President Obama Offers Iran "A Promise of a New Day"
President Barack Obama has taken the first step toward reversing United States policies and actions aimed at Iran that have failed both countries for the past 56 years. "My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran, and the international community," the president said. "We seek engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect" and "a future with renewed exchanges among our people and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce; a future where the old divisions are overcome."
A little recognition, a little respect, goes a long way with a people who have had such a tortured history with the United States. For too long policymakers from both Republican and Democratic administrations, from John Foster Dulles to Zbigniew Brzezenski, have viewed Iran not as a sovereign nation with a diverse population and an illustrious history, but as what Thomas Friedman calls "geostrategic space." During the long Cold War with the Soviet Union, American foreign policy elites believed Iran was so important to U.S. "vital interests" in the Persian Gulf that they had to lock down the Iranian people with a brutal right-wing dictatorship under Shah Reza Pahlavi.
In 1953, the Eisenhower administration, concerned with Soviet power -- as well as wishing to maintain Anglo-American control of Iran's vast oil and natural gas reserves -- decided to re-write Iran's history. For the first time the Central Intelligence Agency overthrew a foreign government. The U.S. turned a fledgling democracy under Prime Minister Mohammed Mossedegh into a buccaneering dictatorship. The CIA even created the Shah's secret police, SAVAK, which terrorized, tortured, and killed tens of thousands of the regime's opponents. For twenty-five years the Iranian people suffered under an American-backed government that was always near the top of the world's worst human rights violators.
This background gives President Obama's simple "Nowruz" (New Year) greeting to the Iranian people added weight and significance. Honoring a campaign promise, President Obama is reaching out for a dialogue with Iran. His brief statement to the Iranians, titled "A New Year, A New Beginning," expressed warmth and the "promise of a new day" in U.S.-Iranian discourse. It is his administration's first prudent, long-overdue step toward normalizing diplomatic relations with Iran. Responding to President Obama, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, after some familiar anti-American boilerplate, offered a ray of hope: "Should you change, our behavior will change, too." This exchange is a far cry from the bellowing about the "Axis of Evil" and the "Great Satan" that have marred American-Iranian relations for the past three decades.
Last week President Obama seized control of his own message. He bypassed the Beltway gatekeepers utilizing new media as well as old, such as his appearance on Jay Leno's Tonight Show. David Broder, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and other stodgy, unimaginative members of the White House press corps tried to filter Obama's communication but the president made an end run around them. President Obama is wisely nurturing a direct channel to the American people unencumbered by elite media gatekeepers. Given the current crises we face this direct interaction is essential; it's a 21st Century version of FDR's fireside chats. He took a similar path free from the corporate media filter to speak directly to the Iranians (with Farsi subtitles).
Better relations between the United States and Iran are the key to stability in the Middle East. Iran shares a long border with Iraq and has deep cultural and religious ties to Iraq's Shia population. Iran also has strong ties to the Shia President of Iraq, Nouri Al-Maliki, and his Dawa Party. The Iranians were helpful for a time against the Taliban in Afghanistan until Bush labeled them part of the "Axis of Evil." The United States and Iran share mutual strategic interests in the region and by engaging Iran President Obama is making a clear break not only from the disastrous Bush policies but also from the policies of the past half-century.
Unfortunately, the Israeli government thought it would be cunning to issue its own New Year's "greeting" to the Iranian people with the clear aim of diluting the impact of the president's message. The only effect Israel's "greeting" will have inside Iran will be to give Iranian hardliners a political boost, which was exactly what Obama did NOT want to do. Iran faces a pivotal election this June and Israel has made it easier for hard-line politicians to blur the distinctions between Israeli and U.S. policy, thereby rendering Obama's words meaningless in the eyes of many of their constituents. The Israeli maneuver works against President Obama's goal of strengthening the moderates in Iran.
In the waning days of the Bush administration, the Israeli government unleashed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in Gaza thereby creating more problems on the ground for the in-coming Obama Administration in its pursuit of peace negotiations. The Gaza operation was clearly timed to coincide with the American political transition. Israel also successfully lobbied through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to block the appointment of Charles Freeman to a key foreign policy post because he was deemed not "pro-Israel" enough. And now Israel attempted to dilute President Obama's historic message to the Iranians by issuing one of its own. These are all indications of Israeli meddling in the formulation and conduct of American foreign policy. For a nation that receives billions of American taxpayer dollars each year it is a curious way to show gratitude.
After committing his administration to a future of honest and respectful diplomacy, President Obama addressed Iran's leaders directly: "You, too, have a choice. The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right -- but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization. And the measure of that greatness is not the capacity to destroy, it is your demonstrated ability to build and create."
Loud elements allied with Israel including Benny Morris, John Bolton, and Norman Podhoretz still call for a military attack on Iran despite the fact that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Joint Chiefs of Staff prevailed upon Bush to forego such a course because it would be a disaster for the United States. American relations with the rest of the world must not be held hostage by the likes of Bibi Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman. President Obama should be permitted to run his own foreign policy. The American people are facing the worst economic crisis in seventy years while footing the bill for two costly and misguided military occupations. They have little appetite for launching yet another (bigger) war in the Middle East. President Obama's promise of a new day in U.S.-Iranian relations must be given the opportunity to bear fruit free from outside intervention.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Joseph P.
