Obama less ideological: More flexibility & initiatives in U.S. Foreign Policy towards Iran
An interview with Dr. Johannes Reissner
Against the background of the future relations between Iran & the West, the U.S. elections were said to be the first crucial landmark for any forecast.
Now, as the new U.S. President is elected, Irdiplomacy spoke with Dr. Johannes Reissner about the extent of possible change in Iran-West relations and its linkages to the respective Presidential characters and roles.
Dr. Johannes Reissner is researcher at the German Institute for International & Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin, which consults German Bundestag (Parliament) and Bundesrat in Foreign Policy Affairs. Dr. Reissner is said to be a famous expert on Iran and the region, whose area of expertise also includes the relationship of the Islamic world and the West.
Mr. Reissner,
Even if not going so far to refer to Iran as the ‚pâshne âshil’ of the United States, as it was read in some Iranian newspapers these days, Iran, its Nuclear Issue & its position as a regional power undoubtedly affect some central interest and needs of the future U.S. government.
Therefore not least Dennis Ross, one of Obama’s Consultants on the Middle East, had recommended to strongly reshape U.S. Foreign Policy Strategy towards Iran.
Do you actually expect a ‚change’ in U.S. Foreign Policy towards Iran under the new President? And which key elements should a new U.S. Foreign Policy Strategy include for being successful?
A change of policy, more flexibility and initiatives I do expect. However, I am sceptical whether there will be a change in the fundamental attitude of U.S. policy vis-à-vis the Islamic Republic of Iran. In particular I doubt whether Dennis Ross is the right person in that respect. Obama is expected to be less ideological. He does not divide the world in good and evil. I can imagine that Obama will behave in a way which shows that he respects Iran as an important regional player. All in all, the expected change towards flexibility, multilateralism and initiatives implies the question for Iran whether ‘aggressive diplomacy’ as formulated by the Leader of the revolution in summer 2007 will be enough.
Can the Strategy on Iran be a chance for the new President and at last the United States to recover its credibility and reputation in the world? Will a new course f.e. affect the transatlantic relations with Europe. And what would that imply regarding EU’s Iran-Policy?
That depends on whether the new president will look after conflict resolution in the proper meaning of the word or just to keep conflicts down in order to promote American interests. A more appropriate understanding of today’s world and about America’s role in it can be expected. The U.S. has paid a high price for reacting too slowly to the changes which came with the end of Cold War. The temptation for the remaining superpower to follow the old lines was too great. Now, and in particular with respect to the Near- and Middle-East it became obvious that the capacities of the U.S. to implement its global strategic goals and ideas of order are limited. Multilateralism, cooperation and a serious understanding of regional dynamics are indispensable. A policy according to these lines could provide the Europeans with more room for manoeuvre, also with regard to Iran. But such shift in U.S. policy will also gain more legitimacy to demand more from the European partners.
The EU 3 negotiations on Iran’s Nuclear Issue has ended in deadlock. In your recent survey you recommend European Policy makers to approach Iran through a partnership-role in rebuilding regional balance & stability.
How do you think can Iran be involved into the attempts to stabilize the region?
In many ways, but that has to be found out in thorough discussions about what is possible. We should think in small and practical steps, and have a clear understanding of the interests and concerns of the partners in the region. One should not overlook the fact that Iran after the eight years of war with Iraq and the new geopolitical environment after the demise of the Soviet Union had managed to established working relations in a very difficult neighbourhood and despite foreign efforts to portray Iran as the main source of evil in the region. Many bilateral agreements between Iran and its neighbours have been reached. We need to grasp their impact for regional integration. To concentrate on small steps does not mean to neglect the search for broader regional security arrangements. The discussion of this issue can help to reach a better understanding of the basic and principle aspirations of the parties concerned. However, one should be aware of the danger that discussions of the basic aspirations and identities often work as excuse for not reaching necessary decisions.
The former Iranian President Khatami is a always welcomed guest. Most European media, as well as academics and politicians adulate the thoughtful gentle cleric.
All the more surprising, that ‚Anti-bomb-Activists’ started tumults in Vienna end of October while Ex-President Khatami spoke about the peaceful dialogue. How do you evaluate these?
The ‘Stopp-the-bomb’ activists are a kind of pro-Israel pressure group (…). Their reaction to Khatami’s visit was of no surprise for me at all. (…)
It is, by the way, most interesting to observe how quick discussions of political problems with Iran turn into discussions of Iran’s political system as such. In such a way non-thinking one may put oneself on the ‘axis of good’, but it only blocks ways to find political solutions. Arguments of responsible Israelis are often more differentiated.
Not just on his recent Germany visit Khatami said to be disclined to run for Iranian Presidency in 2009. Was that a tactical statement?
Whom do you expect to announce candidacy? And what skills or programmatic undertakings will be needed by the candidates, 1. not to be refused and 2. getting Iran’s citizen’s votes?
The presidential elections in Iran have still some time to come. I do not think that Khatami’s statement was just tactical. I agree with the argument, not only promoted by Kayhan, that Khatami’s candidature could work as an important incentive for the principal-ists to rally behind president Ahmadinejad. Who else besides Mehdi Karroubi will announce his candidature is impossible for me to say. Any candidate in order not to be refused must somehow harmonize with the Leader of the Revolution and the groups behind him. And in order to get the voices of Iran’s citizens, he must be able to give hope for the real and concrete concerns of the people. For an outside observer it is very difficult to detect political programs and what Iranian politicians want to do for the people and the country in concrete terms. However, I am confident that Iranians know to find out what they can expect from candidates and the elections.