US Will Not Negotiate with the Present Government

The US is one of the most important political and economic powers of the world and the presidential election in this country is very significant; because it impacts the trend of international developments and even domestic and regional issues of some countries of the world. The question which is proposed today is whether Obama's administration has been successful or not. The answer to this question must be found beyond the relations, behaviors and norms of the two countries.

It is true that Obama, himself, had his own capabilities, but he was welcomed partly due to Bush leaving the decision-making scene of the biggest political, security, and economic power of the world. The world felt more secure with Bush’s absence and Obama's slogans strengthened this sense of security. Now, the question is whether Obama and his Democrat administration have been able to return this feeling of security to the people of the world, and whether the American people themselves feel more secure.

In my opinion, in a brief assessment, the answer to this question can be relatively positive, although serious failures and disappointments can be seen when evaluating the performance of Obama's Democratic administration. I believe that Obama has been one of the most successful recent presidents of the US. He inherited a country which was involved in two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and took command of the administration at a time when the US was faced with one of the biggest economic crises ever, and a horrible recession and unemployment crisis. Decisions he has made with regard to unemployment, social security and insurance have been very brave and influential.

This power structure, with this American republic, was the first experience of Americans in macro-economics and macro-industry. The Obama administration became a phenomenon because its view on taxes, investments, and social services were different.

Obama also had numerous successes in foreign policy. In my opinion, in recognizing the crisis, Obama comprehended human suffering and the world with intelligence. But, in solving them, he was faced with power circles which had found strong roots during the past few decades; hence, he was not able to overcome the super-lobbies of the US which play significant roles in the decision-making process of this country’s power structure. Obama did not assess the nature of the global security crisis through the dominant ideological outlook of the neo-cons; he instead paid attention to the rift between the Western world and the world of Islam and the roots of degradations and threats. Through his interpretation of the social aspects of Islam and the interaction between Islam and the West, he was able to talk about reconciliation between the US and the Islamic world and express his hopes in this regard. His speech in Egypt was one of the most strategic speeches made by a US president with regard to the issues of the world of Islam.

In addition, in confronting popular uprisings in the Arab world and the Islamic Awakening, Obama acted very wisely. For the first time, contrary to its traditional view of supporting dictators, the US stood by the people and not by the authoritarian regimes.  This was one of his most strategic decisions, where the US administration did not accompany its former allies against the massive popular protests. He had the ability, like many other incidents where the US had stood by the oppressive rulers, to give permission to the Egyptian army to suppress the protesters, but he expressed his support for people's uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia, and.... Of course, this measure was taken while considering US interests; the basic principle of US foreign policy is interest-based. Enforcing this policy can undoubtedly be considered as a great event in the history of interactions between the US and the Islamic world.

On the other hand, from the beginning of his tenure as president, Obama attempted to contain Israel and had serious differences with his Secretary of State in this regard. The problems that he created for Tel-Aviv’s usurping regime during the first months of his presidency led to bitter reactions from the prime minister and president of Israel toward Joe Biden, the US Vice President.

With regard to Iran, Obama also made great efforts in the beginning and, through different messages, attempted to move closer to Iran. Although he was able to take some steps in this regard, he was later faced with the paradoxical behavior of his expert system. Obama talked about interaction with Iran while, at the same time, signing a bill to allocate budget for the overthrow of the government of Iran. Although Obama had brought the State Department’s Iran Desk to the White House and intended to personally follow this file, he was not able to make brave decisions to eliminate sanctions, as a positive step. Considering Iran's absence in the scene, Obama’s allies on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and in Israel, succeeded in changing his views. He intended to take serious practical steps in this regard, but the existing political atmosphere of Iran and the Americans' understanding of Iranian issues prevented the success of these efforts. While surrounded by the opponents and dealers of political relations, he misunderstood the nature of power and the decision-making process in Iranian foreign policy.

But, the question that is proposed today is whether there will be any developments in US-Iran relations after the US presidential election. Can Iran and the US, following the election, talk directly with each other and solve their problems? In my opinion, this will not happen and relations between the two countries will not be normalized during the second term of Obama's presidency (if re-elected). I believe that there will be no practical development in bilateral relations between the US and Iran until Iran's presidential election, even though they are well aware of the fact that the issue of foreign policy in Iran is under the authority of the highest official of the Islamic system, that is to say the Leader. But, they have never been and will never be willing to negotiate with Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Meanwhile, the question is what the approach of Obama or Romney will be with regard to Iran. Is it possible that they might use the military option against Iran? In my opinion, Iran has great geopolitical, geo-strategic, and geo-economic capacities; hence, any talk of a military attack against Iran is more of a psychological war and campaign propaganda. But sanctions will certainly be on the US agenda.

It should not be forgotten that Iran has great potentials and capacities at the regional level. The security belt of the region has no meaning without Iran's presence. But, the issue is how these capacities and capabilities are used. Artful negotiations and gaining political achievements are practical measures in this regard.

Good advice for today's Iran is that we should lead conditions towards the direction of holding lively elections in Iran. If the results of such an election lead to the establishment of a powerful government and wise and intelligent people come to power, this powerful government can manage the issues well by receiving concessions from the US and by considering Iran-US interests, which are more than the common interests of Iran with Europe. The common interests of Iran and the US necessitate the resolution of many issues by these two countries, and it requires them to reach a comprehensive agreement.

It is said that Mitt Romney will lead the US towards a cold war with Russia and that this is to our benefit. In my opinion, this is not a credible viewpoint. We should view the issues strategically. The question that needs to be answered is: Isn't Obama’s re-election in the interest of Iran, the Islamic world and humanity? If it is in the interest of Iran, Islam and the world, why should we analyze this issue in some other way? It is a reality that, if Obama is re-elected as the US president, he will decide about international issues differently than other US presidents and will pursue his policies in order to reduce tensions between Islam and the West.