Apparently, it’s not only Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that hate America and want to surrender to Iran, but so does Henry Kissinger. Either Henry Kissinger has quietly and inconspicuously switched his political party affiliation to “Defeatocratic” Party, or he is, what knowledgeable, non-ignorant, non-red-necks, non-Zionists call a realist.

Yes, Henry Kissinger, a former secretary of state, national security adviser and recently an unofficial adviser to the Bush administration, has embraced Ahmadinejad, waved the white flag and is now urging the rest of America to do the same. In the realist world, however, it’s what Henry Kissinger, a moderate and realist Republican with an extensive foreign policy and national security expertise, concluded based on evidence and facts of the region. On the contrary, people like John McCain and predominantly the Neo-Conservative establishment continue to filibuster any efforts at negotiation with Iran. Their proposal is to get tough - which can mean one of two things: bomb Iran - which McCain gives 2 thumbs up to; or continue sanctions - which carry the predictable consequence of producing no positive results for the US. Indeed, Iran continues to enrich uranium and may, in the near and foreseeable future, become another nuclear state.

What threat does Iran pose?
As the wisdom goes, it’s hard to trust a crazy man with his finger on the button. Therefore, it’s necessary to prevent it. However, all serious experts in the field with an understanding about military and geopolitics agree that Iran, despite its rhetoric, presents no real threat to either United States or Israel, which even Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni concedes. It is true the Iranian president (not monarch or dictator) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for “wiping Israel off the map”, (where he was referring to Israeli government, which Iran, like the rest of the Arab world, considers illegitimate) displayed a plethora of anti-Western rhetoric aimed primarily at the United States and Israel (who doesn’t these days?), and dared to interfere in Iraq, for which the evidence is scant and weak. However, Iran - a developing country, with a medium sized military, and an old weapons system is simply incapable of getting into any military confrontation with Israel, whose army is highly trained, air force possibly the best in the world and intelligence nearly perfect. For more, see this article.

So what threat does Iran pose to US or Israel? By far the more serious threat comes from the fact that Iran refuses to be America’s client state and or its virtual colony like it was prior to 1979 revolution. Primarily, there are two serious threats that Iran presents: its geographical location (oil) and its oil contracts with China which is proposed to be traded in non-dollars (hence devaluing the dollar further). Furthermore, the fact that it sold oil contracts to the highest bidders worries the US planners in that it loses an important leverage and veto power over others that it held for decades. For more on this, see the video below:

However, despite the fact that Iran’s nuclear potential may not present a real physical threat to Israel, it is an issue that US and the rest of the world must deal with. According to Bloomberg.com report, Henry Kissinger said he favors direct talks with Iran. While he avoided details, Kissinger indicated that there should be willingness to engage bilaterally with Iran, where clear goals are set. However, despite Kissinger’s and many other experts’ call to begin negotiating with Iran over nuclear issues, Iraq security, and other geopolitical concerns, the Bush administration filibustered any efforts at negotiation. Instead, saber rattling continues to be the preferred diplomatic option, however unsurprising.

But in fact, there are serious and real proposals on the table. One such proposal is offered by William Luers and his colleagues about how to deal with Iran’s nuclear issues. The plan proposes a multilateral approach to Iran’s nuclear program. Just as crucially, he cites 3 major reasons why negotiation with Iran must not only take place, but that it be done soon.
1. Recent NIE report, though flawed it may be, said that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. As a result Russia, China and European countries are less willing to impose harsh sanctions on Iran now
2. Iran is moving fast at building and using centrifuges necessary to enrich uranium
3. Iran’s contracts with China and relations with Russia undermines US’s position at negotiating.

What are the chances that the Bush administration even bothers to listen to such proposals? The clue to that question is given by John McCain clearly and concisely:

And that’s the extent of foreign policy discussion within the Republican base! BOOM!