« ‘Silly Season’ fatwaWhen They Say “Saudi-Backed, Anti-Iranian”, Think CIA. Think Mossad »

Obama’s Iran Policy Is Misguided

October 26th, 2009

Jalal Alavi

The first day of October was the day on which six world powers (P5+1) and Iran met in relation to the latter’s controversial nuclear program.

Reports that have come out of that meeting depict the Islamic Republic as willing to concede on at least two grounds: negotiating the fate of its nuclear program with the P5+1 and holding direct high-level talks with the country the Islamic Republic has for years called the Great Satan (i.e., the United States).

What, of course, makes these concessions most intriguing is that they are being made not by the reformists in Iran, to whom better relations with Europe and a thaw in relations with the United States have always seemed prudent, but by those for whom the Islamic Republic has for years been the bastion of anti-Americanism.

To be sure, Iran ’s hardliners and the United States have always had a proclivity for limited strategic cooperation of often a covert nature [1].

However, the overt yet highly confidential 45-minute conversation between Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, and the US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, William Burns, on the sidelines of the latest P5+1 meeting with Iran, can be considered a new development in the context of post-revolutionary Iran’s relations with the United States.

The fact that Burns and his European counterparts did not push the Iranian delegation to agree to a freeze on uranium enrichment is also quite intriguing, for such a demand on the part of the United States and its allies was supposed to form the basis for any future P5+1 negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

The above being the case, the question arises as to why the Iranian hardliners and the West led by the United States are all of a sudden showing so much flexibility when dealing with the nuclear stalemate.

The answer is clear: the two sides are considering a rapprochement, a marriage of convenience, so to speak, that is supposed to address a number of issues, both domestic and international, facing the parties involved.

The hardliners in Iran, for example, are in dire need of improving their international image, so as to be able to annihilate the reformists who are rightfully challenging their rule; mend relations with Russia, which were badly damaged as a result of their recent disclosure of a second nuclear facility in Qom; and thus avoid the possibility of further UN sanctions, which could truly jeopardize their grip on power.

The West led by the United States, on the other hand, is in dire need of stability in the Middle East; Iran’s assistance with the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan; and a steady flow of oil and gas.

Thus, a “grand bargain” can be said to be in the making on the part of the parties involved in the negotiations, and, if the United States fails, in its present capacity as the leading promoter of peace [2], to introduce a balance between realpolitik and idealism into any future P5+1 negotiations with the incumbent regime in Iran, chances are it will end up doing more harm to the world than good.

In a sense, it all goes back to the Obama administration’s distorted policy of direct engagement with America ’s adversaries, which relies heavily on a rather crude interpretation of the abstract principle of non-interference in international relations.

Taken to its logical conclusion, the above orientation has the dangerous tendency of undermining the very principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states by rewarding criminal state behavior so long as it suits the perceived interests of the United States or those of a particular administration.

Thus, the United States (and its European allies, for that matter) had to stay virtually “neutral”, for example, when the hardliners in Iran sounded the death knell for republicanism throughout the country by stealing the June 12 presidential election from Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

To be sure, the Obama administration’s proclivity for direct engagement with US antagonists is anything but new in the diplomatic history of the United States .

Former President Ronald Reagan, for example, also engaged America ’s rivals, including revolutionary Iran , in more ways than one.

What is quite troubling at this point in time, however, is the fact that there is now a vibrant reform movement in Iran which is being totally undermined by a United States administration that is seemingly only interested in proving the efficacy of its direct engagement policy to the world by attempting to strike a quick bargain of an undemocratic nature with the Iranian regime over the latter’s nuclear program.

And nowhere is this self-serving orientation on the part of the Obama administration better reflected than in Obama’s speech of June 15 [3], in which he said that he is going to continue negotiating with the small clique of isolated individuals he calls Iran’s leaders, irrespective of their foul behavior both during and after the election.

