[home][about][contact] [getting involved] [Educational][Academic] [Media Watch][Views]
As the nuclear talks with Iran hover in a sort of holding pattern with meetings below the senior level, there seems to be no end to advice from those saying the only chance of success is the exertion of pressure, more pressure and nothing but pressure. That makes about as much sense as, when encountering a door that needs to be pulled to open and having failed to open it by pushing, we respond by simply pushing harder. The latest such advice is in an op-ed from Michael Singh  of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The West has given its best shot as far as sanctions are concerned, says Singh, and the sanctions by themselves are not sufficient and are not likely to be sufficient even given the passage of more time. Well, he's right about that. But taking Singh at his word that his objective is to achieve compromise at the negotiating table, he gives not the slightest hint of recognition of what needs to be brought to that table for compromise to happen.
The Guardian has run an article about Iran's statement that they will respond, in the Guardian's words, 'within minutes of an attack on the Islamic Republic'. The text of the article clarifies that the statement was about retaliation, however the headline given to the report is "Iran 'ready to fire missiles at US bases'", which falsely portrays Iran as the aggressor in the situation.
Excerpt: Headline: Iran 'ready to fire missiles at US bases'
Headline: Iran 'ready to fire missiles at US bases'
The New Delhi government ordered Indian state-run insurers to provide cover to the country's ships transporting Iranian oil, allowing refiners to avoid any interruption in supplies due to the western sanctions.
United India Insurance Co. has agreed to provide protection and indemnity cover to Indian tankers carrying oil from Iran with General Insurance Corp. offering reinsurance. ››read more