Page 2 of 2 US shrugs off Iran's
revolutionary spirit By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
that US unilateralism has "nothing
in common with democracy", Larijani criticized the
United States' "Greater Middle East theory" by
contending that the Washington's opposition to a
"democratic Iran" and the results of the
Palestinian elections show the true nature of that
theory.
"That Iran is willing to threaten
Israel is wrong," Larijani also said. "We pose no
threat, and if we are conducting nuclear research
and
development, we are no threat to Israel. We have
no intention of aggression against any country."
Iran's nuclear discourse No
doubt the issue of nuclear rights has become a
twin agenda of Iran's discourse on its ongoing
revolution. In his speech on the occasion of the
revolution's anniversary, President Mahmud
Ahmadinejad reiterated Iran's right to peaceful
nuclear technology, its commitment to its
obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, and opposition to Western demands to halt
its uranium-enrichment activities.
Both
Ahmadinejad and Larijani renewed Iran's proposal
for an international consortium to fabricate
nuclear fuel as a guarantee against proliferation
concerns. "All of Iran's nuclear activities are
monitored by the IAEA [International Atomic Energy
Agency] and its inspection," Larijani told the
Munich conference.
Interestingly, on the
eve of Larijani's trip, the IAEA, pressured by the
US, announced its cancellation of most technical
aid to Iran's nuclear program, an announcement
that initially caused a temporary cancellation of
Larijani's trip and ignited questions in Iran's
power circles about the sincerity of the IAEA
chief's recent proposal for a "time out".
Indeed, if the IAEA is serious about
playing a mediating role in offsetting this
dangerous crisis, why does it allow itself to be
continuously manipulated by the US and its allies,
keen on deflating the mood for compromise in Iran?
Clearly, the untimely announcement was meant to
set back the momentum in Iran in favor of IAEA
head Mohamed ElBaradei's proposal, thus showing
that it is the US that is inflexible and is
struggling to avoid a peaceful solution.
"In Iran's national-security doctrine
there is no place for atomic and chemical
weapons," Larijani stated, reminding the world
once again that "the Supreme Leader has issued a
decree, fatwa, against nuclear weapons and
considers it contrary to Islamic principles". As
for the prospects for renewing negotiations,
Larijani expressed "our readiness to reach a
modality for resolving the issues within three
weeks".
Anticipating the United States'
negative reaction to Iran's overtures, both
Ahmadinejad and Larijani accused the US of
exploiting Iran's nuclear issue for "adventurism",
a charge resonating with the opponents of Bush's
new Iraq policy, which now counts kidnapping of
Iran's diplomats in Iraq as one of its (unstated)
purposes.
"There has never been such a
case in international law that extrapolates
'intentions' and seeks punishment before proving
guilt," Larijani stated. This may well be extended
to Iraq as well, where the US is ratcheting up the
accusations of Iran's arms smuggling into Iraq,
even though a number of US analysts, such as
Kenneth Pollock of the Brookings Institution, have
made it clear that some of these arms may have
come through the black market, not to mention the
armed Iranian opposition group the Mujahideen
Khalq Organization, harbored first by Saddam
Hussein and now the US.
Iran's regional
security discourse According to Gary Sick,
a former White House aide in the Carter
administration, US casualties are happening more
in Sunni insurgent areas and not where Shi'ites
are concentrated. In his speech in Munich,
Larijani pointed out that "today a major bulk of
Iraq enjoys stability", adding that these are the
provinces "bordering Iran" and the ones "where the
US is not present".
"I repeat that the
Islamic Republic supports democracy in Iraq and
the national government of Mr [Nuri al-]Maliki and
the National Assembly and the Iraqi constitution,
and does not refrain from any steps that help the
development, reconstruction and stability of Iraq.
Iran considers Iraq's territorial integrity and
sovereignty a self-evident fact and fully supports
it."
Such clear policy statements by
Larijani should be music to the ears of US
politicians, including members of the now-defunct
Iraq Study Group (ISG), who have called for the
United States' diplomatic engagement of Iran (and
Syria). Larijani spoke of the need for
"constructive diplomacy" and its prerequisites,
ie, "common will and common opportunities". He
might have also added "common challenges", in
light of the ISG's point about Tehran's and
Washington's common interest to prevent "chaos in
Iraq".
Yet contrary to the report's call
for "confidence-building measures", the Bush
administration is today flirting with disaster
through an aggressive anti-Iran policy that is
sure to add to the Iraq chaos.
According
to Larijani, the US policy toward Iran is anchored
in a "denial theory" - denial about Iran's
constructive role in the region, and denial of
Iran's importance and the fact that "security is
not a one-way process". While highlighting Iran's
regional security outlook, Larijani stated Iran's
readiness to "hold a regional security summit in
Tehran".
Unfortunately, no matter what
reassuring words or gestures by Tehran, the United
States' march toward confrontation with Iran
continues, reflected in a more and more unabashed
militarist recipe put forth in the US media. There
may be dire warnings of "catastrophic
consequences" by dissenting voices such as former
national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, yet
there is no evidence that the Bush administration
can liberate itself from the cognitive jailhouse
of "preemptive strike" and Iran's constant
demonization.
What is certain, however, is
the extent to which the world community is
distancing itself from Washington's warmongers. As
a former White House specialist on Iran, Flynt
Leverett, recently pointed out, the US is unlikely
to muster sufficient regional or international
forces to cause a regime change in Iran, and the
more it tries to do so, the more its Middle East
policy will suffer and the "erosion of the US's
strategic standing" in the region will follow.
There is, of course, the alternative of detente
with Iran, but that has not been a US priority for
the past 28 years and, by all indications, is not
so today.
Kaveh L Afrasiabi,
PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New
Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview
Press) and co-author of "Negotiating Iran's
Nuclear Populism", Brown Journal of World Affairs,
Volume XII, Issue 2, Summer 2005, with Mustafa
Kibaroglu. He also wrote "Keeping Iran's nuclear
potential latent", Harvard International Review,
and is author of Iran's Nuclear
Program: Debating Facts Versus Fiction.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
