Scott Horton Interviews Trita Parsi

Scott Horton, March 28, 2012

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Trita Parsi, founder and president of the National Iranian American Council, discusses how Iranian sanctions block peaceful diplomatic solutions, making war more likely; the “risk premium” in oil prices, exacerbated by hawkish foreign policy, that hurts Iranians and Americans alike; the daunting resources and time commitment required to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program through invasion and war; the media’s increasingly conflicted narrative on the Iran “threat;” and why the Obama administration is amenable to a deal centered on Iran’s re-implementation of the NPT’s Additional Protocol.

MP3 here. (19:33)

Dr. Trita Parsi is the author of A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama’s Diplomacy with Iran, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States, and recipient of the Council on Foreign Relation’s 2008 Arthur Ross Silver Medallion and the 2010 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order.

He wrote his Doctoral thesis on Israeli-Iranian relations under Professor Francis Fukuyama (and Drs. Zbigniew Brzezinski, R. K. Ramazani, Jakub Grygiel, Charles Doran) at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies while heading the largest Iranian-American organization in the US, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC).

25 Responses to “Trita Parsi”

  1. The world — Will it save us from ourselves?

    Asia Times has a news item today describing how a majority of the Pakistan parliament demands major concessions from the U.S. before supplies got Afghan War may pass through Pakistan. No drone bombing an absolute, plus a new demand that the U.S. agree to never attack Iran.

  2. U$ got Karkuk-Basra-Kuwait-Dhahran-Doha-Masqat-Abudhabi-Joba-Burqa in their Pockets while Euisrael got Quds-Macca-Bahrain-Amman-Beyrout-Baghdad-Cairo in their hands…Indeed ONE global deidly P3's Bankcc

  3. Dr. Parsi is completely correct. Tough sanctions will lead to war with Iran, which will destroy Iran's democratic movement, set the entire Middle East on fire, and will cause the collapse of the world's economy. Only people like Netanyahu and Barak, who behave as if the U.S. is Israel's puppet, do not care about such consequences.

  4. I thought the purpose of sanctions was to weaken the other country to the point at which the U.S. military could throw the country against the wall and break it up.

  5. Beef prices are going up bc of TX drought. Had to slaughter herds bc no feed. Now there are no steers left to slaughter.

  6. The Iranians have legal justification for withdrawing from MPT already since it has already been attacked. Assassinations, sanctions, terrorism within Iran by state sponsors of terrorism like Israel, U.S., Saudis.

  7. If you think the US economy is bad read this:
    http://advisoranalyst.com/glablog/2012/02/07/unde

  8. Of course sanctions are designed to bring on a war. Duh.. The idea is to get the enemy to attack first, or to do some act (like a nuclear test) that Israel will have to respond to with a preemptive nuclear strike.

  9. Don't be silly, its not "terrorism" when the US does it….

  10. Sanctions should really be called a "blockade" because thats what it is. The US and its allies using the threat of military force to prevent goods and services from flowing into Iran. The "hope" is that the Iranians will attempt to break the blockade with force so the US can claim they were "attacked". This has been the tactic of choice of US imperialists since 1860. Always maneuver the victim into firing the first shot so boobus americanus can be rallied to the flag once we are "attacked".

  11. For instance, I had a conversation with a conservative friend not too long ago about the justification for the Iraq war. When I pointed out that Iraq had NEVER attacked the US she responded "They shoot at our planes all the time". I was like "WTF are you talking about what planes? Ive never heard of the Iraqis shooting at our planes." She responded "They shoot missiles at our planes that are enforcing the no fly zone in Iraq."

    I just facepalmed and had to walk away.

  12. IRAN
    “The devil’s most valuable disciples are those with the most nukes…
    the devil himself being the one who invented nukes.”

    Now why would Iran say such an uneducated thing? Why, all educated people are well educated in the fact that there is no devil, right?

  13. Be an Empire — Enrich yourself upon the misery of the world

    “But so what, where’s the crime in that?” will all devoted Empire builders shout back at us. And their point is well taken, for a sports mentality is our national pastime, from the little league baseball games to the body contact brutality of football and boxing, to be all we can be, to compete to the ultimate by enriching ourselves upon the misery of those slower and weaker, this is the spice of life.

  14. There will be war with iran because the west has cut them off completely from the world economy. SWIFT? Hello? Oil sanctions on iran? The iran threat reduction act passed by congress? Hello? That act basically cuts off all diplomacy with Iran. Not too mention the banking sanctions and Iran being paid in euros and yuan and gold etc. That will cause a major financial crisis for america, which they can in turn blame on iran. The risk for war is very high and will happen. We just don't know when. Or how. I think Iran will attack somewhere, because of all the terrorist attacks they have been getting from america and israel, not too mention cutting them off from the global economy is an act of war and will incite a response from the Iranians. They will attack US assets, America will consider that an act of war and war we will have.

    The world has been dumping dollars for a long time and our day of reckoning here in america is rapidly approaching. Rapidly approaching. We will have war with iran because the obama administration has guaranteed it.

