Do Not Miss This Opportunity
Interview with Masha-Allah Shams-ol-Va’ezin, political analyst on Obama’s speech in Cairo and the future of Iran-U.S. relations.
How do you see Obama’s remarks about Iran in Cairo?
First of all let me say I am against a group who believes United States has not yet taken an actual step, since change of policy starts with change of language, as Mr. Ahmadinejad’s policy shifts started with a change in his rhetoric and gradually moved towards change of actual policies and strategies. But it is too soon to judge Obama’s speech in Cairo and accuse him for not actualizing his promises. He has been in office for only 120 days.
As to the Muslim world, Obama is criticizing United States’ past record and regards it as a threat to his country’s national interests. An instance is when he referred to overthrow of Mosaddeq’s democratic government with involvement of United States, despite the claim that it supports democracy in Third World countries. Obama is in fact challenging United States’ public opinion in order to prepare them for radical changes in foreign policies.
Were there any clear messages in his speech for Israel and Muslim countries?
It surprises me that Obama started his challenge with Israel quite early. I thought he would move towards that challenge in his second presidential term. However, with a hawkish government ruling Israel Obama had no other choice. His direct opposition to constructing settlements in the Occupied Territories, Palestinians’ right to have a state and non-imposition of United States political model to Third World countries were the signs of this opposition.
Obama seems to be intelligently creating opportunities for the United States. But to stay level-headed and avoid exaggeration on Obama’s speech, I have to say Obama is not an angel who is wants to return the rights of Third World countries or countries in United States sphere of interest, or Palestinians. He has come to solve United States’ accumulated problems in the Arab world, Muslim countries and Middle East.
What is the message of Obama’s speech for Iran?
It showed that as much as Ahmadinejad’s language against United States in Bush’s era was a necessity –consciously or unconsciously- it will turn into a serious challenge for Obama and may be a threat to United States’ national interests.
Obama has come to solve the troubles caused by occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, international sanctions against Iran and pressurizing Western allies. He intends to solve the problems of his own country not the Muslim world.
That’s why currently we have an exceptional opportunity. We have lost many chances to reconstruct relations, but we shouldn’t miss the new opening created by Obama for our country.
Which of the four candidates for Iranian presidential elections can lay the groundwork for starting a new age of relations with West?
I believe that Mr. Mir Hosein Musavi is the best choice to pass this critical period. He has the required plans, knowledge and administrative experience to weather crises. I totally believe that Mr. Musavi can bring a better future for Iran. He can turn challenges into opportunities and opportunities into leverage, and it seems that United States has no problem with this. We have negotiated with Americans during George Bush’s presidency, so there is no reason we couldn’t enter talks with Obama. This should encourage us to grasp the opportunity created by Obama and engage in talks. Otherwise the international community and the public opinion will come to the conclusion that Iran is more willing to talks with warmonger rather than civil, dovish leaders and that is concerning.
First of all let me say I am against a group who believes United States has not yet taken an actual step, since change of policy starts with change of language, as Mr. Ahmadinejad’s policy shifts started with a change in his rhetoric and gradually moved towards change of actual policies and strategies. But it is too soon to judge Obama’s speech in Cairo and accuse him for not actualizing his promises. He has been in office for only 120 days.
As to the Muslim world, Obama is criticizing United States’ past record and regards it as a threat to his country’s national interests. An instance is when he referred to overthrow of Mosaddeq’s democratic government with involvement of United States, despite the claim that it supports democracy in Third World countries. Obama is in fact challenging United States’ public opinion in order to prepare them for radical changes in foreign policies.
Were there any clear messages in his speech for Israel and Muslim countries?
It surprises me that Obama started his challenge with Israel quite early. I thought he would move towards that challenge in his second presidential term. However, with a hawkish government ruling Israel Obama had no other choice. His direct opposition to constructing settlements in the Occupied Territories, Palestinians’ right to have a state and non-imposition of United States political model to Third World countries were the signs of this opposition.
Obama seems to be intelligently creating opportunities for the United States. But to stay level-headed and avoid exaggeration on Obama’s speech, I have to say Obama is not an angel who is wants to return the rights of Third World countries or countries in United States sphere of interest, or Palestinians. He has come to solve United States’ accumulated problems in the Arab world, Muslim countries and Middle East.
What is the message of Obama’s speech for Iran?
It showed that as much as Ahmadinejad’s language against United States in Bush’s era was a necessity –consciously or unconsciously- it will turn into a serious challenge for Obama and may be a threat to United States’ national interests.
Obama has come to solve the troubles caused by occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, international sanctions against Iran and pressurizing Western allies. He intends to solve the problems of his own country not the Muslim world.
That’s why currently we have an exceptional opportunity. We have lost many chances to reconstruct relations, but we shouldn’t miss the new opening created by Obama for our country.
Which of the four candidates for Iranian presidential elections can lay the groundwork for starting a new age of relations with West?
I believe that Mr. Mir Hosein Musavi is the best choice to pass this critical period. He has the required plans, knowledge and administrative experience to weather crises. I totally believe that Mr. Musavi can bring a better future for Iran. He can turn challenges into opportunities and opportunities into leverage, and it seems that United States has no problem with this. We have negotiated with Americans during George Bush’s presidency, so there is no reason we couldn’t enter talks with Obama. This should encourage us to grasp the opportunity created by Obama and engage in talks. Otherwise the international community and the public opinion will come to the conclusion that Iran is more willing to talks with warmonger rather than civil, dovish leaders and that is concerning.