The Iranian people voted for him because they wanted a “reformist” who’d gradually change their country’s domestic and foreign policies, knowing that nothing radical can be expected due to the strict system of checks and balances that’s in place to prevent this.
As long as Iran avoids becoming ensnared with western institutions like the World Bank or IMF, and (most critically) does not allow a single western NGO to set foot inside the country, then some kind of balance regarding overall relations seems reasonable. Now, whether the United States would accept being denied its primary weapons for controlling and exploiting other countries as a basis for cordial relations is another matter altogether.
IMHO, except for the first 10 years or so immediately after the 1979 revolution, Iran's national fervor, if there was one, has cooled down and become more realistic over time. There is a historical burden on their shoulders and a big country don't change course fast. At the same time, the US and Israel are equally blind to the changes inside Iran, and proceed to provoke Iran again and again. Iran understands Israel has atomic bombs but will not use them easily. However, given that orthodox Jews (some call them the Khazars) now start to dominate Israelis politics, some in Iran would think Iran needs its own nuclear weapons, not to use it against Israel, but to prevent Israel from using nuclear weapons on Iran. Such counter-balance was less necessary when Israel was lead by people of better sanity. However, I don't see any fundamental change coming for US or Israel, not even when Trump becomes the US president.
More weapons may not deter the end of times types. Maybe best for the US to figure out how to keep Israel from becoming an even bigger thorn in the ME foot than it already is.
this sounds good and is a way forward recognizing Iran as a leading nation
As long as Iran avoids becoming ensnared with western institutions like the World Bank or IMF, and (most critically) does not allow a single western NGO to set foot inside the country, then some kind of balance regarding overall relations seems reasonable. Now, whether the United States would accept being denied its primary weapons for controlling and exploiting other countries as a basis for cordial relations is another matter altogether.
I've been wondering if it's not time to end the idea of NGO's all together. I have a hard time seeing any good or benefit, especially here in the US.
IMHO, except for the first 10 years or so immediately after the 1979 revolution, Iran's national fervor, if there was one, has cooled down and become more realistic over time. There is a historical burden on their shoulders and a big country don't change course fast. At the same time, the US and Israel are equally blind to the changes inside Iran, and proceed to provoke Iran again and again. Iran understands Israel has atomic bombs but will not use them easily. However, given that orthodox Jews (some call them the Khazars) now start to dominate Israelis politics, some in Iran would think Iran needs its own nuclear weapons, not to use it against Israel, but to prevent Israel from using nuclear weapons on Iran. Such counter-balance was less necessary when Israel was lead by people of better sanity. However, I don't see any fundamental change coming for US or Israel, not even when Trump becomes the US president.
More weapons may not deter the end of times types. Maybe best for the US to figure out how to keep Israel from becoming an even bigger thorn in the ME foot than it already is.
True. But it has been for a while now, it appears USA is the vassal while Israel is the master. Trump's term is unlikely to change that relationship.
Great news! Sounds like we have another Viktor Orban-style diplomat promoting Win-Win cooperation and dialogue open to all.
Hopefully, some sanity will return.