I almost always agree with your comments, and I always listen when a discussion about Iran begins with our 1953 overthrow of their government, because if we forget the beginning, we can never make progress.
The Iranians will never forget.
Having said that, I feel that your cmmentary has bypassed another of Obama's comments on Iran, the one that shows disrespect towards the Iranian people and its leadership.
Nuclear weapons.
Obama pushed close to the Rice-Bolton button when he admonished Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program.
Had he instead raised the need for all countries to increase their satisfaction that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, he would have gained a great deal with the Iranian people.
The Iranians are proud of their nuclear achievements in the field of research, medicine and energy.
That includes the enrichment required for nuclear power plant fuel.
Without acknowledging Iran's legitimate and inalienable right to enrich its own uranium on its own soil, we will never make real progress.
Obama has disappointed me a number of times, being that I am a progressive thinker.
That goes with the territory.
But his efforts to claim to respect the Iranian people while chiding them for a nuclear weapons program that doesn't exist, as far as we now, proves that sometimes even the black man speak with forked tongue.
See Joseph A. Palermo's Profile
Yes, I agree with many of these comments -- we'll have to wait and see how much pressure Obama can use to extract US policy from Israeli policy -- the two countries have very different interests in the region and in the world (despite what Chomsky says -- who has a great point but it's too Cold War now) -- the US is occupying Iraq, in part, because of "interests" thought to be shared between the US and Israel -- that's just part of the record, look at what was being said by AIPAC et al. at the time in October 2002 to March 2003 -- now, I don't believe it is in US "interest" to occupy Iraq -- it's drained our treasury, made us hated in the Arab world, blocked all peace efforts in the Palestine-Israel conflict, caused damage to our reputation and killed a lot of innocent people, especially Arabs. So, how does that serve US interests? It doesn't. Hence, attacking Iran would be a disaster for "US interests" -- yet Bibi et al. want the US to attack Iran and threaten to do so themselves (which would only bring devastation to Israel -- unless one believes a nation of 7 million can attack a nation of 70 million and remain unscathed (it's never happened before in history so we'd have to wait and see). The point is that why should Israel do anything to Iran when it can lobby and push the US to do its dirty
Mr. Palermo says, "American relations with the rest of the world must not be held hostage by the likes of Bibi Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman. President Obama should be permitted to run his own foreign policy."
I agree wholeheartedly and would add that I also hope American relations with the rest of the world will not be held hostage by likes of other men and women, American citizens who are much, much closer to Obama than Netanyahu and Liberman.
hey mr paleermo,
great article very unbaised and with corect facts,kudos to you,reading a very sensible article on iran,you got it right.you have shut up all the baseless rantor and dooms day prediction made by pig heads.
thank you.
Nothing I read in your piece indicated what the Obama administration intends to bring to the table. Diplomacy is a give and take effort, and it seems all Obama has done so far is yip-yap about what Iran needs to do.
Regarding your last paragraph on "allowing" Obama to run his own foreign policy, the ball is in his court. What interaction has he had with the new Israeli government? What kind of interaction do you think is possible? You barely touch on this.
Interesting article.
There are some optimistic assumptions though. Especially when you consider the advisers Obama has surrounded himself with. Why does he have to go around and over them if they're on his team?
Many of us have seen the power of the lobby. If Obama is sincere, and Israel is opposed to normalizing relations, the battle will be up hill for sure. A thousand cuts from the lobby, the right, congress, and the media.
Most of hope Obama's overtures to the world are sincere, and if so, hope he will succeed.
I've become a sceptic though. Contradictory statements will be noted and challenged.
No more - we have to prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons. There is no evidence that Iran has ever pursued nuclear weapons. If there is any doubt, accept Irans offer to turn their enrichment process into a consortium in Iran. That would end all suspicions.
See Joseph A. Palermo's Profile
Hey Johnie! Always glad to see your comments -- hope I've provided a little content for radio yakking -- I think the tone of Obama's statement to Iran could be the first step toward normalizing relations (which certain nations in the region don't want to see). But, if anything, the US has treated the Iranians so miserably over the years -- the best way to bring the clerics over there along is to engage them, sell them stuff, buy stuff from them, (like China), and take it from there -- no one seems to mind trading with China but China's human rights record is worst than Iran's -- just look at Tibet. Iran isn't going to disappear and the nations in the region who want to start wars with Iran are really unhelpful.
Sorry to say, Joey, I'm not on the air right now. The economy knows no boundaries. Hope to have something worked out pretty soon to rectify that. I mentioned something about it on a related post of yours last week. When I get back on, you and Stan are my first guests.
I think you are wrong on this.
Hell of a retort!!! A little slim on facts, though. Care to elucidate?
What the title says ?
Ok, here is the title: "President Obama Offers Iran "A Promise of a New Day""
Watch it ! (60 min doc.)
http://www
When you are done, tell us what has been changed ?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
