US seeks Persian Gulf allies against Iran
With the deadline for Iranian compliance with a United Nations Security Council resolution on its nuclear program less than a month away, recent remarks by a United States envoy to the Persian Gulf suggest that American opposition to Tehran is hardening. The extent to which that position will enjoy unqualified support among Persian Gulf residents, however, remains in doubt.
At a speech in Dubai on 23 January, United States Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns told a group of academics, diplomats and journalists that a second US aircraft carrier strike group headed toward the Persian Gulf "is Washington's way of warning Iran to back down in its attempts to dominate the region."
The USS John C Stennis, along with several accompanying ships, is expected to arrive by late February in the Gulf, where it will join the USS Dwight D Eisenhower aircraft carrier group. Its presence will mark the first time since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 that there have been two American carrier battle groups in the region.
The dispatch of the carrier groups to the Persian Gulf comes on the heels of a US-backed United Nations Security Council resolution in December, which called on Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program and imposed limited sanctions on the country. Iran has until 21 February to comply with the resolution.
"The Middle East isn't a region to be dominated by Iran. The Gulf isn't a body of water to be controlled by Iran," Burns commented.
"Iran is going to have to understand that the United States will protect its interests if Iran seeks to confront us," he continued. "We will defend our interests if we are challenged. That is a message Iran must understand." ...>
http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=17165_____________________________________________________
Brown hints at a shift in the 'special relationship' (Britain/U.S.)
Mark Joyce Published: January 25, 2007
LONDON: On Jan. 12, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain gave his first major speech of 2007 in a Royal Navy amphibious assault ship. Surrounded by armored vehicles and a carefully selected audience of defense-industry grandees, he outlined his priorities for British security policy.
To supporters of Britain's "special relationship" with the United States, the arguments were familiar and reassuring: The British government should resist mounting public demands for cuts in military spending; the international threat environment requires that we maintain the capabilities to fight wars as well as keep the peace; Britain must continue to assume that it will fight side by side with America.
While Blair's speech stole the headlines, Gordon Brown, the chancellor of the Exchequer — who is expected to take over as prime minister this year — was making a quieter but more significant intervention. In an article in The Guardian he called on developed nations to make education the overarching priority of international security policy. Ensuring that all the world's children have access to education within 10 years, he argued, makes not just moral and economic sense but strategic sense, too.
The article signaled that Brown's arrival in 10 Downing Street could be bad news for those who favor a special Anglo-American security relationship...cont'd
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/25/opinion/edjoyce.php
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
