Obama's Evolving Position on Iran

Don't call Barack Obama an appeaser.

In his speech Wednesday before the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, Obama sounded a bit like the more hawkish officials in the Bush administration.

He said the military option is "on the table" for dealing with Iran's nuclear program, and in stark contrast to earlier statements, he said he would meet with Iranian leaders "if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States."

Obama's tone was strikingly different from it has been in the past.

During a debate last summer, he said he would be willing to meet with Iranian leaders and other American adversaries "without preconditions" during the first year of his presidency. Today, he made it clear that we should not expect a President Obama to be sitting down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad any time soon:

"[A]s president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place of my choosing if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States. That is my position. I want to be absolutely clear."

Obama Camp Defends

Obama campaign officials insist the presumptive Democratic nominee has not changed his position.

"It's not a precondition to say he'll only do it to advance our interests," said Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough.

McDonough said Obama has never promised to meet with Iran's leaders. He's simply said that he is willing to meet with Iran's leaders. "And the key word there is willing. The idea that some have suggested is that he has promised a meeting. That is not the case and never was the case. He argued then as he argued today that he is willing to meet as it advances our interests."

But take another look at what Obama said during last July's Democratic debate sponsored by CNN and Youtube. The question is clear, and so is his response:

QUESTION: "Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?"

OBAMA: "I would. And the reason is this: The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous. Ronald Reagan constantly spoke to the Soviet Union at a time when he called them an evil empire. He understood that we may not trust them, and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward. And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them."

Obama's position on talking to Iran has been evolving for some time.

Since the CNN/Youtube debate, he has been saying that he would only meet with Iranian leaders after "preparation" by lower-level officials.

Most recently, talking to reporters in South Dakota last month, he explained, "The preparation would involve starting with low-level, lower-level diplomatic contacts, having our diplomatic corps work with their Iranian counterparts, an agenda. But what I have said is that at some point, I would be willing to meet."

Now with his speech before AIPAC he said he will meet with Iranian leaders "if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States."

This isn't all that different from the Bush administration's position.

Page
  • 1
  • |
  • 2
Join the Discussion
You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
You Might Also Like...
See It, Share It
PHOTO: A home damaged by a landslide Friday, April 18, 2014 in Jackson, Wyo. is shown in this aerial image provided by Tributary Environmental.
Tributary Environmental/AP Photo
null
Danny Martindale/Getty Images
PHOTO: Woman who received lab-grown vagina says she now has normal life.
Metropolitan Autonomous University and Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine