Diplomacy and Subversion
Ali Asghar Kazemi
May 28, 2007
Amidst heated debates and controversies about the modalities of opening the first round of official talks between US and Iran’s delegates in Baghdad, news of spy networks guided by American intelligence services to carry subversive actions inside Iran shattered the whole scheme. In my previous comment I alluded to the flagrant blunders of American policies in the Middle East including Iraq and Iran. Indeed, this new gamble falls in the same array of consecutive US bungles which could be very costly for this superpower in the region.
When on May 30th 2006 the United States ventured to take a bold attempt to open dialogue with Iran on the nuclear Issue with the specific precondition that it should halt all nuclear enrichment, the matter was construed as a rather untenable bid. Since Iranian hard-liners had made so much political maneuver on the subject as a national pride that any retreat from that position would be considered as a public tragedy. Indeed, American decision-makers had a clear vision of the offer, in the sense that they knew well that Iranian government would probably reject emphatically the proposition and thus the ground would be ready for further actions against Iran in the United Nations Security Council.
Recent revelations about spy networks including the detention of some Iran-US citizens appear to be a calculated signal by Iranian hardliners to the American administration that they are suspicious of this whole undertaking. Eventually, those in charge of decision-making in Iran have come to the conclusions that the final aim of American strategy is a fundamental change in Iran’s political structure and thus looks beyond the mere allegations regarding the nuclear issue or even human rights and terrorism.
Mutual signals from both sides are vivid indications that neither Iran nor the United States are willing to engage each other in a true confrontational situation. Nonetheless they continue remain hostile until the time a solution is found in the process. Of course we should not expect much from this first round of talks which is supposed to be centered merely upon security situation in Iraq but could eventually pave the path for further negotiations on other critical issues.
The seemingly American compromising move at this juncture seems to pursue a number of objectives which disregard of Iranian response would be fulfilled. The final aim is to disengage Iran from Iraq internal affairs and to push it to the corner on the nuclear issue with a view to attract Russian and Chinese support for a U.N. Security Council resolution containing serious penalties.
Iranian government is now anxious for its survival and is looking for some safeguard for its security and protection. To that end, it is trying to drag on time for the purpose of finding some avenues for guarantying that a “regime change” alternative would be erased from the American strategy.
As it appears today it seems very unlikely that Iran would go along with the U.S. demands neither on the nuclear issue nor on Iraq. Therefore, it is very probable that hostilities between the two will continue and the nuclear case will be decided upon in the next round of deliberation in the Security Council under chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. We shall wait and see how the issue will develop in the coming days./