The Bush administration has deliberately ruled out direct negotiations with Iran either over the nuclear issue or over the broad range of strategic issues that you would need to talk to Iran about if you were going to get a real diplomatic settlement on the nuclear issue.

. . . [Y]ou had a bunch of neo-cons, and even the president himself [against dialogue], it’s not just the neo-cons who wanted regime change and nothing else. Ultimately the president is, on this issue, very, very resistant to the idea of doing a deal, even a deal that would solve the nuclear problem. You don’t do a deal that would effectively legitimate this regime that he considers fundamentally illegitimate. I think that’s the real issue.

In essence, despite Bush's claim in January that he wanted to find a diplomatic solution, he is simply fulfilling a campaign promise he made back in July, 2004 when he said he would make regime change in Iran a priority in his second term:

PRESIDENT George Bush has promised that if re-elected in November he will make regime change in Iran his new target.

Bush named Iran as part of the Axis of Evil along with North Korea and Iraq almost three years ago. A US government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that military action would not be overt in changing Iran, but rather that the US would work to stir revolts in the country and hope to topple the current conservative religious leadership.

The official said: “If George Bush is re-elected there will be much more intervention in the internal affairs of Iran.”

Recent stories in the Washington Post and the british daily, the Telegraph , both of which relied upon unnamed administration sources, make it very clear that the policy driving the conflict with Iran is all about changing its form of government.

"The upper hand is with those who are pushing regime change rather than those who are advocating more diplomacy," said Richard N. Haass, who as State Department policy planning director in Bush's first term was among those pushing for engagement.

In fact, considering what actions the administration has taken lately with respect to Iran, its hard to see how diplomacy fits into their thinking, except as a smokescreen for their true intentions:

The focus on Iran inside the administration lately has been striking. Bush, according to aides, has been spending more time on the issue, and advisers have invited 30 to 40 specialists for consultations in recent months. [...]

Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns said in an interview that the department will also add staff in Dubai, which is part of the United Arab Emirates, as well as at other embassies in the vicinity of Iran, all assigned to watch Tehran. He called the new Dubai outpost the "21st century equivalent" of the Riga station in Latvia that monitored the Soviet Union in the 1930s when the United States had no embassy in Moscow.

The administration also has launched a $75 million program to advance democracy in Iran by expanding broadcasting into the country, funding nongovernmental organizations and promoting cultural exchanges. Voice of America broadcasts one hour a day into Iran; by April, that will grow to four hours a day, and the administration plans to go to 24 hours a day. But the administration suffered a setback last week when lawmakers slashed $19 million, mainly from broadcast operations.

Remember this when the campaign ads roll out this Fall hyping the menace Iran poses to our safety and security. Bush doesn't care about Iran's nuclear program except as an excuse to justify what he and his cadre of loyal neocons have always wanted to do: attack Iran in order to depose its leadership and install a more "democratic" American-friendly regime.

And we all know how well that's worked out for them in Iraq, now don't we?

Bush Iran Regime Change Iranian Nuclear Program Diplomacy