Thursday, November 6, 2014

President Obama Wrote Secret Letter To Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei About Fighting The Islamic State And Reaching A Nuclear Deal

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks live on television after casting his ballot in the Iranian presidential election in Tehran June 12, 2009. REUTERS/Caren Firouz

Obama Wrote Secret Letter to Iran’s Khamenei About Fighting Islamic State -- Wall Street Journal

Presidential Correspondence With Ayatollah Stresses Shared U.S.-Iranian Interests in Combating Insurgents, Urges Progress on Nuclear Talks

WASHINGTON—U.S. President Barack Obama secretly wrote Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the middle of last month and described a shared interest in fighting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria, according to people briefed on the correspondence.

The letter appeared aimed both at buttressing the campaign against Islamic State and nudging Iran’s religious leader closer to a nuclear deal.

Mr. Obama stressed to Mr. Khamenei that any cooperation on Islamic State was largely contingent on Iran reaching a comprehensive agreement with global powers on the future of Tehran’s nuclear program by a Nov. 24 diplomatic deadline, the same people say.

Read more ....

More News On Reports That President Obama Wrote Secret A Letter To Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei About Fighting The Islamic State And Reaching A Nuclear Deal

Report: Obama Sent Secret Letter to Ayatollah Khamenei -- Time
Obama asked Iran for help against ISIS in secret letter -- The Hill
Obama sent secret letter to Ayatollah Khamenei on Islamic State -- Washington Times
Obama sent secret letter to Iran supreme leader to join up against IS -- Times of Israel
Obama reportedly sent secret letter to Iran's Khamenei regarding IS -- i24 News
Obama Coordinating With Iran In Islamic State Fight, Growing Evidence Suggests -- Akbar Shahid Ahmed, Huffington Post
Report: Obama secretly wrote to Iranian supreme leader Khamenei last month about fighting ISIS, nuclear deal -- Allah Pundit, Hot Air

Update: The White House responds to these reports .... White House says Iran policy unchanged; declines comment on letter (Reuters)

7 comments:

James said...

Well now.

Publius said...

For the United States and the West, this is a disaster.

1. Iran has repeatedly made it clear that their nuclear weapons program is their highest national priority. For Iran, having nukes trumps ISIS and pretty much everything else.

2. By sending the letter, the Administration reveals two weaknesses. First, the Administration does not really believe that our war against ISIS can work without Iran's help. Second Iran's cooperation fighting ISIS trumps American concern about Iran's nuclear program. Sending the letter at all proclaims those weaknesses. It does not matter what the text of the letter says.

3. In reply, Iran recognizes our weaknesses. Iran therefore will cooperate with us against ISIS if, and only if, we first cave on their weapons program. In fact, Iran must resist ISIS whether the United States makes concessions to them or not. Although ISIS and Iran both despise the West, they also loathe each other with even greater intensity. And they are neighbors.

4. Thus, the Obama Administration offers a huge concession in exchange for actions Iran must take anyway. No wonder Iran is so contemptuous of us.

5. I am not a betting man. Yet I'll wager that the Administration sent this letter without informing, let alone consulting with, any of our allies (NATO, Israel) and others with whom we share an interest in resisting Iranian nuclear aspirations (the contact group, the Gulf states). Delivering the letter "secretly" also gave Iran the power to "out" our offer at any time of its choosing. I wonder if this leaked now because the Iranians intended to leak it themselves. Is there any wonder why our allies don't trust us?

6. ISIS is a huge threat to the civilized world. No dispute about that. But Iran with nuclear weapons is at least as great a threat. It is truly remarkable that the Administration does not see this.

War News Updates Editor said...

Publius .... you beat me to the punch. I do not understand what is the White House's strategy and game plan on this issue .... unless there is no strategy or game plan and we are now seeing it play out.

Jay Farquharson said...

Obama is quite logically reaching out to the Hardliners in Iran, who "lose" if there is rapproachment, cooperation and an Agreement, the same way that the Hardliners in the US and Israel "lose".

The "letter" allows the Hardliners to take some credit for a deal they have opposed, but have to accept, given the current regional military and political conditions.

Philip said...

Based on three decades of personal experience in the Gulf region, the leadership of Iran are all hardliners; the only difference being a matter of degree. That includes Hassan Rouhani.

Iran is facing a crossroads of sorts. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is beginning to have health issues. That means an impending power struggle between the mullahs and the IRGC, likely before the end of the decade (Rouhani has ably positioned himself in both camps.)

Both sides, however, view Iran's decade-plus nuclear program as vital to both national prestige and international influence. I think that some delay might be acceptable, but the idea that the program will be curtailed is laughable.

It's possible that Iran may cooperate with regards to ISIS, but, based in its history, its leadership, and its current actions vis a vis Iraq, the Kurds, Hamas, Hesb'allah, Syria, etc., it won't be out of altruism and it won't be to the mid-to-long-term benefit of the U.S.

James said...

Philip,
I hadn't considered the age issue with the Irani leadership. I knew the mullahs and the IRGC have been jockeying against each other for awhile. I agree that anyone seeing any kind of pro western or moderate reading in the machination of either side is a fool.
That being said, do the mullahs have a younger group coming up that has a power base of their own or they reliant on the old guys? Also has IRGC made the regular Irani completely irrelevant?

Philip said...

James,

The Ayatollahs did not lay an educational or practical base for their succession. So yes, a lot of old, old men. That said, there are a few candidates in their 50s and 60s:

Ayatollah Shahroudi, 66. He's the acting head of the Assembly of Experts (the ones who select the Supreme Leader,) has the clerical chops, but not the charisma. He also has the drawback of being Iraqi-born.

Next is Ayatollah Khamenei's son, Sayyed Mojtaba. He's 45, a severe hardliner and closely tied with the IRGC and the Supreme Leader's office. He's an obvious choice, but he doesn't have the clerical c.v. and his succession might not be viewed as palatable.

Some second tier candidates are Ayatollah Khomenei's 42-year old grandson, who has clerical chops but is tied to the reformists, and Hassan Rouhani, who has an acceptable clerical background and good political skills and position, but also is viewed as a slightly dubious.

There are some long shots with either age or character issues, but they might be considered as compromise candidates.

The IRGC will be a major power broker; they have the political and economic power. The clerics have largely either been sidelined or prefer the religious/academic/judicial fields.