Iran: Fissures in Leadership growing wider

Neser Boha

upgrade your gray matter
Mar 4, 2009
2,028
381
130
Nordic Bayou
Iran's Moves Reveal Leadership Rift - WSJ.com

One month after the U.S. launched a great diplomatic experiment by talking directly with Iran, the pressure of the effort is opening up some stress fractures.

Some small fractures are showing up in the wall of solidarity the U.S. and its partners have tried to show in confronting Iran over its nuclear program -- specifically over how long to give diplomacy a chance before turning to new economic sanctions.

But the more meaningful stress fractures are showing up within Iran itself. There, the unwillingness to follow through on a nuclear deal the country's own negotiators worked out -- or even to offer a straight explanation of why Iran isn't following through -- has laid bare serious fissures within the country's ruling establishment.

If that continues to be the case, the U.S. and its partners will be heading in coming weeks toward a fundamental question: Are these splits within Iran more likely to be widened by the pressures generated through continued diplomacy, or by the pressures generated by tough new economic sanctions?

It seems that the 'fractures' the article is speaking about are not good for the diplomacy regarding nuclear proliferation; however, it appears to be a positive sign overall - a sign that people indeed do have an impact (even though quite limited one) on the country's ruling elite.

Any thoughts? Please, do read the entire article.
 
Last edited:
this is true, but Larijani did a very similar thing in 2006. In fact he agreed to discuss matters, then returned to Iran, and didn't show up for follow up meetings.

What appears to be happening is that Iran's wealthiest guy, Rafsanjani, felt like he was losing power to Khamenei. It's a power struggle between khamenei and Rafsanjani, but the people are independent.
 
Who do we want to win in Iran?

The Liberals who want religion out of government and want secular leadership?

Or

The Religious Conservatives who believe that God should be leading the country, similiar to Republicans in this country?
 
I feel sorry for Obama in a way he is in a great predicament. He has 2 options on the table with Iran in terms of the WOMD I shyly state, are supposedly in the works. He can
A) Not do anything and Iran can whip Israel off the map along with reek havoc on other countries.

Or

B) Invade Iran and make this a triple war trifecta.

Tough call, all I know is our Jewish friends in Israel will attack if we don’t will we befriend another ally like we did to Czech Republic and Poland.
 
Who do we want to win in Iran?

The Liberals who want religion out of government and want secular leadership?

Or

The Religious Conservatives who believe that God should be leading the country, similiar to Republicans in this country?


It was Obama who gave the speech in Saudi Arabia where Obama stated he will protect countries that have religous laws that oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty. Obama supported religion in government in the USA and in dictatorships.
 
Who do we want to win in Iran?

The Liberals who want religion out of government and want secular leadership?

Or

The Religious Conservatives who believe that God should be leading the country, similiar to Republicans in this country?


It was Obama who gave the speech in Saudi Arabia where Obama stated he will protect countries that have religous laws that oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty. Obama supported religion in government in the USA and in dictatorships.

Obama said he wanted to oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty?

I missed that speech.
 
Who do we want to win in Iran?

The Liberals who want religion out of government and want secular leadership?

Or

The Religious Conservatives who believe that God should be leading the country, similiar to Republicans in this country?


It was Obama who gave the speech in Saudi Arabia where Obama stated he will protect countries that have religous laws that oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty. Obama supported religion in government in the USA and in dictatorships.

Link.

When will you 'tards finally learn to include a link to the source of your information every time you post something that is not common knowledge? I'm tired of reminding people!
 
Where do you get the idea that all republicans want a religious state in the US?

Because he's a bonehead who doesn't understand conservatism. Ignore him, you'll be much better off.
 
oh, and if the link thing also applies to me (and it does, because I have a bad habit of not posting links either), here's a good link to show the schizophrenia of Iran's diplomacy:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO0lNjxtayU]YouTube - P6/6: Nuclear Confrontation (18/18: Iran & The West - S3/3)[/ame]
 
Who do we want to win in Iran?

The Liberals who want religion out of government and want secular leadership?

Or

The Religious Conservatives who believe that God should be leading the country, similiar to Republicans in this country?


It was Obama who gave the speech in Saudi Arabia where Obama stated he will protect countries that have religous laws that oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty. Obama supported religion in government in the USA and in dictatorships.

Obama said he wanted to oppress 11 year old girls who are entering puberty?

I miss that speech.

You miss that speech, your a sick fuck.
 
np, it's a very good program for anyone interested in the middle east or diplomacy in general

yah, I don't think a single person outside of iran and its proxies understands the country's decision making... one can guess.

Some say it appears that after June 12, the IRGC has effectively kicked the mullahs out of the picture and is now dominant voice, with Ahmedinejad as its figure-head. But they're so closed off, nobody has a clue.
 
np, it's a very good program for anyone interested in the middle east or diplomacy in general

yah, I don't think a single person outside of iran and its proxies understands the country's decision making... one can guess.

Some say it appears that after June 12, the IRGC has effectively kicked the mullahs out of the picture and is now dominant voice, with Ahmedinejad as its figure-head. But they're so closed off, nobody has a clue.

If you know of any other interesting sources of information such as articles, research papers, etc. let me know as I am becoming rather interested in Iran.
 
np, it's a very good program for anyone interested in the middle east or diplomacy in general

yah, I don't think a single person outside of iran and its proxies understands the country's decision making... one can guess.

Some say it appears that after June 12, the IRGC has effectively kicked the mullahs out of the picture and is now dominant voice, with Ahmedinejad as its figure-head. But they're so closed off, nobody has a clue.

If you know of any other interesting sources of information such as articles, research papers, etc. let me know as I am becoming rather interested in Iran.

the only guy that seems to be worth listening to is Robert Baer (George Clooney's character in Syriana). His book "The Devil we Know" is a great read about the realities of Iran's foreign policy goals:

RandomHouse.ca | Books | The Devil We Know by Robert Baer

unfortunately research articles on the topic are probably not worth reading on this topic, simply because it is becoming every bit as closed off of a society as North Korea.
 
oh, and to add to the topic:

Khamenei's Nephew: President, Revolutionary Guard 'Running The Show' - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty © 2009

I found this interview with Khamenei's nephew, where he suggests the IRGC controls Khamenei. This makes a lot of sense, because the IRGC has slowly but decisively taken over the economy of Iran. They're taking over ports, contracts for building airports, etc.

Perhaps Ahmedinejad's privatization of the system is akin to the Russian privatization. Except this time the big winners are IRGC commanders. Until recently, the top commander was a Safavi (a family of royal blood) suggesting, at the end of the day, the IRGC may be an extension of the old aristocratic centers of power.
 
Iran's Moves Reveal Leadership Rift - WSJ.com

One month after the U.S. launched a great diplomatic experiment by talking directly with Iran, the pressure of the effort is opening up some stress fractures.

Some small fractures are showing up in the wall of solidarity the U.S. and its partners have tried to show in confronting Iran over its nuclear program -- specifically over how long to give diplomacy a chance before turning to new economic sanctions.

But the more meaningful stress fractures are showing up within Iran itself. There, the unwillingness to follow through on a nuclear deal the country's own negotiators worked out -- or even to offer a straight explanation of why Iran isn't following through -- has laid bare serious fissures within the country's ruling establishment.

If that continues to be the case, the U.S. and its partners will be heading in coming weeks toward a fundamental question: Are these splits within Iran more likely to be widened by the pressures generated through continued diplomacy, or by the pressures generated by tough new economic sanctions?

It seems that the 'fractures' the article is speaking about are not good for the diplomacy regarding nuclear proliferation; however, it appears to be a positive sign overall - a sign that people indeed do have an impact (even though quite limited one) on the country's ruling elite.

Any thoughts? Please, do read the entire article.


any thoughts, yea, there aint a thought of wisdom in your premise for a thread and even less in your cut and paste.

i got a bit frustrated and must admit I posted before reading anything more in this thread.

the only thing any person understands either as an individual or a nation is getting their ass kicked.

we been talking for eight years, over twenty if we go back to the nutty peanut farmer racist carter and his keystone cop approach to foriegn affairs.


talk time is over, bush failed, bush failed, bush failed, bush called Iran out and bush wimped out, why did not bush back up his words, simple, bush was a pussy trying to empower the new world order of the united nations. dumb fuck millionaire is damned rich just like clinton and gore that he dont give a shit.

Axis of Evil, right, more like the plot for one world government, the new world order, hte rockefeller dream cum true, now that is an axis of evil.
 
What?? Rifts? Don't make me laugh, you communist swine. Everybody knows that the entire leadership of Iran are the same cookie-cutter bearded bad guys, that all from the top to the bottom scream for the blood of every man, woman, and child in Israel and America and every peace-loving nation like them. And I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING- But Epsilon, Iran hasn't waged a war of aggression in almost centuries while America wages at least one every twenty years- well, as this gallant intellectual gentleman above me stated, the only way to teach these bearded baddies is to KICK THEIR ASS- AMERICA-STYLE!!!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!! LAND OF THE FREE!!! HOME OF THE BRAVE!!!

AMERICA - FUCK YEAH!
 

Forum List

Back
Top