Ahmadinejad's letter: An opening quickly sealed

By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

In a stunning new development, a letter by Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad to US President George W Bush has stirred the diplomatic pot and added a new and, from the US point of view, untimely twist to the nuclear standoff, in light of the ongoing debates at the United Nations Security Council and the growing signs of a predictable policy quagmire.

Described by some diplomats as a "tactical masterstroke", Ahmadinejad's letter has elicited a preliminary rebuttal by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who dismissed it as a "philosophical" narrative that does not "engage the issues". It is to be hoped that Rice's negative reaction will not be echoed by Bush, who may well connect to the religious content of the letter and its "dialogue among theologies" subtext.

According to Rice, there is "nothing in this letter that in any way addresses any of the issues that are on the table in the international community". That is strange, since the letter covers a whole array of international issues, including Third World poverty, superpower militarism, multinational exploitation, the plight of Palestinian people and, of course, Iran's right to civilian nuclear technology.

Maybe Rice does not like Iran's perception of the relevant global issues, but can she really dispute Ahmadinejad's assertion that the United States' global policies, particularly in the Middle East, have made "people of the region increasingly angry with such policies"?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HE11Ak03.html

dismiss it as irrelevant! Personally, I found some parts of the letter very difficult to understand, but some were quite plain. If nothing else, it is going to make the US look like the warmongers they are if they don't give reasonable attention in their response to the Iranian leader!

Ensuring that we retain our reputation as bellicose oafs in the eyes of the world. Everyone is all too well aware that force of arms is America's preferred solution to any issue and this affair does nothing to dispel that notion. That's what you get when you place people like the redoubtable Ms. Rice in positions demanding skill and acumen, such as the Secretary of State, which * undoubtedly thought required stenographical capability.

She obviously can't read, and was put in a bush position,
for her undying loyalty to war, more war, starting wars,
and all the lying it takes to move those objectives.

Yes, there is something in the letter. Written by one president to another. Both are elected representatives their nations. Both are weird and out of step with their people but we go to negotiations with the presidents we have.

Why slap it down so quickly? The Bush administration must slap down that they are afraid of with a big hammer . The bigger the fear the faster and stronger the slap. They must fear this letter greatly. It does engage some issues. What does Bush have to lose by talking about them in a reply? Whatever he would lose would be our gain.


The letter deserves a response. The response can come from anyone that wants to initiate it. This is an opportunity for a continuing dialog of a rather strange nature.

If some MSM, prominent blog or individual made the excellent, legitimate and sincere or even satirical reply that the letter deserves and if Ahmadinejad would respond to that reply wouldn't that become a unique "what if" situation? What if that "what if" exchange started to show it was really getting somewhere?

Does Ahmadinejad "get" Colbert? Does Colbert "get" the opportunity here? Somewhere I remember reading that Ahmadinejad was unconventional.

This is an upside down world where an idiot does not respond to a letter that the originator must think is sincere. If not a reply from the idiot then why not a comedian pretending to be that idiot. The ultimate satire would be that the exchange of letters saying "I will do this or that if you do this or that" would bear fruit and really get on with resolving the problem?

I would rather have Colbert speak for me to Ahmadinejad than an idiot and his idiots that will not. Actually I would rather have a well respected MSM person do it but they would not touch it with a 10 foot pole. Colbert would get his hands on it. Maybe even humiliate the prez by accomplishing something.

A satirical president negotiating with a real president? Maybe both nations would have a good laugh if nothing else. Maybe we both need it. Maybe it would save us.