American Iranian Council!
The US government has authorized the American Iranian Council, a US-based NGO chaired by Houshang Amirahmadi to open an office in Iran.
Morteza Kazemian, political analyst comments on this issue.
The US government has authorized the American Iranian Council, a US based NGO chaired by Houshang Amirahmadi to open an office in Iran. Although this decision is unprecedented in the history of Tehran-Washington relations over the past three decades since the Islamic Revolution (1979) but it is unlikely to be very effective in eliminating the disputes and crisis in relations between the two countries.
Amirahmadi, a professor at the University of New Jersey and one of the most prominent figures working to reestablish Iran-US ties, said AIC had been established “to create a better understanding of economic, social, cultural and political issues and diplomatic relations between the two countries.” He said AIC was also a means for transparent dialogue at acceptable level in the world today. (Interview with Radio Zamaneh).
Although Amirahmadi has said the office would have no political and diplomatic assignment, however a brief report appearing on AIC website has stressed that the Council “will use this great opening to more effectively advance its mission of promoting dialogue and understanding between the peoples and governments of Iran and the United States at a time of immense promises and perils for their relations."
AIC presence in Iran will promote people-to-people exchange and educational programs as well as facilitate policy dialogue through roundtables, conferences and timely informative and analytical publications, it said. Using its office in Iran, AIC will also help make policies on both sides better understood and more transparent than is currently the case. It said by establishing an office in Iran, AIC will be able to significantly build upon its accomplishments thus far and extensively aid the process of reconciliation by building an active pro-engagement constituency. Promoting a diplomatic approach to resolving US-Iran disputes will eventually lead to the normalization of relations between the two great nations, it added. Also, AIC Executive Director Brent Lollis said the opening of AIC office in Tehran would be a first step to institutionalize normal relations between Iran and the United States.
In another interview (with Radio Farda) Amirahmadi rejected any link between opening of AIC office and a US interest section office in Tehran but said if Tehran authorized AIC to run an office it would encourage US officials to go ahead with the interest section initiative.
By contemplating on the related news over the past couple of months as well as Amirahmadi’s Iran visits (on two occasions at least) and his meetings with power holders and examining the “pulses” and remarks made by IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his recent visit to the US we will realize that the decision by AIC to open an office in Tehran has some special connotation.
Amirahmadi’s shuttles between Iran and US and his free and undisturbed meetings and interviews (even with pro-government media in Iran) clearly demonstrated signs of a “resolve”. During his recent visit to New York to attend the UN General Assembly, Ahmadinejad displayed this resolve to some extent. The IRI president tried to convey his meaningful “message” on normalization of Tehran-Washington relations to US statesmen and public opinion through his interviews or speeches.
But it seems that both advocates such as Amirahmadi and the Neocons in Iran have forgotten that settlement of disputes with Washington, as the White House leaders have reiterated time and again, would depend on resolution of certain critical issues in relations between Iran and US, namely the nuclear issue, the Middle East peace process (Israel and Palestine), Tehran’s alleged support for terrorism and finally the question of human rights. If we overlook the last item, which unfortunately always “suddenly” disappears and is sidelined, settlement of other issues would be tantamount to a fundamental shift in Iran’s political system.
If the Iranian Neocons are capable of settling such issues at any cost in order to survive and remain in full power of the oil government and if they can change so much then there would be no need for creation of such associations as American Iranian Council. This would be the peak of a pragmatist approach by the ruling camp to correct its strategy and ideology at the highest level possible and justify this shift for the social class supporting it. Obviously occurrence of such an event cannot be analyzed within the decisions of a democratic government because it would have taken a decision of such importance after dialogue with the political currents active in the country and by actually preferring “national interests” to the “interests of the government” or interests of power factions. A trend other than this would be regarded a “political game” and action by the hegemonic current in the power structure to survive and further serve the interests of the administration whose costs would not be little.
Another option is for the IRI to fail – or refuse for any reason – to undo the most important knots in relations with the White House that were mentioned above or for Washington to pick a different project in interacting with Tehran for certain reasons. Then again, the operation of AIC type associations would fail to significantly affect the main decisions and strategies of the two governments.
Efforts to change the outlook of the public opinion too would not be important because basically the peoples of Iran and America are not hostile towards each other. This is something reiterated by Ahmadinejad time and again and he has drawn a line between the American people and government. Interestingly, a similar approach has been adopted by senior officials at the White House vis-à-vis the line people and government of Iran.
It seems that the activities of AIC officials as underlined by them directly and indirectly, are aimed at “forging dialogue and understanding between the two governments” and opening a new window and opportunity for exchange of views and “messages”.
The outcome of the next presidential elections in the United States will undoubtedly greatly affect efforts of this nature and from this angel everything will be on hold until further notice unless the Neocons in Iran may be in a hurry to settle Tehran-Washington disputes for certain reasons (such as the presidential elections in 2009)…