Of course, the President must have forgotten on that day that his Inaugural Address promise of extending a hand to tyrannical regimes precludes those who refuse to “unclench their fist”, that is, hopefully those who refuse to treat their subject populations with respect.

Here is what he said in his Inaugural Address [4]: “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

Alas, when it comes to taking sides in the battle between freedom and servitude, democracy and tyranny, at least as far as the situation in Iran is concerned, it seems Barack Obama does not mind ending up on the wrong side of history himself, so long as he can provide Congress with timely reports of a realpolitik nature.

Opportunism, rooted in disregard for the plight of ordinary people, is the Achilles heel of the Obama presidency, therefore. Let us hope the President will get a handle on this before it is too late.

----------

Jalal Alavi is a sociologist and political commentator based in Britain.

Notes

  1. Consider, for example, the Islamic Republic’s involvement in what later became known as the Iran-Contra scandal, as well as its involvement in the US occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.
  2. President Barack Obama’s success in winning the Nobel Peace Prize this year can, in a sense, mean that the world is now expecting the United States to act as the leading promoter of peace in the world.
  3. Listen to Obama’s June 15 speech via the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZErZx9JVS0.
  4. The full text of Barack Obama’s Inaugural Address is available from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/inaugural-address/.

No feedback yet

Voices

Voices

  • Fred Gransville In 2025, globally, corporations will continue milking the rising tide of environmental awareness. By publicizing green projects and declaring themselves sustainable, many firms portray themselves as saviors of the planet. However, all…
  • By David Swanson An imperial presidency, a cult of idiocracy, and a team of hateful oligarchs is the problem. A salute is just a symbol. If you do a web search for images of “Bellamy salute” you find countless black-and-white photographs of U.S.…
  • Chris Spencer Draining the Swamp? Is that even possible? An Analysis of Dwight Eisenhower's and Joe Biden's Ominous Warnings, Assassinations of JFK, MLK, and RFK Eisenhower's farewell address was less a goodbye and more a dire warning wrapped in a…
  • Fred Gransville The More It Changes, the More It Stays the Same. "Rebellion" of Status Quo. Social Justice via Corporate Hegemony, Neoliberalism, Global Elites, Political Rhetoric, Think Tanks, Corporate State, Faux Democracy, Anti-Human Rights, Empire…
  • Janet Campbell Image via Freepic Starting a business in your community offers the unique opportunity to create something meaningful while building connections with those around you. It begins with understanding the needs of your area and aligning your…
  • Tracy Turner Modern Feminism Chants Equality Ad infinitum While Promoting Misandry A Cultural Revolution at the Hands of Covert Influence The very fabric of modern civilization is inculcated with the contributions of legions of people, mostly men, whose…
  • by Tracy Turner January 17 Update: Eaton/Palisades Fires $390+ Billion in Damage Do their red ties blind these politicians (Listed below), or are they not just enemies of California? Are they purveyors of a globalist agenda, a term used to describe a…
  • Paul Craig Roberts Dear Friends, I am as tired of challenging and distressing news as you. Today there is a treat instead. The treat is “the Tall Texan,” the American pianist Van Cliburn playing Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto at the first Soviet…
  • by Ellen Brown North Dakota is staunchly conservative, having voted Republican in every presidential election since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. So how is it that the state boasts the only state-owned bank in the nation? Has it secretly gone socialist? No.…
  • Dr. Althea Mentes An Exposé of The Brain Police Mental health care has always been in conflict and dispute, struggling with deep-seated cultural perceptions, changing medical practices, and a growing tide of mighty industry profit. What is often…
January 2025
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

  XML Feeds

Social CMS software
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted articles and information about environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. This news and information is displayed without profit for educational purposes, in accordance with, Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Thepeoplesvoice.org is a non-advocacy internet web site, edited by non-affiliated U.S. citizens. editor
ozlu Sozler GereksizGercek Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi E-okul Veli Firma Rehberi