will stabilize the middle east. That would be Trump's greatest foreign policy achievement.
1
Rather than beg them to come to the table, we have pressured them through economic sanctions.
Now, they need to negotiate more than we do. That is how it is done.
9
@d, yes the great way to do things. Hold a knife to someone’s children until they submit to your desires. If all that matters is “winning” this encounter, you can do anything, without regard to morality, long term consequences, the rules, the law. Shining city on the hill. MAGA?
6
@d Not quite. Back in June of this year "Trump says he’s open to Iran talks without preconditions".
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-iran-talks-preconditions-20190623-story.html
1
"Mr. Trump when he offered talks without preconditions"
Well, except the precondition that they do it Trump's way within a week or two ... longer if they send a love letter.
18
I used to think that the Iranian leaders were frighteningly crazy.
They now seem fairly reasonable and tame compared to Trump and this “administration”.
80
@Grove They *were* frighteningly crazy - Ahmadinejad was basically Iran's Trump when he was their president. The Iranian people voted their Trump out of office, though, and replaced him with... well, I've had one Iranian commenter describe Rouhani to me as Iran's Bush II.
They traded up while we traded way, way down.
6
@Grove @Tom
@Grove @Tom They still are crazy. We should not forget that their government is made of Islamic fundamentalists who bring Handmaid's Tale to life across that country oppressing their people. But they are tactical when it comes to their survival and manipulating foreign adversaries, including the US. Those tactics include being sweet when they need to in order to get concessions from America (remember the "reformists" Khatami? Rouhani is no different) and bombastic when it's needed (nationalism works no differently in Iran as any other country, including sadly the US).
@sv
Iran is hardly the Handmaids Tale. Women there can work, get jobs, vote, drive, and even run for public office. There are more women in Iran's Parliament than there are women in our Congress.
No, the real Handmaids Tale is Saudi Arabia, where women there can't do any of those things, but we're aokay with supporting, arming to the teeth, murdering journalists in plain sight of everyone, and exporting terror worldwide.
19