Diplomacy's Boring, Can We Blow Stuff Up Yet?

[UPDATE: The NY Times analyzes this story and is skeptical of the administration's intentions. They state that recently "it became obvious to Mr. Bush that he could not hope to hold together a fractious coalition of nations to enforce sanctions — or consider military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites — unless he first showed a willingness to engage Iran's leadership directly over its nuclear program and exhaust every nonmilitary option." Yep, sounds just like the pre-Iraq scenario again. Furthermore, it notes that while our allies are pleased with the diplomatic turnaround, some have "questioned whether this was an offer intended to fail, devised to show the extent of Iran's intransigence". I bet Vice President Cheney (whom the article notes was dead set against this new diplomatic route) misses the good ol' days when Judy Miller was still at the Times to pass along his 'scoops'- above the fold, natch.]

The White House decides to give this diplomacy thing a try-

AP: U.S. sets conditions for talks with Iran

- The United States is prepared to join other nations in holding direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program if Iran first agrees to stop disputed nuclear activities that the West fears could lead to a bomb, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday...

TruthDig summarizes the significance of this announcement: "It’s a dramatic about-face, and comes a mere three weeks after the Iranian president sent a personal letter to Bush--the first direct communication between the two countries in over 20 years."

Of course, my cynical side (which sadly often ends up bejng right) tells me that these 'talks' are just a way for the Bush administration to appear to be taking the diplomatic high road so that when they begin military action, they can say "hey, we tried!". They did similar things before the invasion of Iraq. Of course, my optimistic side tells me that, seeing how badly they've mangled their two current Middle East military quagmires, no one in the administration except for Cheney and Rumsfeld are pushing for another military mess for our overstretched and abused military resources to deal with. I have a feeling we'll know which wins- cynicism v. optimism- by November.

Iran, meanwhile, responds-

Iran's foreign minister on Thursday welcomed direct talks with Washington on his country's disputed nuclear program but rebuffed a U.S. proposal that Tehran must suspend uranium enrichment as a condition, state-run television reported...

..."We won't negotiate about the Iranian nation's natural nuclear rights but we are prepared, within a defined, just framework and without any discrimination, to hold dialogue about (our) common concerns," he added...

Note that they didn't call us the 'Great Satan'. See, we're making progress already.

Meanwhile, words of caution from the United Nations-

Iran does not pose an immediate nuclear threat and the world must act cautiously to avoid repeating mistakes made with Iraq and North Korea, the head of the U.N, nuclear watchdog agency said on Tuesday.

Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the world shouldn't "jump the gun" with erroneous information as he said the U.S.-led coalition did in Iraq in 2003, nor should it push the country into retaliation as international sanctions did in North Korea...

..."You look around in the Middle East right now and it's a total mess," he said. "You can not add oil to that fire."...

The White House refused to heed the UN's warnings last time. How'd that work out again?

Finally, Ivo Daalder at TPMCafe ponders whether sanity is returning to U.S. foreign policy.

[PS- Progress in North Korea too? More news for time to tell...]