Freedom to Fascism

Jones Report

Will Robert Gates Sway the Iran Debate?
Until now, the Bush Administration has avoided talking to the regime in Tehran. But its presumptive nominee for Defense Secretary believes U.S. interests demand engagement


VIDEO: Rumsfeld Says Flight 93 Shot Down


Russo: Rockefeller fortold "event" eleven months before 9/11

...related video

Police take control of Mexican city

Poll: Majority Believes Gov't Doing Too Much

Swiss Re Insurance Defeats Silverstein Claim of WTC Double Incident

9/11 Only "Make Believe" Says Iranian Govt Official

Scientific Method vs. Political Method: The US Administration and 9/11

Minutemen 'expose' Bush's 'shadow government'

Guantanamo may be final home for many detainees

US Nat'l ID Cards by 2008

Corp Awarded Patent for Implantable RFID chips

School Safety Drill Upsets Some Parents

Global Warming Tax: Pay Up...Or the Planet Gets It

US to Conduct Gulf Naval Maneuvers Off Iran

Israel Preparing Broad Gaza Operation

Audit Finds Missing U.S. Weapons in Iraq

U.S. Military's October Death Toll at 100

Al Qaeda Plans for an October Surprise?

FBI Probing 'Nuclear Info Leak'

Airport Screeners Fail to See Most Test Bombs

Secret Cabinet Memo Admits Iraq is Fuelling UK Terror

Leak Defies Blair Terror Claim

Afghanistan War is 'Cuckoo,' Says Blair's Favourite General

Muse's Bellamy Discusses Uncle Killed by IRA

Operation Hollywood

Early Voting 'Glitches' in Florida

1 in 4 Using Absentee Ballot

Election Meltdown Brewing Everywhere...

Orange Co. Indicts 11 GOP Operatives for Voter Registration Fraud

GOP 'Party of Death', Too

Christians Dissatisfied with Public Education


9/11 and more at

TIME | November 9, 2006

If Robert Gates joins the Bush cabinet as the replacement for outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, he can be expected to urge President Bush to talk to the leaders of Iran — an option Bush has thus far avoided. Gates made his own views on Iran policy known in mid-2004, when he joined Zbigniew Brzezinski — President Carter's National Security Advisor — in chairing a task force of scholars who issued a report titled "Iran: Time for a New Approach."

The group, commissioned by the ur-establishment Council on Foreign Relations, concluded that the U.S. should engage in direct, sustained talks with Tehran despite — or, in fact, because of — its rogue behavior.

"The Islamic Republic appears to be solidly entrenched and the country is not on the brink of revolutionary upheaval," the group concluded. "Those forces that are committed to preserving Iran's current system remain firmly in control and represent the country's only authoritative interlocutors. The urgency of the concerns surrounding [Iran's] policies mandates the United States to deal with the current regime rather than wait for it to fall."

President Bush has offered to send envoys to join European Union diplomats in direct talks with Iranian representatives over the nuclear problem, but only if and after Tehran verifiably suspends its uranium enrichment program — a condition rejected by the leadership in Tehran.

Judging by his past statements, Gates seems likely to argue for finding a way through the impasse on the nuclear issue. He may also be sympathetic to European calls for broader Western engagement with Iran, to resolve concerns not only over its nuclear ambitions, but also over its support for Hizballah and Hamas, and over the nature of its involvement in Iraq. The Bush Administration has relied on the Europeans and Russians to convey its views to Tehran and is attempting — so far with little success — to boost popular resistance to the regime from within. But many analysts believe that, if anything, the hard-line forces are only growing stronger.

Gates' pragmatism on Iran was evident when, in 2004, he briefed reporters on the task force report. "We have forces engaged in Afghanistan and in Iraq," Gates said. "We have a nuclear program going forward in Iran that looks very dangerous. And our view is, do we sit on the sidelines and watch those things happen, including negative things, or do we try and do something about it, for our own interests? We can debate a lot about what's going on inside Iran, how soon things might change in Iran. But what we have to focus on is what is in America's national security interest now and in light of our commitments that we now have in the Middle East and Southwest Asia." And his own conclusion was that U.S. interests required engaging with Iran — a view that has not been dominant within the Bush cabinet until now.

Get TERRORSTORM Before the History of Government-Sponsored Terrorism Catches Up With You.