Iran - America: The Time of Changes

Sami Kleib - al-Akhbar newspaper

The Iranian-American relations have entered the time of major changes. Today and tomorrow all barricades are to fall. US and Iranian officials meet directly and for two days in Geneva, Afterwards, Iranians meet with the Russian for two consecutive days as well.

Tehran has imposed itself as the first side in the international equation of the Middle East region; an equation that drives Iran allies, from Syrian to Iraq, Yemen, and Hizbullah, to feel highly confident in the nearing victory of their axis. And the most salient demonstration of this confidence lies in the recent speech of Hizbullah's Secretary General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

The very fact that the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran have become direct talks is a major event per se in the region. "The biggest devil" and the "state of evil" are sitting together on the same table. The meeting is taking place on the level of the deputies of the foreign ministers of two states. It will be no surprise if the foreign ministers meet afterwards. Neither will it be if Rouhani and Obama do. Ever since their historic phone call last September, positive effects keep coming. We are then in front of a huge transformation in the Middle East region.

Perhaps we are in front of a redrawing of new alliances and new roles, which shall leave an impact on many dossiers, namely in Syria and Iran. It is normal then that announcing the surprising holding of those meetings was the fruit of many mediations that were kept away from the limelight.

Oman, Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey, and others participated in the mediation efforts. It is normal as well that other meetings took place between both sides on the level of experts. The dossiers are multiple and thorny. Some more than others. Neither Iran nor the US will take the risk and hold public bilateral meetings without previous agreements on a number of these files.

The bomb is not the problem

The nuclear bomb is not the problem. The US, "Israel," and the West knew it. Iran itself has announced many times its refusal to produce bombs. Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei has issued a Fatwa hereby banning their production because they are against the religion and ethics. He said that if Iran wanted to produce them, nobody would have prevented it from doing so. This is true. The problem then lies in Iran's possession of the nuclear technology and not the bomb. This technology makes Iran a fierce rival against many western states, on top of which France. If, for instance, Tehran and Paris competed on producing an electric reactor with nuclear energy, Iran would win because the costs and the workforce are more competitive. The scientific progress in Iran overdoes that in neighboring countries by 11, 3% according to the latest report issued by Reuters. Iran won while it is under sanctions. It reached the sky with its satellites and controlled the earth and the sea with its tremendous ballistic capacities.

What changed then?

It seems now that the US and the West are convinced of the necessity that Iran preserves a good level of nuclear technology. The West accepted for now what it refused before. The policy of "the warrior flexibility" which Sayyed Khamenei has touted kind of bore fruit. This is when the Leader, as flexibly, was saying that negotiations would not lead anywhere. He kept intensifying attack on America and supporting negotiators. President Rouhani and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs kept rekindling the indicators of openness. The flexibility of the warrior combined to his maneuver.

What's the result?

On the regional level, Iran has become the most important state for America and the NATO-led west in facing terrorism. Military readings and studies conducted in the most trusted US centers all tilt in this direction. Security will be anchored during the next stage the more terrorism proves to be requiring a more entrenched regional and international cooperation. Later on, this cooperation must certainly include, and publically, the Syrian army.

Iran and America may agree on their roles in the region of East Asia. the region will be very vital for Washington in the coming decades. Some are speaking of a possibility that it becomes the key center after the Middle East, especially after America gives up the Gulf oil as of 2018.
One must notice the number of summits Iran has held with Asian leaders during the past months to understand the reason of the US interest.

Cooperation must later include, publically, Syrian army

All tension hotbeds in the Middle East and the Gulf need a US-Iranian agreement. Some of this agreement has become reality. Iraq is a good example. The Lebanese government and the security plan are not far from this agreement. There are talks about US and Russian advice given to Riyadh on the necessity of rapprochement with Tehran. It has been even said that Obama himself had conveyed this wish during his last visit to Saudi Arabia. The US President has moved from the phase of isolating Iran to the phase of double containing Iran and Saudi Arabia and the other allies in the Gulf. A little Gulf concern that the US administration has started to pay a lot of attention to the future of its rapprochement with Iran is justified though.

It was a huge change to see US State Secretary, John Kerry, reading, from the heart of Beirut, a written text hereby calling Iran and Hizbullah to find a solution in Syria. It was not a futile matter. The text was written, indeed. Kerry read it literally. The text was written directly after the Syrian elections. Therefore, it was not usual. The Middle East will be probably getting used to many unusual things in the coming time.

