- Iran: Eight Prisoners Hanged on Drug Charges
- Daughter of late Iranian president jailed for ‘spreading lies’ - IRAN: Annual report on the death penalty 2016 - Taheri Facing the Death Penalty Again - Dedicated team seeking return of missing agent in Iran - Iran Arrests 2, Seizes Bibles During Catholic Crackdown
- Trump to welcome Netanyahu as Palestinians fear U.S. shift
- Details of Iran nuclear deal still secret as US-Tehran relations unravel - Will Trump's Next Iran Sanctions Target China's Banks? - Don’t ‘tear up’ the Iran deal. Let it fail on its own. - Iran Has Changed, But For The Worse - Iran nuclear deal ‘on life support,’ Priebus says
- Female Activist Criticizes Rouhani’s Failure to Protect Citizens
- Iran’s 1st female bodybuilder tells her story - Iranian lady becomes a Dollar Millionaire on Valentine’s Day - Two women arrested after being filmed riding motorbike in Iran - 43,000 Cases of Child Marriage in Iran - Woman Investigating Clinton Foundation Child Trafficking KILLED!
- Senior Senators, ex-US officials urge firm policy on Iran
- In backing Syria's Assad, Russia looks to outdo Iran - Six out of 10 People in France ‘Don’t Feel Safe Anywhere’ - The liberal narrative is in denial about Iran - Netanyahu urges Putin to block Iranian power corridor - Iran Poses ‘Greatest Long Term Threat’ To Mid-East Security |
Thursday 05 April 2012What does US hope to achieve with Iranian nuke talks?
Fox News -- DORE GOLD, FORMER ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: If December of 2012 is the time when the secretary of defense evaluated that they will have an atomic bomb. We don't have much time. HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: We are maintaining a full court press against the regime, enforcing the most comprehensive package of sanctions in history, and further isolating Iran from the international community. This sustained pressure is bringing Iran's leaders back to the negotiating table, and we hope that it will result in a plan of action that will resolve our disagreements peacefully. (END VIDEO CLIP) BRET BAIER, ANCHOR: Those new talks have not been locked in yet. Secretary Clinton today and former Israeli ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold, our interview earlier. You heard him in that interview mention a concern about leaks. In part, I didn't follow up there, but it dealt with recent leaks that the Israelis are very concerned about when it comes to the country of Azerbaijan. This deals with Israel, Iran, and the country of Azerbaijan. Charles, explain. CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Well, the leak came in a magazine attributed to administration or intelligence sources unnamed in which it said an Israeli attack would use the territory of Azerbaijan which has close relations with the Israelis. Why? Because for Israel to attack the nuclear facilities in Iran is a long way, and you have to have a lot of refueling and fuel on board, which means that you can't carry a lot of the munitions. If you can do it out of the abandoned Soviet airbases near Iran on the northern frontier, as we saw on that map, it makes it a lot easier. The reason the Israelis are extremely upset about this, some have said it's not going to happen. It's not in cards. Others have said it is in the planning. And the United States leaking it or the government leaking it here is a way to undermine any Israeli attack, because if Israel were to attack, it would be hard for the pilots to return home. But if they land at the airbases in Azerbaijan, then they could land, be able to take on new armaments, and return or even have a second attack. Second, the Israelis would be able to station helicopters as a way to rescue its pilots. So if this is the plan and it's being leaked, the Israelis have to ask themselves is the U.S. or at least elements of the U.S. government endangering our plans if and when we have to launch an attack? BAIER: From that interview and from your conversations, do you sense that the Israelis are growingly frustrated with the administration? KRAUTHAMMER: Well, when we heard the secretary of state speaking of the increasing isolation, that's been the line we have been using now for years. But the Israelis have said, the Iranians have said, and our director of national intelligence here in America has said that, yes, the sanctions have had an effect on the economy, but they all agree it has had no effect whatsoever on retarding the nuclear program. BAIER: Mara, even former ambassadors have to be careful about what they say about the relationship. Your thoughts? MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: Well, I can only imagine that President Obama would rather not have this happen if the Israelis are going to strike before the election. Or if it has to happen before the election, at least make it really, really close to the election, because then you have a kind of rally around the flag effect. I think that people would be united behind the president, behind the United States supporting Israel, but then you don't have the blowback until later. I think it's a complicated calculus. I heard from people who say they think Israel has more time than just until December. They don't have to rush into this. And then you hear from others if they don't do it by the end of the year, it's too late. So it's complicated. But I think what you heard the president say when Netanyahu was here was we've got your back. I would rather have us do it. Let us plan this with you. Don't just go out on your own. BAIER: Steve? STEVE HAYES, SENIOR WRITER, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: Well, I talk to former senior U.S. intelligence official who was talking to me about the timing of the potential strike. And this person thought that the best possible time for the Israelis would be to do it shortly before the political conventions here in the United States because it would ensure some political backing. It would be hard for either Republicans, less likely, or Democrats, more likely, to do anything but offer full-throated support of that kind of an attack going into the heart of the political season. I'm not sure that that's right or that's in the discussion, but at least it was something that this person thought. KRAUTHAMMER: When the president said I have your back, he said that to the group of pro-Israel lobby in the United States. The next day he said, well, by that, I meant the same way that we have the back of the British and the Japanese, which was a way to completely undo any effect. It was interpreted as meaning if you don't strike, we will strike. But then he made it obvious that it was only an interpretation he wanted the AIPAC people to accept. That is not his intention at all. BAIER: Do you think that the talk of the talks is delaying things? Or do you think Israel -- are you still at the 90 to 95 percent that this is probably going to happen before the election? KRAUTHAMMER: Well, because I think that the chances of any success in the talks is near zero. The talks are going to happen. They are resuming talks at a year ago were dissolved when the Iranians refused to even speak about uranium enrichment, which is what it's all about. I think there is no chance, there is no indication that Iran has any inclination to slow down or stop its program. BAIER: Quickly, is the administration hoping that these talks really do work? HAYES: Yes. I think the talks won't have substantive success. They'll have phony success. Whatever happens at the talks will be declared a success precisely because the administration wants to have this kind of a diplomatic breakthrough. BAIER: That is it for the panel, but stay tuned for an unusual sports report. Content and Programming Copyright 2012 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2012 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. |