I have probably said this before, but Israel has basically been a strategic liability for the US since at least 1973. The fiction that they are an asset will be forever revealed if the US and Iran patch up their differences, and the nonsense assertion of “existential threats” will die with it.

At the end of the day, who is the Lobby? It is, when all is said and done, the American people. The only real way Obama can nail it is if sentiment amongst ordinary Americans changes. Israel is his biggest helper in this regard – their attacks on Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2006 and 2008 mean it takes less to sway Americans now than what it would have taken before. Every extreme act gets more and more attention.

If it turns out those nasty old Iranians and Palestinians and Lebanese are not the salivating, gun-toting nutcases Americans were told they were, the whole edifice the Lobby has constructed crumbles.

So Obama’s leverage over Israel becomes, first and foremost, his capacity to put Israel in a situation where they put the goodwill of the US public at risk if they act in an extreme manner. In my parallel universe, I see him withdrawing diplomatic cover for their nefarious deeds, refusing to veto UN resolutions against Israel, and even contributing to the promotion of the Palestinian side of the story in the US.

They say there’s one born every minute …..

Recently I read an allusion to a deal that Dick Cheney is involved in, that links US corporation Westinghouse with a transaction to control Iran’s nuclear technology.

Paneer, thanks for the links. US fascination with Iran’s green movement makes me a little queasy and brings to mind Romans in the Coliseum, and Augustine’s harsh denunciation of his own and the Roman world’s addiction to the games and to a culture of violence. The Superbowl having had the bad luck of being played out in the midst of a major snowstorm in the NorthEast US, American political leaders need a new ‘circus’ to distract the masses: Iran fills the bill with the added benefit of coming at no cost whatsoever to American politicos.

In Iran, we are definitely on their time as you say. There are signs of peace amongst the elite again which could augur well for a deal, but I suppose we have to see how Feb 11 plays through the system.

On I/P, it seems to me Obama can’t stand Netanyahu, and others such as Jim Jones do not trust Israel one inch. Also, Obama has Palestinian contacts beyond Abbas which is very important. There is a lot of talk at the moment of a new US initiative waiting in the wings that effectively sets a defined endpoint to I/P negotiations, but it depends on two things – firstly Hamas/Fatah reconciliation, secondly leverage over the Israelis, because it would be dead on arrival without it. Doing business with Iran gives him that for all sorts of reasons. Perhaps he can then start to unwind some of the power of the Lobby and their allies, because until he does that nothing will really change.

I get the feeling you’re right about the Obama kind of President. I think he is almost inscrutable, which of course means he could be bad or good, but it does give the impression that he is getting his ducks in a row before he strikes. At the end of the day his real enemies are at home, and if he conjures up a way of dealing with them then he really will be the one who made a difference.

“If government-sponsored, why haven’t they made it into the badly underpopulated square, given that the satphoto claims to be from 10:47 AM? Was it too early or just standard Iranian tardiness?”

Because Ahmedinjad’s speech started only after 11:00 and at 10:47 people were coming off the march and streamed into the square.

I too agree with your premises, but I believe Obama has to back off the I/P issue until his next term.

He can’t claim victory in Iraq, because the ‘realists’ were the foreign policy faction who turned defeat into something short of victory after the neocons fell flat on their faces, and before Obama took office. He can and is continuing those polices and can claim future successes as Iraq normalizes and US/Iraqi relations improve.

Afghandistan and Pakistan are his biggest nuts to crack, and if his policies succeed there before the mid terms next year he will have validated his foreign policy credentials.

We are on Iran time regarding any movement in relations with that state. But things could change course on a dime for the better, giving Obama another feather in his cap.

Obama is the forerunner of a new kind of president in a much more expansive and powerful chief executive branch. In many ways he has already made history and his presidency may be ranked among those that marked major transformations in US history.

“Iran needs to keep all of them out I think.”

Bingo!

The Iranians aren’t stupid and have been living in this neck of the woods for thousands of years. They have a lot of experience with all their neighbors and is a big reason many Iranians would prefer better relations with the US so as to play all 3 of the great powers to their advantage. Liked or not, the Iranians are a regional hegemon in the Middle East and demand to be respected on that score and why the Iranians won’t put all their eggs in one basket.