Rouhani says US should move past nuclear fears, focus on extremism

In remarks at the New American think tank, Iranian President Hasan Rouhani urged the US to move beyond fears that his country is developing nuclear arms. He said the two countries should focus on the fight against the Islamic State.

Iranian President Hasan Rouhani urged the United States on Wednesday to move beyond "insignificant" fears that his country seeks nuclear arms and challenged it to join his country in battling what he described as the global threat of Islamic extremism.

Rouhani also made clear he was not prepared to interfere in the case of Jason Rezarian, an American-Iranian journalist detained on unspecified charges in Iran, during a speech and question-and-answer session hosted by the New America think tank.

But most of his comments focused on the menace posed by the Islamic State terror group and attempts by his country and the U.S. to seal a deal to meet White House demands that Iran agree to significant long-term curbs on its nuclear program that could be used to make weapons in exchange for an end to crippling sanctions.

The Iranian president is addressing the U.N. General Assembly on Thursday, and his comments Wednesday touched on some of the issues he is likely to highlight.

The nuclear talks appear stuck two months before their extended Nov. 24 deadline. While the U.S. is formally joined by five other powers at the negotiating table with Iran, it is clear that the Americans are the lead negotiators, and Rouhani directed most of his comments at Washington.

He urged the U.S. government to "let go of pressure politics toward Iran" — a reference to Iranian complaints that Washington's demands at the talks are unrealistic. Repeating that Iran is not interested in nuclear arms, he urged the U.S. to "leave behind (this) insignificant issue."

Instead, Rouhani said, the two countries must focus on the fight against the Islamic State group and other extremist groups, the "real and serious common challenges which ... threaten the entirety of the world."

At the same time, he was critical of the U.S. bombing campaign of Islamic Group strongholds in Iraq and Syria and the growing coalition of countries seeking to stop the extremists by military means. "Bombing and airstrikes are not the appropriate way," he said, warning that "extraterritorial interference ... in fact only feeds and strengthens terrorism."

Blaming "the misunderstandings of the realities of the region by ... outsiders," Rouhani said wrong U.S. policies, including the invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, likely led to the birth of the Islamic State group by creating power vacuums exploited by the extremists.

He also suggested it was in the West's interest to reach a nuclear agreement with Iran, freeing Tehran to play a more active role in creating and maintaining stability in the Islamic world.

Even if a nuclear deal is sealed, it could face harsh opposition by Iranian hardliners and U.S. congressional critics united in one fear — that their side has given away too much. But Rouhani shrugged off opposition from inside his country and said it was up to President Barack Obama to deal with Congress.

Iran-U.S. tensions have eased since the election last year of the moderate Rouhani. A year ago, he and Obama spoke by telephone for 15 minutes, the first time the presidents of the United States and Iran had talked directly since the 1979 Iranian revolution and siege of the American embassy. The conversation was hailed as an historic breakthrough.

But American officials are furious with Iran for detaining Rezarian, a Washington Post journalist who has both American and Iranian citizenship, as well as his wife.

Iranian officials have not specifically said why the couple is being held, and Rouhani has dodged questions about their fate. Asked Wednesday about Rezarian, he said he would be freed if he is innocent of any crime.

"We must not prematurely express opinions about a case that hasn't reached the court yet," he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.