The U.S should (and probably will) open talks with Iran

The current administration has consistantly refused to talk directly to countries like Iran and North Korea with undisirable repercusions.

These countries have been forced underground to persue their goals.

To me the phycology of this strategy has been all wrong. If the West really wants to enforce non-proliferation it cannot achieve these goals by threatening countries into submission. It certainly cannot achieve these goals through refusing to speak to the offending entities..

To me this amounts to nothing more than cheap schoolyard snubbing. The whole "we do not negotiate with terrorists" speech is counter productive.

Will things change with the appointment of Robert Gates?

With Rumsfield gone and Bob Gates taking over as Secretary for Defence, it seems a new strategy for dealing with countries like Iran might be on the way..

On at least one Persian Gulf issue, Gates has been associated with a different approach than the one now being pursued. In the summer of 2004, Gates and former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski co-chaired a task force sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations that argued for opening a dialogue with Iran. The task force’s report contended that the lack of American engagement with Iran had harmed American interests, and advocated direct talks with the Iranians. “Just as the United States has a constructive relationship with China (and earlier did so with the Soviet Union) while strongly opposing certain aspects of its internal and international policies, Washington should approach Iran with a readiness to explore areas of common interests while continuing to contest objectionable policy,” said the report, entitled “Iran: Time for a New Approach.”

Source

It's about time a change in strategy is employed. We have already been shown what not to do

My question is what gives us the right to tell other countries that you can't have nuclear weapons, when we have them ourselves. Is our government really that paranoid that they are worried that some little tiny country is going to destroy the United States or is it that they are worried that these little countries will stop all their plans for world domination. Isn't this the same thing as a pot calling the kettle black?

Originally posted by malakia
My question is what gives us the right to tell other countries that you can't have nuclear weapons, when we have them ourselves. Is our government really that paranoid that they are worried that some little tiny country is going to destroy the United States or is it that they are worried that these little countries will stop all their plans for world domination. Isn't this the same thing as a pot calling the kettle black?

It would have something to do with NPT. Signatories cannot develop nuclear weapons.

There is a cop-out clause though....

They can develop nukes, provided they give 6 months notice....

Go figure...

This is not wholly true that we were not talking to them which is what really amazed me. I remember when we had just begun to open talks with them by inviting a soccer match between our 2 countries, and there were talks about reopening not an embassy but a US mission in Iran again, then all hell broke loose and there were accusations of their having a bomb flying around . I believe there are some countries in the ME that just wish to see us alienated and enjoy the status quo being stacked in their favor.

I know they deny it but its strange every country on that PNAC list seems to be mentioned on a constant basis or falsely accused of something or other. Someone is trying very hard to make that list happen.