Obama's false premise on Iran diplomacy

Kenneth Timmerman:

"Now, understand that part of the reason that it's so important for us to take a diplomatic approach [toward Iran] is that the approach that we've been taking, which is no diplomacy, obviously has not worked. Nobody disagrees with that." Mr. Obama then added a few illustrations to bolster his case:

"Hamas and Hezbollah have gotten stronger. Iran has been pursuing its nuclear capabilities undiminished. And so, not talking, that clearly hasn't worked. That's what's been tried. And so what we're going to do is try something which is actually engaging and reaching out to the Iranians."

Let's assume for an instant that the people briefing Mr. Obama on Iran haven't read the files that the George W. Bush administration turned over to them about the previous eight years of diplomacy and outreach toward Tehran. But you don't need to have access to classified information to figure this one out: A simple Google search will suffice.

U.S. government officials at the ambassador level or above met publicly no fewer than 28 times with their Iranian counterparts during the Bush administration, according to published accounts. So Mr. Obama's briefers either were Internet-challenged, lazy or just out-and-out dishonest.

The U.S.-Iran meetings began in November 2001. The last meeting, held in Geneva on July 19, 2008, was conducted by Undersecretary of State William J. Burns, a career bureaucrat who was held over in the same job by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mr. Burns presumably will be involved in the next round of talks. If anyone could have enlightened the president of his error, it was Mr. Burns.

The notion that the Bush administration "never talked to Iran" is the founding myth of Mr. Obama's foreign policy. Mr. Obama repeated it at every occasion during the campaign and has repeated it since. It is patently false.

Another key myth used by the pro-Iran lobby and the president's supporters is that the Iranian regime offered a "grand bargain" to the United States in May 2003, which Bush administration neoconservatives rejected out of ideological zeal.

This myth has been propagated by a former National Security Council analyst, Flynt Leverett, who claims he was personally involved in the exchange.

But Mr. Leverett's claims about the authenticity of the Iranian offer were debunked once and for all by then Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage - whom no one has accused of being a closet neoconservative.

...

There is more.

Obama seems to think that more direct contact with Iran might make a difference, but there is no evidence to support that assumption. If Iran was interested in a bargain with the US, there were plenty of opportunities to negotiate one, which they rejected.

I think Obama probably recognizes this and that is why he is putting a time limit on getting a positive response from Iraq so they don't buy more time than he is willing to give them to achieve their nuclear ambitions.