  15. There was the attempted assassination of Bush 41 in Kuwait. That is casus belli.

  16. He just wants it timed to help him in the november elections.

  17. The corporate rich who rule Empire USA, for the same reason they told Truman to nuke Japan, they now tell Obama to station two aircraft carriers off-shore of Iran — their goal of a one-world economy policed by a one-world military.

  18. Preemptive war — Cause of our preemptive police state

    Three days ago in Pasadena California, a black teenage college student was blissfully jogging when he made the fatal mistake of moving a hand toward his belt, whereupon two white cops fired eight bullets killing him instantly.

    For in America, the police are not only allowed to kill anyone who acts like he is going for a gun, but required by law to shoot to kill on the slightest provocation. For promotion in law enforcement depends entirely upon how many times you fired your killing machine in the line of duty.

  19. So even if they did plot to kill Bush I (and there is evidence that is not the case) lets look at the timeline here:
    1991 Bush I bombs Iraq killing how many people?
    1993 Sadaam's "CIA" allegedly attempts to bomb Bush (who was at that time a FORMER President)
    2003 Bush II invades Iraq because "they tried to kill my daddy". Kills how many people Iraqi and American?

    The US has no business declaring war over attempted assassinations when the US routinely attempts and commits them. Assassination of a political leader is an utterly stupid reason for war since it is the civilians that suffer and die, not the people who ordered the hit.

  20. You do realize the entire Kuwait invasion happened.
    Where does it fit into your timeline?

    And do you have a list of things that used to be 'casus belli' that no longer applies?

  21. Iraq invaded KUWAIT, NOT the US. They never attacked the US. Sadaam was a US ally in the 80's. He checked with Washington before invading Kuwait. He was then attacked by his former benefactor, former CIA director, Bush I. Its like a bunch of gangsters all backstabbing and jockeying for dominance. How far back do you want to take the timeline? Back to Sadaam's CIA approved rise to power? His proxy war with Iran on behalf of the US and its satraps in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia who then refused to pony up the cash when he went bankrupt fighting the Iranians? Its a dirty business. Bush played this dirty business his entire life. Am I supposed to feel sorry for him and be mad about it? "A man reaps what he sows."

    There was NO just reason for war with Iraq, in 1991 or 2003, other than libido dominandi. Seriously, you really believe the US went to war in Iraq because Sadaam attempted to assassinate one of the least popular FORMER US presidents of all time? You really believe that is a legitimate reason for war? Would you give your life for that cause? How about one of your kids lives?

    These men are all cut from the same cloth, Bush, Sadaam, Clinton, Putin, Assad. They all run a dirty business and my heart does not weep for them when they kill each other off. I do weep for the poor civilians caught in the maelstrom who do 99% of the fighting, suffering and dying.

  22. Well, thanks for explaining all that out in such detail. It does make your other posts consistent at least.

  23. U$ HamadsysBBBeCORPZ Xplay:UKisrael invaed LebFalastin..Palestin invaed ME..IraKKK invaed Iran..Kuwait faw invaed irak..irakjordan invaed dhahran..KKKuwaitME invaed Taef&irak..K$A invaed Sham=MOZA akfan timesharincc_____

    Umar Empire NOW is the new Road to Janna.

  24. The decision to go to war with Iran constitutes the most momentous strategic decision for the United States in many decades. It will not be taken lightly as it is often suggested.
    Bluffing with “All options are on the table”, and actually embarking on a bombing campaign with dire consequences for the attacker(s) are two very different things.

    Netanyahu can keep on bluffing without any loss of credibility; because at the end – when no Israeli attack has materialized – he could say that the Americans and Europeans prevented him from eliminating the Iranian existential threat to Israel. And he will have plenty of media evidence to back him up on that claim.

    But Israel will never attack Iran directly; because there is no precedence for Jewish State taking big risks in its wars. And when Israel does become reckless and get a bloody nose – Lebanon war of 2006 comes to mind here – they tend to become extra careful planning a next military campaign.
    Israelis are fond of reminiscing about the successful demolition of Iraq's Osirak in 1981 and compare it with the potential bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities. But they should remember that Saddam’s Iraq at the time of Israel’s bombing was fighting the most intensive and crucial stage of its long war with Iran.

    PM Begin knew that all of Saddam’s military might was pointing east towards Iran, and that the likelihood of an Iraqi retaliation against Israel was minimal: Saddam did not have long range missiles, and the potential threat from Iraqi jetfighters could easily be contained by the IAF.
    What is more, in 1981, at the time of Osirak bombing, there was no Hezbollah to threaten Israel with tens of thousands of missiles.
    Even then; Ariel Sharon recalls the Begin cabinet decision approving the attack on Osirak “as the most difficult in Israel’s history” he could remember.

    It is also good to remember that unlike Netanyahu Sharon never bluffed. He never talked about bombing Iran even when Iran was much more vulnerable and less able to retaliate

  25. If you wish for to grow your know-how only keep visiting this web site and be updated with the most recent news update posted here.

Leave a Reply