All the Ayatollah cares about

ARTICLE: Iran's Supreme Leader Rebuffs Obama,
By Thomas Erdbrink, Washington Post, March 22, 2009; Page A15

The truth is, the Grand Ayatollah is basically correct: we are not going to give him what he wants in either Iraq or Afghanistan (complete withdrawal) and Obama is playing the same exact--and weak--line as Bush on the nuke question.

We may get some movement by ratcheting down on the nuke issue, offering economic ties and normalized relations, and starting a careful dialogue on cooperation in both interventions, because that package would enhance regime legitimacy in Iran.

And that's all the Ayatollah cares about: keeping his regime.

Comments

[Arsalan]

My main question has always beenWhy should we really care about them having a nuke?

If there is one thing that the great Ayatollahs excel at is that of maintaining power. For supposed religious zealots, the Ayatollahs have a very keen understanding of analytical thought. The Ayatollahs know that if they ever thought of using a nuke retaliation is assured. I also don't think that it would spur any other countries into some form of dissent against occidental and Israeli power. I need to hear a good argument that an Iranian nuke would serve as an existential threat to America. As for Iran's influence in the region, I would have to agree with Rashid Khalidi in the way in which we view Iran through some sort of cold war lenses (pawns and prime mover state). As for Afghanistan, I hear that you can never "buy" the authority but that you can rent them. I think that that saying in itself tells us about the nature of that region and its problem with any long-term establishment.

[Bobby Williams]

Give it time... Khamenei is buying time. The last 8 years were easy for him, now they have to deal with someone who appears 'GASP' rational!

I think too much is made of Khamenei's "rebuff" or whatever you want to call it.