Hikers lost in stasis of US-Iran relations
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Analysts and recent events suggest that now may be a good time for the White
House to start referring to President Mahmud Ahmadinejad as the elected leader
of Iran. In fact, White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs did just that on
Wednesday before quickly retracting the remarks under alleged political
pressure.
Such contradictions from the Barack Obama administration are symptomatic of
larger problems within its Iran policy. These disconnects have been
characterized by half-steps and aborted
initiatives. Experts now believe the Obama administration must soon get its act
together on Iran to avoid repeating the failures of the five preceding US
administrations.
With three American backpackers now in Iranian custody for allegedly illegally
crossing over the border from Iraqi Kurdistan, this may be a fortuitous time to
break the decades-long diplomatic standoff. There are inevitable comparisons
between their situation and that of two American journalists held by North
Korea in March but released this week after a surprise visit by former US
president Bill Clinton.
Some US pundits have loudly pondered if Clinton could pull off a similar
breakthrough with Tehran.
Gibbs' fleeting acknowledgement of Ahmadinejad's electoral victory would have
been a tiny step in this direction. Nevertheless, he was forced by anti-Iran
forces in Washington to reverse his statement, and then repeat the alleged
question marks over the validity of Iran's election results.
The fallout from the presidential elections storm has largely settled, and the
opposition candidates have failed to corroborate their allegations of rigged
elections with any hard evidence. As such, Western nations such as the US and
Germany are increasingly hard-pressed to find a sound rationale for their
refusal to acknowledge Ahmadinejad's victory. Some 50 other nations have
already extended their congratulations.
Even the British government is parting ways with Berlin and Washington on the
issue; a British diplomat was present at Ahmadinejad's inaugural ceremony at
the Iranian parliament, or Majlis, on Wednesday. In comparison, German
Chancellor Angela Merkel has resisted advice from her foreign policy experts to
congratulate Ahmadinejad, under the impression that there are still valid
reasons to question the poll results.
But are there? Close scrutiny of the results gives no objective basis for the
charges they were rigged, something that even a senior election advisor to
reformist candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, has publicly acknowledged. Historians
may treat Mousavi's allegation of "stolen elections" with disdain, in light of
the wealth of evidence suggesting a misperception of electoral votes on the
part of Mousavi and his supporters.
Mousavi did win in Tehran, but somehow he and his supporters believed that they
should have won in the rest of the country as well, despite the incumbent
president's numerous advantages in the provinces and rural Iran.
Even a truth committee set up by the reformist candidates has acknowledged that
Ahmadinejad carried the rural vote, attributing the win to a pre-election ploy
of procuring rural votes by distributing cash and resources among some 5.5
million rural Iranians. This may be a case of indirect bribery, a prime subject
for the Iranian courts, but not evidence of voting fraud. [1]
Washington must decide whether to continue with its current policy or come to
terms with Ahmadinejad's victory and his staying power.
With the Obama administration's informal deadline for Iran engagement on the
nuclear issue fast approaching, the window of opportunity for genuine dialogue
between the US and Iran may be closing. Inconsistent behavior such as Gibbs'
only aggravates a difficult situation made worse by the post-election turmoil.
With Ahmadinejad's presidency now established, US-Iran diplomacy remains
stalled over doubts about Iran's electoral process. The democratic process in
Iran is still evolving. Some of its problems are procedural in nature - such as
the gap between the Census Bureau and the elections organization with respect
to eligible voters and residency.
Analysts are calling on the White House to build confidence with Tehran to
prove the Obama team is not a replica of its predecessor. Some say that
Ahmadinejad's letter to Obama congratulating his victory last November deserves
a reciprocal reaction.
The stakes are high enough on an array of regional issues involving Iran - such
as Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan - that the White House may pursue a security
dialogue with Tehran.
For this line of communication to open, a US gesture of goodwill towards Iran
is necessary, experts believe. Ahmadinejad has been adamant about organizing a
debate with Obama at the United Nations, putting the ball in Obama's court to
accept or reject the invitation.
Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New
Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) . For his Wikipedia entry,
click here. His
latest book,
Reading In Iran Foreign Policy After September 11 (BookSurge Publishing
, October 23, 2008) is now available.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
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
