Efforts to Improve Iran-US Relations
Iran-US relations have gone through a tumultuous period of change since the downfall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. During the Revolution of 1978-79 in Iran, there was an emergence of religious activists allied with extremist "Dedicated Fighter" groups, the Mujahedin, which were opposed to the influx of foreigners, particularly Americans, and to a westernisation they saw as threatening to the traditional values subsumed under the cloak of Shi'ite Islam. When on January 16, the Shah fled Iran, crowds in excess of 1,000,000 demonstrated in Tehran, proving the wide appeal of Khomeini, who arrived in Iran amid wild rejoicing on February 1, 1979.
On April 1, 1997, after a landslide victory in a national referendum, Khomeini declared an Islamic republic, subsequently invested with a new constitution reflecting his ideals of Islamic government. Fundamentalist measures followed, and revolutionary committees patrolled the streets enforcing Islamic codes of behaviour and dress. Efforts were made to suppress western influence.
At this time, anti-American sentiment was strong. On November 4, 1979, supporters of the revolution took control of the US embassy in Tehran, seized 66 US citizens there and at the foreign ministry, and, with the exception of 14 who were granted early release and despite the death of the Shah on July 27, 1980, held them hostage until January 20, 1981. On November 14, 1979, US President Jimmy Carter ordered frozen all Iranian assets in US banks. An unsuccessful US attempt (April 24, 1980) to rescue the hostages aggravated hostility between the two countries. On January 20, 1981, the day of Ronald Reagan's inauguration as US President, the hostages were released.
When Ayatollah Khomeini died on June 3, 1989, Ali Akbar Rafsanjani was elected president. He favoured a policy of rapprochement with the West. A move towards that end was facilitated with the resumption of diplomatic ties between Iran and the United States on September 27, 1990. Such relations, however, remained rather cool. Washington imposed tough economic sanctions on Tehran saying that it was against the Middle East peace process and that it harboured terrorists who see American interests as the prime target.
After two decades of confrontation with Washington, new Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has moved cautiously to ease relations offering a "thoughtful dialogue with the American people." This move has been further supported by the Iranian foreign minister who said it was up to the United States to improve relations with Tehran and that his government wanted good relations with western world. He said: "The ball is in the court of the United States, improving relations is something that depends on their sides. We are ready to work with all nations based on mutual respect. The Americans must change their behaviour towards Iran."Iranian President Mohammad Khatami's unusually conciliatory message aimed at the United States has been reciprocated by US President Bill Clinton in equally conciliatory terms, saying he was greatly encouraged by the opening from Iran. If the new overture leads to the resumption of meaningful contact between the two countries, it is expected to contribute to the lessening of tension in the Middle East and hopefully reopen a new chapter of cooperation between the two countries.
It is open to question whether the American perception of Iran as a country encouraging terrorism and impeding the Middle East peace process is shared by her allies. The economic embargo imposed by the US also does not appear to have been fully effective in as much as many countries have been lukewarm in honouring it. It is reported that even US companies are violating the embargo to promote their own business interests.
There are hopeful indications in this direction from other quarters. Saudi Arabia lately offered to mediate between the US and Iran to reconcile them in the interest of regional stability in the Gulf. The Saudi Crown Prince said: "It is not hard for our Iranian brothers or for a friendly country like the United States to reach a settlement to their differences, and we will be happy to see stability and security in this sensitive region." Leaders of the European Union also lately confronted President Clinton with their long-standing objections to US sanctions on international trade with Iran.
In the opinion of international observers, the encouraging thaw in the relations between the two countries is not likely to lead immediately to any major development, keeping in view the present uncertain state of the over-all situation in the Middle East. In this context, each side will carefully watch further developments before taking any meaningful next step.
The United States still has reservations about Iran. It also wants to be sure about power equations in that country. Whatever be the nature of power structure at the high level as between Ayatollah, the supreme leader and President Khatami, the willingness on the part of Iran to normalise relations with the US is indicative of a consensus among those who wield power in Iran.
There is another refreshing aspect of the present internal situation in Iran. Until recently, Iran's Islamic leaders tried to prevent their people from knowing when things were going wrong. When they chose to publicise problems - economic or moral - they preferred to blame the West, notably the United States. With Mohammad Khatami's relatively moderate government in office and with a growing public hunger for openness, this may be changing. Newspapers have begun to reflect the darker side of life under Islamic rule and to raise political and religious questions that push at the limits of the state's tolerance.
Over the past few years, western policy has been a muddle. The aim was fine: to persuade Iran to change its more dangerous ways. The Americans tried to do this by enclosing it in a cordon sanitaire, Europeans by talking it into good behaviour. Neither method worked. And so, both sides began to agree it was time for a joint reassessment. So far, America's policy has remained officially unchanged. In 1995, the Clinton administration cut off all dealings with Iran. Last year, the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act laid down that any non-American firm investing over $40 million a year in Iranian oil or gas would be punished. The plan to pipe gas from Turkmenistan across northern Iran to Turkey and beyond may not technically break the letter of the sanctions act; it certainly breaks its spirit. But the US administration decided not to oppose the project. Three distinguished former US officials jointly attacked current policy as crude and ineffective. Senior US officials are also said to be giving hints about their desire to end the Iranian estrangement.
In the light of the latest Iranian overture for reconciliation, the western view of Iran as sponsor of terrorism needs be revised particularly because a beginning has been made with the Iranian President taking the first major step by offering a dialogue and President Clinton's response eulogising Iran as "a country with a great history" and declaring that Americans "have been greatly enriched by Iranian, by Persian culture."In the context of the above developments, there seems to be no doubt that a rapprochement between the United States and Iran will help to ease tension and contribute to the creation of peace and stability in the region.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments