Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

DATE=5/28/03

TYPE=U-S OPINION ROUNDUP

TITLE=U-S DESIGNS ON IRAN?

NUMBER=6-12946

BYLINE=Andrew Guthrie

DATELINE=Washington

EDITOR=Assignments

TELEPHONE=619-3335

CONTENT=

INTRO: Some American daily newspapers are contemplating a change in U-S relations with Tehran against a background of news reports on a resurgent nuclear weapons development program in Iran and intelligence information that some al-Qaida terrorists may be hiding there. There is concern in some publications that reports the Bush administration is contemplating a program to unseat Iran's theocratic government is a mistake. We get a sampling now from V-O-A's ____________ in today's U-S Opinion Roundup.

TEXT: U-S rhetoric toward the Iranian government seems to be hardening, causing a good deal of reaction. In Texas, The Corpus Christi Caller-Times wonders:

VOICE: Is Washington angling for [an] Iran showdown? There are indications that Washington is interested in taking care of some unfinished business with Iran. It dates back to the U-S Embassy takeover in Tehran in 1979, which still rankles in our national consciousness. However, the real impetus for renewed interest in this component of the celebrated "axis of evil" (the other two being Iraq and North Korea) traces back to concern over the Iranians' support of terrorist movements, possibly including Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network.

TEXT: In the Midwest, the Chicago Tribune suggests we need to get farther along in Iraq's stabilization before we take on another major challenge.

VOICE: The lights aren't even on in all of Iraq, and yet there is speculation that the Bush administration may turn its attention to regime change in Iran. At least that's the buzz [Editors: U-S slang for "rumors"] that has been intensifying over the past week. The Washington Post reported that unnamed Bush administration officials were alarmed by intelligence [suggesting] al-Qaida operatives in Iran had a role in the May 12 suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia. That prompted the administration to cut off diplomatic conversations with Iran that had seemed to portend a thaw in relations.

But the U-S should be wary of promoting active talk about regime change. Put simply: Iran is not Iraq. Iran has a reform-minded, democratically elected government and a vibrant pro-democracy movement that is working [peacefully] to topple the despotic mullahs who hold most of the power.

TEXT: However, New York's Daily News takes a much harder line, proposing:

VOICE: In three major areas -- supporting a democratic Iraq, stamping out terror and curbing nuclear arms -- Iran is failing to act as a responsible member of the international community. But there could be hope. It lies with the Iranian people. On its neighbor Iraq, Iran is "being unhelpful," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [says]. "Iran," he explained, "should be on notice that efforts to remake Iraq in Iran's image will be aggressively put down."

On terror: Iran denies it is harboring al-Qaida. On nukes: Why does a state rich in oil and gas need a nuclear energy program in the first place? Or is it an arms program in disguise? [However] Unlike Iraq under Saddam, Iran has democracy. Regime change is possible from within. That's the way to go. Take the case directly to the people. Our quarrel isn't with them, but with the unelected ayatollahs.

TEXT: Moving to Florida, The Orlando Sentinel agrees with Chicago's Tribune:

VOICE: While pressing the hard-liners in Iran to abandon the country's objectionable and dangerous policies, the United States must take care not to undermine the reformers who are trying to lay the foundation for a more responsible regime. Iran is not Iraq. As Mr. Bush, himself, said in his last State of the Union speech, "Different threats require different strategies."

TEXT: Lastly, from Charleston, South Carolina, this advice on dealing with Tehran's nascent nuclear arms program, from The Post and Courier.

VOICE: Washington's best bet for putting pressure on Iran to accept stricter international inspection is to enlist Russia as an ally in preventing Iranian nuclear programs from having military applications. Prospects for such an alliance improved following a visit by Secretary of State Colin Powell to Moscow. American officials [reportedly] found their Russian counterparts more concerned about Iran's nuclear program than [they had been] previously.

TEXT: On that note, we conclude this editorial sampling on the latest views of relations between Iran and the United States.

NEB/ANG/RH