Obama and Iran

During the campaign, when McCain proposed they suspend the campaign and go to Washington to solve the financial crisis, Obama's cool response was a deft blow: "I think the American people expect us to be able to do more than one thing at the time."

The list of things he's been handling as president is staggering. And now, as if to prove he can tackle anything, he makes what is being called a gracious and brilliant, sophisticated and diplomatic overture to Iran that is a complete about-face from bush's bluster.

Farideh Farhi, an Iranian scholar affiliated with the University of Hawaii, was "stunned by the tone and content of President Obama's message . . . because the message was great, and on matters related to Iran I am not used to hearing what I like from Washington. So here are some quick thoughts."

Aside from being his gracious self, President Obama did several things that are significant. First and foremost was the fact that, unlike his predecessor, he did not attempt to drive a wedge between the people and government of Iran. He spoke explicitly to both the “people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” acknowledging their common history and culture. No more 'we love the people of Iran but hate their government' taunt repeatedly brandished by the Bush Administration.

Second, he did not try to drive a wedge between the leaders of Iran. He addressed them all and in one brilliant move put to rest all the useless chatter about who the Obama administration should talk to. His focus was not on which Iranians the US wishes to talk to ("moderates" or "pragmatists") or should talk to (the ones who “really” wield power) but the fact that the two countries should talk on matters of mutual interest as well as about their differences.

Third, stating his commitment to meaningful diplomacy and avoiding demonizing rhetoric and peremptory demands, he simply stated the basic truth that the two long-time foes now face a chance for “engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect” and addresses concerns of both. The process, he said in no uncertain terms, “will not be advanced by threats.”

Farhi also noted one paragraph that seems somewhat patronizing in which Obama speaks about Iran "taking its rightful place in the community of nations" but reminding them of their responsibilities to reach that place through peaceful actions rather than through terror or arms.

The official Iranian response from the leading cleric, Khamenei, challenged Obama to back up his words with actions. "If you are right that change has come, where is that change? What is the sign of that change? Make it clear for us what has changed."

This is typical Iranian tough talk as the initial response, but Khamenei left the door open to better ties with America, saying "should you change, our behavior will change too."

What is clear is that Obama is sending a very different message than bush did. But he needs to be careful, and to have the courage to avoid arrogance in dealing with an avowed enemy. With regard to Iran, our own hands are not entirely clean.

One person posting a comment on Farhi's blog on Informed Comment: Global Affairs said:

So... if Iran takes it's place in the community of nations without resorting to terror or arms, does that mean the United States will consider trying the same thing?

I happen to agree that we have much to answer for in our history with Iran, including our covert participation in the 1953 military coup that overthrew their duly elected government, headed by Mohammed Mosaddeq, in response to his nationalizing the British-owned oil industry. We then helped reinstall the Shah and his corrupt regime, which was then subsequently overthrown by the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

They held U.S. Embassy hostages during that revolution, leading to a break in diplomatic relations that has lasted 30 years. Iran did express solidarity with us and offered help after 9/11, only to be rebuffed and insulted by bush. Initially promising contacts when Iran cooperated with us in late 2001 and 2002 in Afghanistan fizzled when bush branded them as "Axis of Evil."

Khamenei has a long list of grievances, including provoking ethnic tension and interfering in their internal affairs, oppressive sanctions, accusations of seeking nuclear weapons, and unconditional support for Israel.

I am not saying Iran is not a dangerous force in the Middle East, or that it has not interfered with our position in Iraq; nor am I saying that we should not worry about them acquiring nuclear weapons.

But it is counterproductive for us anywhere, anytime, to pretend that we are the saviors of the world who have never wronged another country. And there is much mistrust left from eight years of bush/cheney.

Obama's overture may not be perfect, but it is light years more advanced than bush's cowboy antics.

Ralph