by Jasmin Ramsey
A member of Iran’s parliament today criticized the Rouhani government for transferring the nuclear negotiating file from the Supreme National Security Council to the Foreign Ministry because he believes FM Mohammad Javad Zarif sold Iran short on the recent interim deal he achieved in Geneva.
“It has now become clear to many that the negotiations team under the leadership of Mr. Zarif has given the maximum concessions and received the trivial minimum of concessions,” said Tehran MP Hamid Resaei.
Resaei is a conservative cleric with little influence these days, but his words could have easily come from more prominent Iranian hardliners. While they lost the upper hand in Iranian politics after their failure to effectively unite in producing an appealing presidential candidate, the potential for them to regain major influence continues to hang over today’s Iran, which has seen change since Hassan Rouhani became President.
“Iranians have effectively capped their program for now and if there is no concrete economic impact as a result of the agreement soon, then these voices will become louder and reach a greater audience,” said Farideh Farhi, an expert on Iran.
It is this potential that US policy and law makers who want an enduring deal with Iran over its nuclear program which addresses key US concerns should be considering when deciding on strategy. While the US’ own hardliners continue to insist that Iran only understands the language of force, the fact remains that Washington currently has a cooperative partner in Tehran that currently enjoys the backing of Iran’s Supreme Leader. Squandering the opportunity to effectively work with the Rouhani administration will result in a far more advanced Iranian nuclear program under hardliner control and an increased threat of military conflict. But the US can counter these possibilities by weakening the Iranian hardline narrative against dealing with the West through various means of international engagement that will empower the Rouhani government’s pragmatic policy positions, according to a report released today by the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a DC-based organization that advocates US-Iran rapprochement.
“[C]oncrete action to fundamentally disprove a core tenant of the hardline narrative – the idea that the West is inherently against the scienti?c advancement of Iran – will signi?cantly strengthen the positive-sum narrative in ways that facilitate a larger agreement with Iran and help prevent a resurgence of the confrontational policies of the hardliners,” states the report, “Extending Hands and Unclenching Fists.” Authors Bijan Khajehpour, Reza Marashi and Trita Parsi — who offer a combined range of scholarly, economic and US policy expertise on Iran — have consulted with key Iranian figures in identifying 7 projects through which this goal can be achieved with no proliferation risks, including an US/EU-Iran Science Summit.
The report, which was supported by the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and private donors in the Iranian-American community, offers specific suggestions for weakening the Iranian hardline narrative against dealing with the West:
To ensure that the summit will make a deep impact on the discourse in Iran, the U.S. and its partners can work to secure the attendance of prominent American and Iranian American personalities, such as Bill Gates, Pierre Omidyar, or Omid Kordestani. The summit can be held in honor of an ancient Iranian scientist such as Omar Khayyam or Abu Ali Sina (Ibn Sina) in order to further disarm skeptics in Tehran. Collaboration in the area of neuroscience is particularly promising. Iran has some of the most advanced neuroscientists in the world, and American scientists in this ?eld have expressed an interest in collaborating with their Iranian counterparts.
As acknowledged by the report, these initiatives will certainly be viewed suspiciously by various Iranian actors given the dark history of the US/UK-engineered coup of Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq in 1953 and more than a century of Western exploitation of Iranian resources. Indeed, there are prominent voices in Iran with substantial followings who will always oppose the country opening to the West, but they have been marginalized since the June 2013 presidential election that saw a moderate, pragmatic cleric — backed by reformist and centrist leaders — take power after 8 years of hardline rule.
“Hardliners in Iran still speak loudly, but they have lost their ability to put an end to plans and programs just by speaking against them,” said Farhi, a NIAC advisory board member who just returned from a 3 month stay in Iran.
The independent scholar cited an EU parliamentary delegation’s recent meeting in Tehran with Jafar Panahi, a director who has been sentenced to 6 years in jail and Nasrin Sotoudeh, a prominent rights’ lawyer who was released in September after 2 years imprisonment as evidence of the hardliners’ weakened hand. Both Panahi and Sotoudeh (who is especially critical of the government) have been honored in the West for their advocacy efforts.
“There were shouts of sedition and so on but the meeting did happen in Iran’s new political environment and will have an impact on EU-Iran relations,” she said.
“NIAC’s suggestions regarding closer scientific cooperation may also face loud objections from similar folks but Iran’s new political environment will be able to withstand and ignore these challenges with the concrete benefits of these interactions on display,” said Farhi.
A valid step in the right direction if achieved. If the Neanderthal mentality of some members of the U.S. Congress can be overcome, then this may have a good chance of seeing the light of day. Oh, and also ignoring the rantings of the paid lobbyists for Israeli interests and their campaign contributions. Of course, there will be the naysayers, who will pound their chests saying if we agree and advance cooperation on the scientific level, then Iran will achieve the ability of blowing up all the warmongers in the world. Of course, that wouldn’t be such a bad thing if they-the warmongers were the only casualties.
Neither the government nor the people in the U.S. know why Iranians fear the U.S. A and what to be protected by atomic weapons. The facts of past relations are not known or understood. Here are a few: Conquest and occupation during WWII, overthrough of the government and placement of the Shaw on the thrown, removal of the elected and popular President Mousadegh by the CIA, execution of his cabinet and life in prison, providing poison gas and military assistance to Saddam Huisen and Iraq during the eight years war, destroying an Iranian international flight French Airbus, in the middle of an international airway under Air Route traffic control, in an apparent threat to force settlement to prevent Iran’s immanent invasion of Iraq, We should settle the disputes with history in mind. This history should be known to all.
The big smiles and soft talk nowadays, in stark contrast to their former premier Ahmadinejad, should never mislead negotiators and the public that these Iranian leaders are bad guys in the mode of Ghadaffi, Morsi, Mubarak dictators. Let no one lower their guard when facing an unexpected outreach, soft tone, big smile and contrite words of Iran. Deeds not words are needed.
Surely it is in Iran’s own best interests to “cap” its nuclear programme. This fact does not go down well with some Iranian leaders.
Comments are closed.