As the United States toughens its stance on Iran's nuclear program, and bitterness toward America hardens on the streets of Tehran, many people can't help but wonder: Why don't the two countries hold face-to-face talks to ease the crisis?
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday, that he was ready to engage in dialog with anybody.
He also said it was "ridiculous" for countries with nuclear arsenals of their own to be pressing Iran to curb its effort to develop nuclear energy.
"The most effective way to resolve the international standoff ... is through direct talks between Tehran and Washington," said Lebanon's The Daily Star newspaper in an editorial.
Experts say that a meeting between Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and President Bush would seem an obvious follow-up to Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush this week. But many doubt a summit, even if arranged, could bridge the two nations' virtually irreconcilable differences.
Bush, they point out, doesn't want direct dialog with the head of a state he labeled part of an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. Doing so would acknowledge Ahmadinejad's legitimacy.
And Ahmadinejad's letter was laced with old grievances against an America that Tehran brands the "Great Satan" and included a long list of Iranian demands.
Shen Dingli, director of the Institute of American Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, China, said the countries regard each other as enemies and approach the nuclear issue from opposite directions.
"Iran believes it must acquire nuclear weapons to ensure state security. The United States does not want to have direct talks with Iran, just like it does not want to talk with North Korea," he said.
Comments
»
»
»
»