 |
|
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (0)
It's quite the day for multilateralism
The U.S. scored two multilateral victories yesterday. First, the Quartet (the United States, European Union, Russian Federation, and the United Nations) issued a statement on the Palestinian elections: [T]he Quartet concluded that it was inevitable that future assistance to any new government would be reviewed by donors against that government's commitment to the principles of nonviolence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the Roadmap.Meanwhile, the permanent five members of the Security Council and the European Union adopted a common position on what to do with Iran for now. Kevin Sullivan and Dafna Linzer explain in the Washington Post: The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- along with Germany, agreed Monday night to report Iran to the Security Council over its nuclear program.Judging by Iran's reaction to the news, I think that's a safe estimate (here's a link to the formal statement by the P-5) Readers are formally invited to speculate about which multilateral entreaty will work better. My money is on the Quartet -- they have far greater leverage in sanctioning the Palestinian Authority than the United Nations has over Iran. At thesame time, though, this FT story by Daniel Dombey , Harvey Morris and Roula Khalaf suggests the EU might buckle on Hamas before the Chinese and Russians do on Iran. Comments: Can I speculate "neither"? Best case in Iran: IAEA refers Iran next month, and Russia and China agree to meaningless travel and cultural sanctions, which have no effect on Iran's nuclear plans. Best case in Israel-Palestine? The quartet fails to turn over any of the aid. Iran and the Arab states step in, the Oslo process finally draws its last breath and we have a few ugly years before the Palestinians get a chance to reconsider their choice of Hamas. I wish I could be more optimistic... posted by: Contributor A on 01.31.06 at 10:09 AM [permalink]I agree. Hamas should say no and Iran can support them. I don't consider this bad. Let's hear it for realism in politics. posted by: Lord on 01.31.06 at 10:09 AM [permalink]The prospect of EU caving in for financial help to Hamas is real. About Iran - it is just matter of time when Bush Administration thinks it is okay to bomb to Iran sites based on: It is a see saw among these competing pressures on this Administration. But without some serious action from USA, it is unlikely that Iran will be tamed. Remember, it is USA only which is the stated enemy of Iran so it is USA only which has the maximum stake in this. Even if economic sanctions are applied - will it be the case like sanctions on S. Africa? Global economy has changed, China is a big player and it can find ways and means to cheat sanction system. The threat of a coup or merely theft in Pakistan is probably greater than a nuclear Iran at this point. posted by: Lord on 01.31.06 at 10:09 AM [permalink]Thw Quartet agreement language is exceedingly weak. Assistance is "reviewed by donors against that government's commitment to the principles . . ."? That's a loop hole big enough to drive a tank through. posted by: Night Owl on 01.31.06 at 10:09 AM [permalink]The timing of the rioting about the 'Mohammed' cartoons is highly significant also. The cartoons were published in September of 2005 and protested formally soon after. But the riots occur now, less than a week after Hamas won the election and the EU started making noises about revoking aid to a government committed to the destruction of another state. So we get the riots and threats of European riots. That is a naked threat. I think the EU countries will cave in..... posted by: Don Stadler on 01.31.06 at 10:09 AM [permalink]Post a Comment: |
 Politics, economics, globalization, academia, pop culture... all from a
Main home page  Reviews of DanielDrezner.com: "Sharp but informal commentary on politics and foreign policy." -- The New Republic "Dan Drezner is terrific.... Excellent blog." -- Andrew Sullivan "Dan's stuff is always worth reading." -- Eugene Volokh "One of the essential weblogs." -- Gawker.com "Old battle horse of the blogosphere." -- Jewcy.com "Soft porn." -- Amitai Etzioni "Spawned grave atrocities and vast destruction." -- Glenn Greenwald "Monday morning quarterback... conservative robot... the very foundation of troubles in this country." -- not-so-random readers Contact me at: ddrezner@gmail.com (But click here to read my e-mail policy) Search the Site TNR's Open University Jacob Levy Glenn Reynolds Andrew Sullivan Mickey Kaus Virginia Postrel The Volokh Conspiracy Josh Marshall Crooked Timber OxBlog Real Clear Politics Kevin Drum Across the Aisle Economist's Free Exchange TNR's The Plank NRO's The Corner TAP's Tapped America Abroad Duck of Minerva Opinio Juris Brad DeLong Jeff Jarvis Mystery Pollster Mark Kleiman Meryl Yourish Megan McArdle Marginal Revolution Michael Munger Chris Lawrence Matthew Yglesias Hit and Run Cold Spring Shops Stephen Green Outside the Beltway Pejman Yousefzadeh Laura McKenna (11D) Elected Swineherd Phil Carter Joe Gandelman Winds of Change Andrew Samwick Greg Mankiw Dani Rodrik Roger L. Simon Tom Maguire Greg Djerejian The American Scene Post Global Democracy Arsenal Recent articles online "Foreign Policy Goes Glam."The National Interest, November/December 2007 "Rise of the Hipster Statesmen." Newsweek International, November 1, 2007 "The New New World Order." Foreign Affairs, March/April 2007 "Mind the Gap." The National Interest, January/February 2007 "The Grandest Strategy Of Them All." Washington Post, December 17, 2006 U.S. Trade Strategy: Free Versus Fair Council on Foreign Relations Press, September 2006. Complete online article archive Blog Archives June 2008May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 Academia Area studies Book club culture economics fence-sitting from Blogger globalization homeland security international relations law Mediasphere My very important posts New Republic outsourcing personal politics Sports The blog paper the blogosphere thesis ideas Trade and Development U.S. foreign policy website maintenance See full archives listing Recent Entries • Someone keep Fleet Street away from Bill Clinton• It rivals Buckley vs. Vidal, I tell you • So.... are the Clintons morons? • The New York Times didn't ask me, but then again, that's why I have this blog • Monica Crowley's jet black pot • Al Qaeda is losing • Speaking of karma.... • The blog post that writes itself • What made me laugh today • Where should Hillary go? Site Credits 
|