The mass uprisings sweeping the Middle East have fed a competition for regional influence as the old order continues to totter. In the thick of things is Iran, which has great interest in the viability of its embattled Syrian allies, the Saudi role in Bahrain, and the leadership turnover in longtime rival Egypt. "The region's strategic balance is at stake," write experts Hussein Agha and Robert Malley in the New York Review of Books. As a sign of alarm over a sectarian shift, Riyadh sent its troops into Bahrain to support the Sunni-minority regime, arguing that protests were orchestrated by Tehran to support the rise of Bahrain's Shia majority. In many countries, "it increasingly looks like a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia," says Christopher Boucek of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Amid this uncertainty, questions remain about how the upheavals affect Iran's regional influence and what that will mean for U.S. efforts to persuade Iran to give up its controversial nuclear program. The downfall of pro-U.S. Arab regimes in the region, an emboldened Arab public angry at Israel and hostile to U.S. foreign policy, and growing assertiveness of Shiites could benefit Iran's standing in the region, and could blunt U.S. efforts to rally regional states against Iran's nuclear program, some experts worry.
Soon after the uprisings in the Middle East began in January, some predicted that "Iran [would] be the main beneficiary of regional instability." Most experts believe the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which removed Tehran's main rivals, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, have already enhanced Iran's power in the region. Tehran has also benefited from high oil prices caused by upheavals in the region, which blunted the impact of international sanctions. Iran's control of regional non-state actors such as Lebanon-based Hezbollah and Gaza-based Hamas could also bolster its future influence, say some analysts. "Combined, both organizations can (and when necessary will) muster political support for Iran among Arabs through their control of private media networks," writes Ed Husain of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) .
However, Iran's backing of President Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria, its tumultuous domestic politics, and the government's crackdown on demonstrations led by opposition leaders in 2009 and again this spring, has limited Tehran's ability to benefit from the Arab uprisings.
The anti-government protests in the region could also travel to Iran, say some analysts, noting how the country faces a youth bulge and rising unemployment, similar to conditions in other Mideast states coping with ferment. Alireza Nader of the RAND Corporation says a potentially powerful civil disobedience movement motivated by environmental, economic, and social issues is also growing in Iran, which could be much harder for the regime to control than the opposition-led Green Movement of 2009.
For Iran's Green Movement to "become a regime-changing factor, it has to essentially recreate itself into a new movement that is capable of challenging the current structure of the Iranian government," expert Vali Nasr says in this video produced by CFR as part of the new interactive "Crisis Guide: Iran." CFR's Ray Takeyh writes that the "Green Movement needs to respond to the challenge of the Arab awakening and move beyond delegitimizing the regime into confronting it on the streets."
The right U.S. policy toward Iran starts with Washington pursuing a regional policy that aligns it with the emerging, empowered Arab public and "denying Iran the ability to exploit the changing environment," writes Marc Lynch of the Center for a New American Security. In Foreign Affairs, Dalia Dassa Kaye and Frederic Wehrey recommend that Washington develop broader relationships within Arab societies. "Helping build economic opportunities and solidify political reforms may do as much to blunt Iranian influence and regional extremism -- not to mention improve the lives of people living there -- as would simplistic containment strategies based on military partnerships and artificial blocs," they write.
This article first appeared on the Website of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Follow Jayshree Bajoria on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jayshreebajoria
Qais Ghanem, MD: Sons of Dictators an Intractable Problem?
Rep. Pete Stark: A Decade in Afghanistan: Thousands Dead, Billions of Dollars Wasted
Further irony is that as the youth bulge turns into a consumer bulge, the American policies that have made 'Buy Iranian' almost the only option for Iranian consumers will make the unemployment issue go away no matter what policies the Iranian government puts in place.
Add in that Iran, with an established (and growing) middle class and hothoused (by American policies) entrepreneurs, and not saddled by politicians of an Islamophobic bent, will have the inside track when it comes to taking advantage of any 'economic opportunities' created by the change in policy to the Arab states the author is suggesting the US adopt, and the premise that these changes will diminish the Iranian power and influence that presently exists in the region falls apart.
But, what adopting those policies will do is keep the US from losing practically all its power and influence in the region, which would somewhat limit how much more Iran will pick up as the dictatorships crumble under economic and social pressures.
The Board of Directors of CFR, is heavily dominated by Israel supporters, with a few Arab reactionaries sprinkled in for cover.
http://www.cfr.org/about/people/board_of_directors.html
Siding with the people of the region should begin with acknowledging they do not share those fears.
Iran does not control Hezbollah and Hamas. That language is bunk.
Influence is not control.
The rest of the piece was interesting in giving opinions from a wide variety.
The whole working for the people not the monarchs and dictator idea is good but runs into the brick wall of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and others though.
It is the wise long term policy, but exemptions make it pointless.
My, aren't we the sophist today.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2011618103354910596.html
Plus, claims of Iran's so-called "hand" in the Bahraini peoples' quest for self-determination is nothing but a scare tactic straight out of the pages of the Cold War:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/07/red_scare_in_pearl_square
If anything, the "Arab Spring" threatens both Saudi AND Iranian authoritarianism...
The "Arab Spring" so far has been triggered by income disparity created mostly by privatization in the past 15 years, not unlike anywhere else in the world. Various political groups are trying to get the upper hands depending on which country you look at. The US is trying to own the next governments while Iran is working with people. The example of this is no more vivid than what is going on in Egypt.
Furthermore, the ultraconservative theocrats running Iran ought to work with their own people's legitimate social, economic, and political aspirations rather than continuing to repress dissent.
The defend these reactionary mullahs from legitimate criticism is to insult the memory and legacy of the greatest modern leader Iran has had-Dr. Mossadegh.
This statement explains US's huge contradictory ME policy. Trouble is, Iran's policy towards promoting democracy in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Yemen, Egypt and Tunisia, and fighting to free Palestine from decades of occupation is perfectly aligned to with the "Arab public". As soon as US decides to align its policy to "Arab public", the US's best ally in the region will be Iran. It's time for the US to overthrow the US supported dictatorships of Yemen, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. US's best interest is to seek an alliance with Iran to avoid another cold war against the whole ME, China, Russia, South Asia and North Africa.
>>Iran's policy towards promoting democracy in
You're joking...right?
A brutal oppressive theocracy is promoting "democracy"???
But seriously, though it may be official US and Israeli policy that none of the elections in Iran mean anything, despite them being a pretty accurate reflection of the will of the electorate shown in credible polling,Iran's position has been pretty much a blanket approach that the government of all countries is up to the citizens of those countries, and not something that should be imposed on them by foreigners. Now, you may say that their opposition to the government of Israel is an exception to this, though if you consider the Exiles from Israel to be citizens of Israel, which Israel doesn't, it is not in fact inconsistent.
Let's come to reality. Here is a Stratfor analyst who just visited Iran observed.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110926-geopolitical-journey-iran-crossroads?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20110927&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=ebec5afbc6ca45c6b904df0c759dea9d
Iranians have build personal relationships with the people on the street, they have been at it long before the "surprised" revolutions. If US is going to play any role in the middle east in the future, it has to review its relationship with Israel. An Israeli dictated policy isn't going to work anywhere in the middle east, with or without Iran.
iran,unlike most of the arab governments,does not forget history.
as for the arab spring,new governments in the region will ally more closely to iran than saudi arabia.the saudis,like the u.s,are distrusted by many in the region.the turks are aware of this scenario, and that is why we see more turkish involvement recently.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace
Rather, as fomer IAEA head Elbaradei has noted, the issue is really just a pretext for regime change, the EU and US having consistently ignored and even torpedoed multiple Iranian compromise offers that would have addressed any REAL concerns about nuke proliferation:http://news.antiwar.com/2011/04/20/elbaradei-us-europe-werent-interested-in-compromise-with-iran/
Finally, the so-called Green Movement was not widely popular in Iran, and even multiple polls by US organizations found that the majority of voters there had in fact voted to Ahmadinejad, and furthermore the nuclear program enjoys massive popularity.
http://www.charneyresearch.com/pdf/2010Dec8_PressRelease_IPI_Iran_poll.pdf
http://www.ipinst.org/news/general-announcement/209-iran-lebanon-israelis-and-palestinians-new-ipi-opinion-polls.html