Iran to Obama: Let's Tango!

 You have to be cautious about predicting political change in Iran, but the last week brought two welcome signs.

 The first was the announcement by moderate former President Mohammed Khatami that he would be a candidate for president once again in the June Iranian elections.

 This is important for what it says about the mood of Iranians as well as the thinking inside the regime. It means moderate tendencies may be making a comeback in the ruling circles. After his stunning populist victory in 1997, Khatami spearheaded Iran's significant improvement of relations with the West, and sought to improve ties with the U.S. as well. It turned out neither Washington nor the Iranian regime as a whole was ready.  Bush destroyed any possibility of leveraging Khatami's moderation when, after 9/11, and despite Iran's cooperation in the U.S. war in Afghanistan, Bush labeled Iran as part of the "axis of evil" along with Saddam's Iraq and North Korea. So much for being an Iranian moderate, and in 2005 we got hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Khatami's place. 

 Khatami left office terribly discouraged by the hard-line directions in Tehran and Washington and would not return as a candidate if he didn't feel the winds blowing in a more favorable direction. I wouldn't be surprised if President Obama's reachout to Iran and the Muslim world was an important factor in his decision. Khatami knows that he disappointed the legions of Iranian reformers who expected him to be more courageous in facing down hard-liners obstructing his relative liberalism and tolerance. But by running for office again he seems to recognize that his reformist base remains very much alive--and is desperate for him to lead it once again. Perhaps even more important, it is unthinkable that Khatami would take such a bold step if he did not receive a green light for doing so from Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. Though Khamenei traditionally covers for the hard-line factions, he is more of a balancing figure than his political associations indicate. If Khamenei is agreeing to the possibility that Khatami will be elected president of Iran once again, it means that he is prepared to see Iran move in a more moderate direction--and that will inevitably mean toward reconciliation with the U.S.  That's an optimistic reading of Khatami's announcement, but a plausible one.

 The second welcome sign was Ahmadinejad's speech yesterday marking the 30th anniversary of the Iranian revolution. He specifically responded to Obama's olive branch to Iran's regime, saying: 

 The new US government has announced that it wants to create change and follow the path of talks. It's very clear that true change should be fundamental and not tactical. It's clear that the Iranian nation will welcome genuine changes. The Iranian nation is prepared to talk. However, these talks should be held in a fair atmosphere in which there is mutual respect.

 Much of the press coverage has emphasized this part of Ahmadinejad's speech.  I agree that it is important but it should be pointed out that this is not a new Iranian position. Iran has long said that it would agree to have a dialogue with the U.S. if only Washington would fundamentally change its attitude toward Iran. In his speech, Ahmadinejad also went on to balance the conciliatory words with the usual diatribes against the U.S. and Israel. He said George Bush should be put on trial for killing "one million people" in Iraq and that "the criminal leaders of the Zionist regime" should also be tried by the nations of the world. As Joe Klein and I have each mentioned earlier, here and here, Ahmadinejad is a politician running for re-election this year.

 Nonetheless, I think Ahmadinejad's conciliatory words are an important gesture. They represent Iran's first pointed response to Obama's reachout, by which I mean he specifically referred to Obama's olive branch and gave a response to it. He chose to do so on a date of immense importance for Iranians--the date of Iran's true independence as a nation-- as well as a date of great symbolism in the U.S.-Iranian relationship--the date of the overthrow of the American-backed shah. Sheer away the rhetoric, and the important words were "The Iranian nation is prepared to talk." Talking, by definition, holds great risks for the Iranian regime. It well understands that talks with the U.S. will go nowhere--and could lead to war if they fail--unless Iran is prepared to make considerable changes in its behavior. It knows that no U.S. president will bring Iran fully back into the community of nations if the regime continues to undermine regional stability through its hostility to Israel and support of militant armed groups and various terrorist factions. I doubt that the powers inside the regime have fully decided on their approach to Obama's moves, but Ahmadinejad is indicating that they are prepared to contemplate serious changes in their policies.

 What I found more interesting in Ahmadinejad's speech was his emphasis on other themes that can be read as preparing Iranians for a diplomatic breakthrough with the "Great Satan" as well as signaling to Obama that Iran is a mature country that is ready for such a breakthrough. I have no idea if Ahmadinejad consciously intended to send those messages, but it is possible to see them nonetheless.

 Ahmadinejad's mention of Obama's reachout came in scarcely one sound byte near the end of the nationally televised speech. Apart from a few customary references like those to the 12th Imam, the remarks were relatively free of religious rhetoric. There were no direct or indirect words of praise for the likes of Hamas or Hizballah, or even a mention of the recent war on Gaza in which Iran backed Hamas facing Israeli forces. The great portion of the speech was devoted to a long and detailed description of the technical advances Iran has made as a nation in the 30 years since the Revolution.  He ticked off statistics showing improvements in almost every field, from literacy and education to production of aluminum and medical research.

 I remembered Obama's words in the unprecedented reachout to the Muslim world in his inaugural address, which was closely followed in the Middle East:

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. 

 If Ahmadinejad was trying to show Obama that Iran IS a nation that builds rather than destroys, his words could also be read, in the context, as a message to Iranians that developing Iran is more important to the regime that fighting Israel. That is precisely the sea-change in Iranian thinking and behavior that can make a rapprochement with the U.S. possible.

 Ahmadinejad said something else that seemed to be a fine way of rationalizing a rapprochement with the "Great Satan" after so many years of hostility and anti-American propaganda. Essentially, Ahmadinejad said that in the long struggle between Iran and the U.S., Iranians have won!

 For twenty-seven years they constantly threatened our nation with resolutions and military attack, particularly in the past few years they were constantly threatening us, arranging military formations and attack formations. Do you remember when during Mr. Bush's administration they had a military expedition to our region; they officially announced that first Afghanistan, then Iraq and then Iran. They threatened us a number of times. They even brought their war material, they had war formation. They beat the drums of war everyday to the extent that the shameless Zionists were threatening to attack and terrorize. And it is interesting that they used to give timings: that such and such a day at four in the morning, five in the afternoon, at midnight. And they were expecting the Iranian nation to surrender. 

 But I would like to ask, what is happening now? How are the conditions now? In what condition are we now? I have to announce this in a loud voice: Thanks to God's grace, God's kindness, and the resistance of the Iranian nation, today the shadow of threat has been removed from the lives of the Iranian nation.

 I would like to ask everyone around the world. They were all united and could not overcome the Iranian nation and the Iranian nation dominated its will over them. From now on which power in the world can dare threaten the Iranian nation? It is impossible for anyone to think that he can threaten the Iranian nation. I formally announce that the Iranian nation today has turned into a true and genuine superpower.

 If Iran is victorious, and if Iran has become a superpower, the logic might go, then there's no shame in achieving a new relationship together on the basis of this newly available "mutual respect." One thing seems certain: Iran's leaders understand they have a new American suitor, and that before long, they'll have to accept or decline an invitation to the big dance. 

 --By Scott MacLeod/Cairo