Middle East Digest: March 17, 2008Bureau of Public Affairs From the Daily Press Briefing of March 17, 2008: QUESTION: Do you have anything more to say about the Iranian election on Friday and any more determination whether it was free and fair or met any sort of standard? MR. CASEY: Other than people in the current Iranian regime, I don’t think you'll find anyone that says that it was a free and fair election. It's pretty hard to have that when the basis for the election is candidates being determined based on predetermined religious and political qualifications. So, no, we don't think this was a free and fair election. We don't think that it afforded the Iranian people any real chance to choose their leadership. We think that's unfortunate, although it's also consistent with past practice. We would, nonetheless, hope that the Iranian Government and that those reasonable elements in it would take a hard look at the very negative direction that the current leadership has been taking it and change its policies, particularly concerning our desire to see them cease their uranium-enrichment activities and join in negotiations with the P-5+1. Nicholas. QUESTION: Tom, to follow up, do you have any hope that that part of the conservatives in Iran might take another look at the nuclear issue and actually perhaps even go back to the 2006 incentives that you offered them? MR. CASEY: Well, we're hopeful that the Iranian Government will ultimately decide to change its views. And the whole basis of the P-5+1's policy is to simultaneously have this offer on the table for negotiations and for a resolution of this issue in a way that would allow the Iranians to be able to develop civilian nuclear power, while at the same time making sure that we can be assured that they're not using that program as a cover for nuclear weapons development. And on the other hand, of course, when the response to that offer has been negative, ratcheting up pressure, both through UN sanctions as well as through bilateral measures that we've taken and those taken by other like-minded states. So, yeah, we certainly hope that the Iranian Government and elements of it would decide that the costs of maintaining their defiance of the international community are too high and would change their policy and enter into negotiations. That would be in the best interests, not only of the P-5+1, but the broader international community and ultimately, the Iranian people themselves. Yeah. QUESTION: Would you have anything additional to say to what Matt Bryza said about the court case that's been brought against the leading party in Turkey to shut it down with the Constitutional Court? MR. CASEY: No. I think Matt's spoken about that and I really wouldn't have anything to add beyond that. QUESTION: Back on the court case against the Turkish leading party. Could you state the State Department’s position -- U.S. position on such court cases, as if they are political issues or legal issues -- MR. CASEY: Well, I can tell you what Matt said, which is we’ve seen reports that the case has been filed, and we think all entities involved should respect democratic institutions and values as well as the rule of law. In any democracy, the voters determine the country’s political future. In Turkey the voters spoke in 2007. This approach reflects our strong support for Turkish democratic secularism. How’s that? Okay. |
 | |||
|
