|
|
|
Subject:
Iraq & US, the view from Iran an article of interest
Herc the Merc
5/16/2007 3:41:21 PM
|
www.asianage.com/presentation/leftnavigation/opinion/opinion/iran-rising.aspx
Iran Rising
Seema Mustafa
Tehran: The word is out: the United States is at the losing edge and is on its way out. In Iran there is not a single person who is not talking of the US defeat in Iraq, Lebanon and now Iran, with senior ministers in the government openly exulting about the failure of Washington?s policy in the region.
The chaos in Israel over its military defeat at the hands of the Hezbollah is only adding to the glee, with even the common man now anticipating the curtains to open on the next stage of the US-West Asia drama. Here the Iranian government clearly sees a major role for itself, and it appears to be almost certain that it is more than willing to engage in peace talks with Washington with one difference: it has to now be on Tehran?s terms. And what are these terms? While many issues could be negotiable, what appears to be totally non-negotiable is Iran?s right to its nuclear programme. Senior Cabinet ministers made it very clear that the nuclear issue had come to symbolise Iranian national pride and there was no question of the government backing off from its right to civilian nuclear energy. The expectation is that with time the US will have to agree to this, as it would need Iran to bring peace to the region, in particular Iraq. The certainty is that Iran will not concede space on this issue, and that after 28 long years in the wilderness it has emerged as a self sufficient, confident nation that can more than withstand any storm the US might now unleash.
Iran, however, is prepared to concede some ground on Iraq, but that, its ministers said here, was only because it had reached the independent conclusion that some of its goals were similar to those of the US. One, both wanted the chaos to end, although there are some differences over this in the government, with at least one minister insisting that the US wanted an unstable Iraq. And two, both wanted the government to be recognised as legitimate.
Tehran apparently has had no hesitation in recognising the Maliki government as representative of the people of Iraq, because it has, after intense discussions spread over weeks if not months, come to the conclusion that the present Iraqi government was sympathetic to Iran. Iraqi President Nuri al Maliki has lived in Iran, and is fluent in Pharsi. As an official here pointed out, there is one VIP visit from Iraq to Iran now every single week, if not more often. Relations are on the mend and Iran is currently negotiating details with the US on this issue.
At the same time, care has been taken to delink the nuclear issue from the ongoing talks on Iraq, with government ministers and officials pointing out that there could be no compromise on Iran?s nuclear rights. The day the nuclear dossier on Iran is sent back from the United Nations Security Council to the IAEA that day we will begin talks, is the official position of the government here. Iran?s nuclear rights have to be treated as an IAEA (NPT) issue and not a political sword to be raised against it by the UNSC. The Americans are not clear about conceding what the basis of their campaign against Iran is, and as the ministers here said, "they are unable to tell us what will be the position at the end of the tunnel; that remains a question mark and until that is answered we cannot have any kind of talks with them."
The anti-US rhetoric remains strong and strident. A senior Cabinet minister went so far as to say that the US, in his view, was fostering terrorism in Sunni dominated central Iraq, as it did not want stability there. A deputy minister for foreign affairs was of the view that the region would see peace only if the Americans left, and he was optimistic that this would happen sooner than later. There is palpable anger against the Americans, but now that the threat of an attack is virtually over, Iran is emerging from the tension keen to establish itself as a regional power. This then is the second certainty in the emerging scenario: Iran will emerge, if it has not already, as the major player and power in West Asia.
There is no doubt about that. It has acquired impressive manufacturing abilities and is now building its own automobiles, its nuclear plants, its roads, its infrastructure. It has ensured 100 per cent electrification with an excellent network of roads, bridges and dams across the length and breadth of the nation. It is opening rapidly to the private sector, even as President Ahmadinejad seeks to address the rural and workers? constituency by offering "justice" shares in the public sector to offset any problems that might arise from rapid privatisation.
The question is not whether Iran will emerge as a regional power, that it definitely will. The question is: who will Iran ally with in the process? Will it seek alliances with the neighbouring countries in the region, and forgetting its long held animosity towards the Arabs, seek to build new bridges with the other countries, even as it seeks Shia-Sunni unity? Or will it strike some kind of a deal with the US and use this renewed friendship to partner US hegemony in the region? The suspicion of some appears to favour the second option, but indications are that Iran will use the Arab networking route to build alliances and establish itself as a leader in the region.
The indications are many. One, there is a strong animosity towards the US now in the not so elite sections of Iranian society, and this will not allow a relationship that is perceived to be helping the US establish its control in the region. Two, the Iranians appear to be setting out a new role for themselves already, with a senior minister pointing out that it wanted to take the lead in resolving the issues of Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and its own nuclear issue, and for this it was essential for the US to leave the concerned countries free to take their own decisions. Three, Iranian leaders point out that they have learnt from the mistakes of others, and citing the case of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, point out that their government will not be party to any move that would leave them as vulnerable as it had left Arafat after he made his first compromise with the US. Four, Iran is now fired by an ambition to be the major player in the region and is not at all keen to share this with the US, as it realises that this would ultimately weaken and not strengthen its position.
The government is almost boasting about the fact that the US cannot move out of Iraq without Iran?s help, and that would be extended only "on our own terms." It is clear that a country that did not strike a deal when the threat of attack was imminent was certainly not going to do so now that the threat had virtually passed over its head. And that while it was more than willing to have talks with the US, it would do so only after the nuclear file was given back to the IAEA to handle, and all pressure on its sovereign rights had been withdrawn.
The success of the government in turning the nuclear issue into a strong, emotive national issue is evident, as even those members of the Iranian elite who would like to see a rapprochement with the US admit that this cannot be until Washington is willing to preserve Iranians right to a peaceful nuclear programme. In fact, a minister went so far as to say that US President George W. Bush has had to realise that his effort to segregate the people of Iran from the government through direct appeals to them was a futile effort and could never work. He said that the US was fast losing ground in the region and this had become clear from its desperation now to engage the Iranians in talks, and call upon the government to help it in Iraq. The Iranian official position is that it decided to participate in the Egypt talks on Iraq only after it was "begged" to do so by the US, the Europeans and the international community at large.
The Iranian government, and the people, are also firm that there will be no compromise on Israel. That can never be, is the immediate response. A senior minister when asked about the "reality of Israel" said, "we understand the reality of Israel, it is a land occupied by the Zionists and this occupation can never be accepted as a right." Another senior minister suggested that the solution for the Palestinian issue could only be one nation with majority rule.
Iran is now poised for a dramatic shift in power equations. As an Iraqi analyst said not so long ago, it takes 1,000 years to create one grain of sand, the people of West Asia have great patience tinged with incorrigible optimism. The Iranians when they speak of the change are not speaking of tomorrow, but of a day for which they have the patience and the perseverance to wait. Unlike the Americans they are not in a hurry and are prepared to wait until victory comes ? "and come it will" ? on their own terms.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Latest
News |
Most
Read |
Hot
Topics |
|
|
|
