Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edscharp who wrote (4106)	12/22/2003 4:02:05 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 22250

Re: Muammar Gaddafi's Libya, which Britain said had been close to making an atomic bomb,.... LOL! What a farce... Col. Gaddafi is probably the first guy who aborted a WMD program before he ever started one!! LOL... Now, you want me to tell you my take on this? I give the renewed "friendship" between Libya and the US about six months before it falls apart.... What's the drive behind it, after all? It's merely the US administration's childish resentment towards France. It's the US attempt to frustrate France's geopolitics in Africa by breaking the Paris-Tripoli-Ndjamena-Bangui axis.... But let me tell you that the anti-French drive is not, and never will be, an incentive strong enough to keep the US and Libya --or just any other Arab country-- together. The only criterion, the only acid test that entails a lasting, positive relationship between any Arab country and the US is "Israel", that is, the Arab country's attitude vis-a-vis Israel. And I'm afraid Libya has yet to pass THAT test, hasn't she? For that matter, rumor has it that the whole rapprochement resulted from secret meetings between US and Libyan diplomats --guess why? Judeocon meddlers had to be kept out of the loop!! LOL... Hell, now they know about it... and I bet you they're already plotting the end of it... then they'll blame Colin Powell for yet another diplomatic flop. Of course, Gaddafi knows all that... he's a smart guy, hence he knows he merely got a six-month window of relief, a breathing room of sorts, before his deal with the US lapses... (just remember what happened to the US-Iran rapprochement in 2002) By then, however, other problems will likely crop up for GW Bush and Libya will quietly fade out of the limelight. Adverse developments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the presidential campaign will top the US agenda from January '04 on. Gaddafi's next move will probably be directed to France and Italy (and the EU). As for the oil factor, never mind it! The US has just grabbed the second major oil producer in the world, namely, Iraq --in addition to the first one, Saudi Arabia... In Africa, US oil majors are pumping oil from Angola to Nigeria... Gus

To: Edscharp who wrote (4106)	12/22/2003 12:16:57 PM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

Footnote to my post #4120. A U.S.-Libya rapprochement? LOL... Deja vu all over again: Rehabilitating 'the Great Satan' By Azadeh Moaveni A recent political cartoon in a Tehran daily shows Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi peering out a window through a telescope; the caption quotes him as saying, "If American policy changes, we will adjust ours accordingly," while his thought balloon reads, "75 degrees to the right!" For a country that has made anti-Americanism a political value, rather than simply a policy, Iran has never been closer to dismantling its virulent animosity towards the United States. Iranian clerics continue their two decades of overheated rhetoric, but they are more than ever contradicted by a pragmatic, private discussion on when, how and, most importantly, by whom ties will be re-established. Both sides seem keen on dialogue, with US President George W Bush's new administration raising expectations of better chances for rapprochement. But this fresh optimism tends to overlook the obstacles facing a more flexible Bush: the American Congress has virtually institutionalised poor relations with Iran via a battery of executive orders and legal bans that will take time and consensus-building to dismantle. For President Mohamed Khatami or his eventual successor, rapprochement requires a deft public rehabilitation of the "Great Satan" (the Iranian preferred term for the United States). Iranian conventional wisdom saw former President Bill Clinton as a de facto Israeli, whose intimacy with, and obligations to, the Israeli lobby blinded him to even American interests. In contrast, Bush's status as son of an oil dynasty is seen as a plus and the Republicans are considered to be historically more hospitable to Iran. Bush's vice-president, Dick Cheney, was ambivalent enough about sanctions against Iran as head of oil-services giant Halliburton to allow it to open a Tehran office, in possible violation of American sanctions. In Iranian eyes, this is clearly a more auspicious team to be dealing with than that of Clinton, who naturalised an Australian Jew, Martin Indyk, then handed him the Middle East file. But the optimism is neither conjectural nor one-sided. Bush's Secretary of State Colin Powell made one of his earliest policy statements on Iran, suggesting the possibility of increased dialogue. And there have been other murmurings that imply that sanctions as a policy weapon are being phased out. Kharrazi himself was more blunt than Powell: "The transition of power in the White House has presented an opportunity for the new administration to make changes in the failed US policies toward Iran." While former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's virtual apology for the American role in the 1953 coup that overthrew Mohamed Mossadeq was brushed off by Iranian officials, the Bush team's tepid statement prompted Deputy Foreign Minister Ahani to say that "the new US administration seems to be taking effective measures to break the wall of mistrust." Even Iranian conservatives, wary of seeing President Khatami given sole credit for increased dialogue, declared their readiness. "We can have negotiations with Satan in the depths of hell if it benefits our national interests," said conservative power player Mohamed Javad Larijani recently. Both sides stand to gain by making amends. Rapprochement would improve Washington's much-battered image in the region, and with Iraq at the top of the Bush team's agenda, Iran becomes perforce an issue. For its part, Iran badly needs access to technology and investment the US could provide, and with the burnish President Khatami contributed to the regime's legitimacy quickly fading, re-established ties could well re-energise the Islamic Republic at home. [...] weekly.ahram.org.eg

