A New Equation to Be Developed

How do you see U.S.-Europe relations with Obama’s presidency?

Despite general beliefs, these relations have not been organized deeply and policy-makers in Europe have some kind of mistrust towards the United States. The reasons are multiple. One is the faction inside United States’ political system, with neoconservatives still looking for ways to exert influence. However, Obama is more charismatic, more active, and with a more serious plan compared with Bush, though all analysts admit that there is a lack of integrity in the present United States government. If this incongruous team fails to fulfill its promises within the first two years of its term, it will face a tough challenge.

Where does Dennis Ross in this situation?

Ross is working separately from the Department of State and Hillary Clinton. In fact it seems that he tries to work directly with Obama. Ross has formed an interministerial team with representatives of department of the treasury, energy, state, defense, CIA and National Security Council for handling Middle East affairs. The think-tank is governed by Ross and Ray Takeyh.

How does Takeyh view Iran?

He is a well-known scholar who believes Iran’s geopolitics has priority over its political system. That is, the political system shouldn’t concern the United States at first place. For Western countries, such an attitude implies that they should avoid impulsive, reactive policies against Iran. United States had embraced that approach in the 1970s, regarding Iran as a regional partner, while neglecting violation of human rights in the country.

So how will the political arrangement against Iran alter?

I don’t believe in change, but a diplomatic transformation. New elements will become influential and force United States to adopt a ’progressive’ policy vis-à-vis Iran.

How far would this ’progressive’ policy go?

Look, the important thing here is that United States has appointed separate envoys for Middle East major issues, one for Palestine and one for Afghanistan and Pakistan, while we thought these would be all controlled by Dennis Ross. It seems that United States is treating Iran as a separate issue. In fact, United States is trying to draw a line between the matter of its relations with Iran and the Middle East peace process and terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I think separating the problem of Iran from Middle East peace process and terrorism is of the utmost importance. By this, United States will get rid of two heavy burdens in the course of reducing its tensions with Iran. If this disconnecting happens, United States’ traditional partners, Arab countries and Israel, and even Europe, and their burdensome lobbies will be put aside and that would make progress with Iran easier.

So this raises the possibility of Iran-U.S. talks?

I can’t be as confident as you. There are two optimistic and pessimistic possibilities. On the pessimistic side, United States may even want to undermine Iran’s regional standing. Thirty years of hostile relations have brought suspicion against Iran for Americans. United States new approach to Turkey and Egypt is a proof for this pessimistic view. See that after Obama’s visit to Turkey, Ahmet Davutoglu was appointed as the new Turkish foreign minister. Unlike Babacan who was a technocrat, he is a theoretician with a global aspiration for Turkey, aiming to revive the Ottoman Empire in a new guise matched to the modern world. The implication is that United States may be trying to strengthen Turkey to limit Iran’s maneuverability. Egypt has also attracted United States’ attention, while this is country is no more the leader of the Arab world. Of course closer relationships with these two countries may also worry Israel about its importance for the United States.

And the optimistic possibility is?

That Americans have finally concluded that they should reach an agreement with Iran on Middle East issue. So terrorism and Middle East peace process should not interfere with rapprochement with Iran. And there is also the nuclear issue. All the disputes in the recent years over Iran’s nuclear issue always suggested a model of uranium enrichment inside Iran through a consortium, such that Iran’s rights and IAEA’s regulations were both observed. This was advocated by a European-American lobby, so with an optimistic view we can say that America is ready to talk with Iran over its nuclear program. But we shouldn’t think of this as a tendency for change. You see that they are planning to impose sanctions on gasoline import to Iran. This shows that the carrot and stick policy is still practiced. So with all the optimism, we shouldn’t anticipate change yet, since change implies acknowledging previous mistakes and courage for changing the trajectory and this is not yet seen from the American government.

Why is Israel talking of diplomacy now?

It’s because of the new government’s failure to create a coalition. Netanyahu didn’t succeed in forming a coalition government. Israel is at its weakest point so it’s trying to keep a low-profile and avoid threats.

In general, how do you see Iran’s regional status?

There are four features I can mention"

1.      Israel is no longer a threat for Iran since Iran has upgraded its defensive capabilities, it has a high level of regional maneuverability and for different reasons such as global economic crisis and weakness in political structure of world powers, and Israel is not allowed to violate standards.

2.      United States can no longer be hostile towards Iran, since it needs Iran’s geostrategic conditions. In oil transportation, Iran is not regarded as a threat but as a country acting responsibility in the last thirty years and only seeking its own rights. So they’re looking for agreement with Iran.

3.      Russia doesn’t feel as Iran’s single ally since Iran has found new opportunities, succeeding to advance its goals in difficult situation, such as constructing nuclear power plants without external aid.

4.      In the new global equilibrium, Europe can not be an opportunity for Iran, since it hasn’t acted honestly for paving the way for negotiations and interaction with Iran. They’re arrogance may be one reason for this.

With all these factors changing, there is a need to write a new equation.