It is something that the Prince of Kuwait Sheikh Sobah al-Ahmad al-Jaber goes to Tehran. There have been visits between Tehran and UAE before on the level of the Foreign Ministers, It is here important to note that this Gulf state, which demands the recuperation of three islands from Iran, has effectuated a 16-billion-dollar trade activity with Tehran in 2013. Moreover, we may also add to the abovementioned the remarkable Qatari tendency towards Iran, or the visit of Iranian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hussein Amir Abdel Lahyan, to Yemen, and then his meeting with Hamas' Khaled Mashaal in Doha.

It wasn't usual either to see Turkey facilitating the US-Iranian meetings. Iran's former representative to the UN Ali Khorm said that the unofficial negotiations that happened recently in Istanbul would leave a positive effect on the next round of talks between Iran and P5+1 and that they would contribute to helping both sides reach an agreement. It is important to keenly follow up on Rouhani's Turkey visit and the Turkish speech following the visit.

Moreover, it is meaningful that Egypt, now allying with Saudia Arabia, sends Iran an invitation to partake in the swearing-ceremony of President Abdel Fattah Sisi. There are information about lines and mediations to enhance the Egyptian-Iranian relations. The interest is reciprocated. It is up to Tehran, which still has reservation regarding Sisi, to be open to him, just like it is up to it to keep the lines open with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas Movement.
Furthermore, It is quite significant that Head of Iranian Cultural Heritage Institution, Massoud Sultani, said that the number of American tourists who visited Iran during this period has increased by 20 times. In addition, there are many economic and banking steps that were agreed upon between Tehran and Washington. Moreover, it was no coincidence that Obama decides to postpone the oil sanctions on Iran for six months.

Also, it is remarkable to see European delegations flocking to Iran looking for economic deals.

How about Syria?

Iran and Russia were the most clear in supporting the recent presidential polls in Syria. Since year one of the war in and on Syria, Sayyed Khamenei sent letters to make the rivals of Syria understand that Iran has a solid stance supporting the regime of President Bashar Assad. He intensified the messages supporting the Syrian command when he appeared after a "wavering" of the administration of former president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.

The center of the Iranian decision towards Syria is well known. In this very center, the position has become stronger than before, especially after the implication of Hizbullah in the fights. Tehran dispatched Head of the Foreign Affairs and Security House committee, Alaeddine Bouroujordi, to Syria, to support the presidential elections and their results. President Rouhani was the first to congratulate his Syria counterpart on his re-election for a third term. Tehran is feeling strong and righteous about its position from Syria after the polls, but also after the remarkable military progress made by the Syria army and its allies on the ground.
The possibility of an Iranian settlement with the Americans over the future of Syria preoccupies some of anti-Assad analysts.

He who listened to the senior Iranian officials in the few past months realizes that this is just fiction. Iran did not just get involved in all this military, financial, and political support for President Assad to give up on him in a "moment of victory." The depiction of victory was mentioned by more than an Iranian official recently, just like it was tackled in the latest speech of Hizbullah's Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

Besides, Syria's allies, namely Iran and Hizbullah, admit, before the others, that if it weren't for the steadfastness of the Syrian army, no party, from Iran or Hizbullah or even Russia, would have been able to move from the phase of difficult defense to the threshold of utter victory. Until now, Iran has abstained, in all its negotiations with all the western states, from opening other dossiers than the nuclear one. "We first end this one then we move to other files," Iran says. Accurate information confirm that many important offers were made to the Iranian command to change its position from Assad. The answer was always the same: "Damascus to us is like Tehran." This was directly said by Iranian officials to the Syrian command. It was also said by the Russian command. "Defending Damascus is like defending Moscow."

Now, as the nuclear deal is about to enter its biggest stage, may one think of solutions in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, and to other thorny dossiers? Shall we wait for the Saudi-Iranian ties' détente, which is still hard to reach, according to the recent speech of Sayyed Nasrallah?

Certainly yes. There will be solutions because cooperation on the level of fighting terrorism and on of guaranteeing major interest in the region requires changes and solutions and agreements. There are talks of an Iranian political document on Syria that aims to widen the base of ruling in the future. This is an important matter, under the condition that the powers of the president remain unscathed.
Will the solutions take place quickly without hurdles?

Certainly not. Negotiations may stumble and they may not. Many factors may have an effect to leave or a role to assume. "Israel" who's now worried and who's relations are severed with the US, is observing and planning and may embarrass everybody with an uncalculated adventure. For its part, the Gulf, which is worried from the Iranian role and the future of the American-Iranian rapprochement, is looking for the means to change the course of the US winds.
Everything is possible. Undoubtedly, the region is entering, as of today, the stage of major changes. It is not usual that the Americans and the Iranians sit around one table for agreement, This is per se the first watershed.