Grand Concession!

IRGC FAITHFUL (Islamic Republic's Parallel Government)

"The only way humanity will be saved is that the world comes under the domination of Islamic Government".--Ayatollah Khamenie


As I've been saying all along, the Islamic Republic covets the "Grand Bargain" that Fidel Castro of Cuba was bestowed upon by President Kennedy and short of that 'Grand Concession', they will not stop their nuclear enrichment program or terrorist sponsoring activities because that's the only thing they view as worth having as far as incentives and diplomacy are concerened.

Apparently, Ahamdinejad has been studying the "Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 with the help of his friend Fidel Castro of Cuba. And Fidel more than happy to oblige, has been given him tips on how to secure the precious "Grand Bargain" from the US. The Nuclear Standoff with Iran parallels the Cuban Missile Crisis in many ways. China Confidential explains below:

A loose alliance of influential, left-leaning pundits, politicians, and academicians are rooting for a Kennedy-style solution to the Iranian Nuclear Crisis--as in JFK and the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.But a careful, sober reading of history suggests that would be a disaster. At best, following the Cuban model, Iran would be assured permanent security--and permanent protection from regime change--in return for giving up its suspect nuclear program. But the mullahocracy would be free to pursue its formidable chemical, biological, and ballistic missile programs for decades to come.

Like Communist Cuba, Islamist Iran would become an institutionalized, internationally accepted threat to world peace. But unlike Cuba--a Soviet welfare case throughout the Cold War--oil-rich Iran would have the cash to finance its deadly schemes and dreams.

Don't expect these dire warnings to resonate among members of the American foreign policy establishment. From the State Department to the Council on Foreign Relations, Kennedy's handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis is ... well ... worshipped.

The popular myth of a totally successful outcome, a staple of the liberal entertainment and publishing industries, ignores an inconvenient truth: JFK's administration bungled the Cuban file from the get-go. Just days before the crisis began, National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy ridiculed reports of suspicious activity on Cuba--i.e. eyewitness accounts of deployment of Soviet-supplied nuclear-tipped missiles. Appearing on national television, Bundy branded the information that Cuban exiles had been giving the State Department and CIA for months as mere "refugee rumors."

Said Bundy: "Nothing in Cuba presents a threat to the United States. There's no likelihood that the Soviets or Cubans would try and install an offensive capability in Cuba."

The following day, Kennedy himself declared: "There's fifty-odd-thousand Cuban refugees in this country, all living for the day when we go to war with Cuba. They're the ones putting out this kind of stuff."

So much for one of best and the brightest--and his brilliant monarch.

In the end, the United States and the Soviet Union managed to back away from the brink and avert a possible nuclear war. The Missile Crisis ended when Moscow backed down and removed the weapons it had secretly installed in Cuba.

As we now know, however, the secret agreement between Kennedy and Soviet Communist Party boss Nikita Khrushchev forbade any invasion of Cuba--not just by the US, but also by any other group or nation in the Western Hemisphere. Thousands of Soviet troops and KGB officers already in Cuba were allowed to remain on the island, bolstering an anti-American regime just 90 miles from Florida.

Shortly after the missiles were removed, Washington, in accord with its covert deal with the Soviet Union, pulled US missiles out of Turkey. Following Kennedy's assassination, US President Lyndon Johnson reaffirmed Washington's hands-off-Havana pledge.

The difference this time is that Fidel's main ambition and objectives for his state were not world domination by an Islamic Government.

Read more!

Future of European-Iranian Relations

Joschka Fischeris, former foreign minister of Germany and a visiting professor at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University sends the Jihadist Islamic Republic occuyping Iran the most sobering warning and assessment to date:

Europe developed the balance of power system after our religious wars in 1648. And we experienced its benefits and its nightmares over the centuries and finally its definitive collapse in two world wars between 1914 and 1945. My country challenged this European system twice in the first half of the twentieth century. At the beginning of the last century, Germany was the leading power of Europe, but we made the wrong decisions and ended in a complete disaster. What was our strategic mistake? We followed hegemonial aspirations that relied on military might and prestige, and we miscalculated the anti-hegemonial instincts of Europe. And twice we underestimated the strategic potential, the power, and the political will and decisiveness of the United States. Otto von Bismarck, perhaps the greatest German statesman of the nineteenth century, defined Germany’s role in his century as either “hammer or anvil.” In the second half of the twentieth century, it turned out that he was completely wrong, because this had never been a serious alternative. A new European system based on a peaceful balance of interests, common European institutions in the framework of the EU, and guaranteed security, produced by NATO and the transatlantic alliance, completely changed the course of German and European history for the better.

Ladies and gentlemen, It seems to me that today Iran is confronted with the question of whether your country will follow hegemonial aspirations or become a driving force for peace, stability, and progress in the Middle East. Iran cooperated with the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, based on its national interest. The result was not very promising from an Iranian point of view, I agree. But the situation has changed for the better, as the common offer reflects. And if we can move forward in the nuclear area to reach agreement, I believe that the implications of such progress will be positive and far-reaching. And I strongly believe that a “Grand Bargain” is achievable, that is, a nuclear and a regional security agreement in exchange for full economic, technological, and scientific cooperation; full political normalization; and security guaranties. But all depends now on the decision of the Islamic Republic of Iran. A policy of nuclearization, of confrontation with the UN, and of destabilization of the Middle East will lead us into a dark tunnel, in which I can see no light on the other side.

Read the whole article in full by clicking here. It's long but worth the read.

Read more!