Meanwhile, on Tuesday, while Ted Cruz came to the podium in the US Senate, President Obama spoke to the United Nations Security Council, but he did not meet and greet the new Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani, who earlier spoke at the UN.
Why not? It's complicated, the NY Times reports:
UNITED NATIONS — It was the handshake that never happened.
While American officials say the near miss between President Obama and President Hassan Rouhani of Iran at the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday means little to the ultimate fate of negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, it does illustrate the acute political sensitivities that will affect both leaders as they try to embark on a diplomatic path.
After two days of discussions between American and Iranian officials about a potential meeting of the leaders, a senior administration official said the Iranian delegation indicated that it would be “too complicated” for Mr. Rouhani and Mr. Obama to bump into each other.
Prior to the new Iranian president's address, there were some hopeful signs of a diplomatic breakthrough with the U.S. and Iran, but some other signs that signal, "not so much."
Max Fisher's op-ed pieces in the Washington Post are thoughtful and
informed. This one deals with international relations much more than comparative
politics, but it contains some background that might be informative. (Thanks, Teaching Comparative blog)
Two great signs and a dubious one from Iranian President Rouhani’s first Western interview
Two great signs and a dubious one from Iranian President Rouhani’s first Western interview
One and a half months into his tenure, and just one week before he addresses the
U.N. General Assembly in New York, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani sat down
with NBC News on Wednesday. It was his first interview with the Western media
since taking office, and it appears to be the latest move in his not-so-subtle
campaign signaling to the United States that he's interested in ending decades
of enmity… Here are three important take-aways from the parts of the interview… The first two are great, positive signs… The third is a bit more complicated.
1. He's got the supreme leader's okay to cut a nuclear deal… If true, then for Khamenei to hand Rouhani that power would be a remarkably positive step just in itself, a sign of institutional weight shifting toward compromise and diplomacy.
2. He's pen pals with Obama. A few days ago, Obama revealed that he had written to Rouhani after his election… Rouhani didn't say much when asked about the letter, but his tone was positive and he did reveal that he wrote back to Obama…
3. He denied that Iran will ever build a nuclear weapon. This is the one point that's gotten a lot of positive attention but about which I'm a touch less sanguine…
It also strains credulity a bit. Western intelligence agencies tend to believe that Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon. But there are lots of signs that it is at least trying to give itself that option…
Below is the new Iranian president's address to the UN:
In the comment section, please share your thoughts (especially model-UN'ers) on what does this say about the United Nations. Is it still diplomatically relevant in our world today?
2 comments:
I think this shows a defect in the design of the UN. The purpose of the United Nations is for all countries to work together to create a better world. But as it was displayed between Obama and Rouhani, lack of communication and contact exist between nations even in the United Nations setting. All countries should be willing to talk to each other, especially if a break in enmity is being proposed, and the United Nations should try to make communication as open as possible.
Tweeted by Christian Science Monitor, in case you may have forgot or thought that the Iranian president is in charge:
CSMonitor.com @csmonitor 5 Oct
#Iran: Ayatollah and Revolutionary Guard say @HassanRouhani went too far trip to New York: http://ow.ly/pwBl9
Post a Comment