Stanley's blog

Dear Minister

You explained on 18 December why we must not take the pressure of Iran. I too am totally opposed to Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, but regret that you do not appear to be taking into account Iran’s experience of the West. You say:

“Since 2002, the international community has striven to resolve our differences with
Iran diplomatically.”

“We want Iran to be secure and prosperous, cooperating with and respected by the international community.”

“On the one hand, a transformed relationship with the international community, including the United States, bringing political, economic and social benefits.”You start from 2002, but the Iranians have a longer memory.

Thus:

1953

Prime Minister Mossadegh was removed from power and the Shah reinstated by a coup d’état, supported and funded by the British and US governments.1953-1979The Shah ruled with extensive US military support.

1980

Since then, the US has had no diplomatic relations with Iran.

1980-1988

The US actively supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war, which began with Iraq invading
Iran, notwithstanding the use by Saddam Hussein of chemical warfare.

1987

New US import embargo on Iranian-origin goods and services.

2003

The US ignores Iranian proposal for wide-ranging negotiations to settle all outstanding differences.

You assert that the international community has sought to resolve our differences diplomatically. This has not been American policy.

Your idea of a transformed relationship with the international community, including the United States, involves the US reversing its 27-year policy towards the country.

The legal case that Iran does not have the right to develop nuclear weapons is dubious. France, the US and the UK have not, from the outset, complied with their obligations under the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and India, Israel and Pakistan have been allowed to go nuclear.

Europeans on the whole believe in diplomacy and dialogue, the tools of soft power: our American friends tend to believe in boycotts and force, the tools of hard power. Cuba is the living testimony of hard power being counterproductive.

Your message should therefore be directed equally to Iran and the United States.

Yours sincerely

Stanley Crossick

Author :
Print