To: Edscharp who wrote (4106)	1/2/2004 5:12:41 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 22250

Footnote to my post #4120: January 2, 2004 Libya Presses U.S. to Move Quickly to End Sanctions By PATRICK E. TYLER TRIPOLI, Libya, Jan. 1 — Libya's prime minister said Thursday that the United States should act quickly to reward his country for abandoning its secret weapons programs. He warned that unless the United States lifted sanctions by May 12, Libya would not be bound to pay the remaining $6 million promised to each family of victims killed on Pan Am Flight 103. The prime minister, Shukri Ghanim, in an interview, said that any decision by the Bush administration was strictly an "internal matter" for the United States, but that the deadlines and their consequences, made clear in the settlement with the Lockerbie families, were well known to all parties, including senior administration officials. A quick lifting of American sanctions would allow American oil companies to return here this spring and pave the way for unfreezing $1 billion in assets that Libyan officials say are languishing in American banks. Mr. Ghanim said his country would like to "accelerate to the maximum" the dismantling of its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs so that President Bush would be able to tell Congress in the next few months that the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, had fully and transparently destroyed or surrendered all his illicit weapons. [...] nytimes.com Told you so, Ed... SIX months for the US-Libya deal to lapse....

To: Edscharp who wrote (4106)	1/8/2004 4:45:52 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 22250

Follow-up to my post #4120: Ouch.... An official statement from the Israeli Foreign Ministry said: "It's still a very long way down the road before Israel and Libya can establish diplomatic relations. The Libyan leader has to demonstrate in action that he is headed toward real negotiation." The statement said that media reports of a diplomatic thaw were "causing Israel damage". Sources in the office of the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, were quoted as saying that the Libya initiative "doesn't appear serious". In Tripoli, the Libyan official news agency said Hassouna al-Shawish, a Libyan Foreign Ministry spokesman, denied any meetings had taken place. "We would like to assert that officials in Libya have investigated this issue and have not found any evidence of it," he said. "International relations are not built on intrigue." [...] Excerpted from: news.independent.co.uk Well, when I predicted that the US-Libya rapprochement will fizzle within the next six months, perhaps I was overoptimistic --let's say 3 months.... Gus

To: Edscharp who wrote (4106)	1/10/2004 5:04:48 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 22250

Told you so.... Playing off the French against the Yanks: Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister, said: "It's a new era that has dawned." He was speaking after meeting Mohamed Abderrhmane Chalgam, his Libyan counterpart, and signing a joint declaration on strengthening diplomatic and economic relations between the two countries. Mr Chalgam said: "Our relations were good - now they will be excellent." He was later received by President Jacques Chirac at the Elysée palace. [...] Excerpted from: guardian.co.uk