On Friday, November 18, the New York Times published a full page statement of nuclear intentions by the Islamic Republic of Iran, which will likely serve as a key point of reference in the on-going debates on Iranâs nuclear program.
Maybe a key point of reference for the Medes and the Persians and their fellow travellers here. Maybe not for the rest of us. | Titled âUnnecessary crisis - setting the record straight about Iranâs nuclear programâ, the narrative (see appendix) was subsequently described by CNN as a âdetailed, point-by-pointâ discussion of the nuclear negotiation process during the past couple of years.
We've been reading about those points for the past couple years. Unlike the intended audience of the ad, we've been watching the hands and the lips. It hasn't been a pretty picture. | It debunked the myths about oil-rich Iranâs lack of need of alternative sources of energy, defended Iranâs negotiation postures and reiterated Iranâs willingness to continue negotiations.
What's it say about Iran's truculence and the occasional remark about dropping nuclear bombs on Israel? | In light of the gravity of the issue and the coming showdown at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting on November 24, where the US-European Union coalition will be pushing for Security Council action, it is important to reproduce the Iranian nuclear statement to provide a modicum of balance in the global mediaâs coverage of the subject, dominated as it is by a negative image of Iran as irrational, dogmatic and incapable of rational discourse.
And truculent. Don't forget truculent. | The US position is opposed by the dissenting voices of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) countries, which prefer an IAEA-based resolution of the contentious issue. The potency of Iranâs nuclear statement lies precisely in its effective debunking of its negative image, by presenting a detailed and comprehensive argument, backed by facts, invoking an image of Iran that the West, particularly the US, is often inclined to ignore. This alone, perhaps, may signal a major difference between Iran and pre-invasion Iraq, that is, Iranâs ability, and diplomatic sophistication, to launch an effective communicative counterpunch vis-a-vis the avalanche of Iran-bashing discourse, sometimes planted by the powers that be, seeking to manufacture a global consensus on Iranâs nuclear threat. ...
Having read the advertisement, I'd say its coherence and reliance on facts is a matter of opinion. I don't think anyone here was particularly impressed. But we weren't predisposed to be impressed. |
|