[Mb-civic] Iranians See Talks With U.S. as Historic - Washington Post

[William Swiggard]

Iranians See Talks With U.S. as Historic
Desire for Improving Ties Grew With Population Too Young to Recall 
Hostage Crisis

By Karl Vick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, March 20, 2006; A09

TEHRAN, March 19 -- Iran's acceptance of direct talks with the United 
States over Iraq is being regarded among Iranians as a major foreign 
policy development, a historic if still tentative departure from 27 
years of official enmity that held the government of the "Great Satan" 
as one to be spoken against, but never with.

"America's objective in inviting Iran for talks is to send a message to 
Islamic movements throughout the world that Iran gave in to Washington 
after 27 years of resistance," Kayhan, a hard-line daily newspaper, 
warned Saturday in an editorial that analysts said underscored the 
significance of Iran's shift.

"Announce as soon as possible that you won't have any dialogue with the 
U.S. and avoid entering a destructive trap that has been prepared for 
Islamic Iran," the editorial continued.

Vehement opposition to the United States has been a pillar of Iran's 
theocratic system since 1979, the year an angry population overthrew the 
monarch Washington had helped install 26 years earlier in a coup 
engineered with the help of the CIA. From the U.S. side, a similar 
enmity was embedded in policy when student militants overran the 
red-brick U.S. Embassy in Tehran, taking 52 Americans hostage and 
holding them for more than a year.

The United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran, and over the 
next quarter-century both countries consistently found a reliable 
villain in the other.

Inside Iran, however, an appetite for rapprochement grew along with a 
population whose youthful majority had no memory of the revolution.

In 2002, a poll found that three-quarters of Iranians surveyed favored 
talks with the United States. The pollster was thrown in jail, but the 
reality drove a quiet competition between Iran's two rival political forces.

"Whoever could take the prize" of U.S. rapprochement would, it was 
widely believed, dominate Iranian politics for the foreseeable future, 
said Mehdi Karrubi, a moderate cleric who was speaker of the last 
parliament dominated by reformers.

The competition, however, had paralyzed the effort: Neither side would 
allow the other to reach out to the United States without risking 
accusations of betraying the Islamic revolution.

That changed last year, when conservative clerics edged reformists out 
of government, unifying Iran's elaborate ruling structure for the first 
time in nearly a decade. It also cleared the way for the opening to 
Washington, and even reformists urged the conservatives to act.

"This might be a historic irony, but it's true the state is in 
'harmony,' " said Mostafa Tajzadeh, a prominent reformist theoretician, 
speaking before the announcement of the direct talks. "No time has been 
more convenient for talks between the two countries. We are less 
sensitive than at any time since the revolution."

A few conservatives quietly urged the same. Behind the scenes of Iran's 
conservative establishment, insiders whispered about the prospect of 
negotiations.

When the announcement came Thursday, it was pointedly public. Ali 
Larijani, who heads the Supreme National Security Council, announced the 
decision to parliament, then summoned American correspondents to 
interviews. With a level gaze, he said Iran would accept the invitation 
of the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, to talk about Iraq.

Analysts and politicians said the decision showed every sign of carrying 
the weight of Iran's ultimate authority, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. And 
some conservatives fell in line.

"It is obvious that when the Iranian officials present an idea, it is a 
calculated act," said Habibollah Asgaroladi, a leader of the Islamic 
Coalition Society, according to the ISNA news agency. "Considering the 
problems in the region, there is this necessity to solve problems 
through negotiations."

No dates have been set for the talks, and Iran has yet to name its 
delegation, which Larijani said would be of a rank "appropriate" to the 
task. Both Iran and the United States publicly emphasize that the 
subject will be limited to the teetering situation in Iraq, where both 
have deep interests and influence.

U.S. officials underscore this adamantly, openly arguing that Iran is 
opening a channel to the United States in hopes of siphoning off 
pressure it faces from the U.N. Security Council about the intentions of 
its nuclear program.

Some Iranian politicians acknowledge as much. "Although the talks will 
be over Iraq, these talks would have certain impacts on other regional 
developments and also on nuclear diplomacy," said Reza Talainik, head of 
parliament's national security and foreign affairs committee, ISNA reported.

Others describe the opening as a first step toward reducing Iran's 
estrangement from the West. The United States long has labeled Iran the 
world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. But Tajzadeh said he feared 
the escalating rhetoric over Iran's nuclear program, which many suspect 
is a front for acquiring atomic weapons, was building toward military 
action.

"The public image the U.S. has made of Iran is a monster. They have to 
do something, at least break a horn," he said. "There is only a small 
chance. This is negotiation.

"Of course, in the short term," he said, "it would not be in my party's 
favor. But in the long term, it would be in the favor of the Iranian 
nation and our party."

Naser Hadian-Jazy, a political scientist at Tehran University, said 
Iranian commentators of all stripes see the new opening as the most 
significant public approach to Washington since 1979, despite mid-level 
diplomatic contacts through third parties in advance of the invasions of 
Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Both the supporters and those who are critical have made this point 
clear," he said.

The public also appeared to welcome news of talks. "I think both sides 
should take advantage of this opportunity. They should be friends," said 
Kobra Mehdipour, 68, clutching her chador against the March wind.

Asked who in Iran might feel otherwise, she said, "There might be some 
illiterate people in the provinces who want to be friends with other 
countries but might be under the influence of some kind of propaganda."

Karrubi, the moderate cleric, moved from supporting the 1979 embassy 
takeover to urging rapprochement with Washington. He said that was the 
challenge for the governments as well.

"Both sides should forget the rhetoric used in the media and politics. 
They should put it aside," he said. "They should create something new."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031901026.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060320/435a08ca/attachment-0001.htm