Wednesday
May142008
The view from Tehran
The Woodrow Wilson Center held a discussion on “Iran, Iraq and the United States: The View from Tehran” with Selig S. Harrison, senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center and director of the Asia Program of the Center for International Policy. Harrison visited Tehran in February, his second visit in the past nine months, where he has met with advisors, specialists, scholars and diplomats. He said his two trips to Iran had a limited objective: “to explore the terms for a modus vivendi [an agreement to disagree] in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf.”
Harrison said that in Washington “the focus of most discussions on Iran is the nuclear issue,” but in Tehran “what they want to talk about is Iraq.” He said that when President George W. Bush “destroyed the Saddam regime in the name of democracy” Iran hoped that the Shiite majority “would come into its own and that Iraq would tilt toward Iran after the American occupation ended.” He said the president did not have the “Iran and the Shiite connection on his mind” and that Pentagon advisors “were not worried about empowering Iran.” But he says now “we have to give serious attention to Iran’s view of what should come next in Iran.”
Harrison said he has been told that Iran is “ready to cooperate in stabilizing Iraq” but only if the U.S. sets a timetable to gradually withdraw combat forces and accepts Iran’s “right to be a major player in postwar Baghdad.” He said Iran wants a “friendly” Iraq, meaning one dominated by the Shiite majority. The Iranian officials he met with envisioned a bargain where the U.S. would “end its current military offensive against Moqtada Al-Sadr [Shiite politician in Baghdad]” and Iran would “pledge not to give him missiles capable of hitting the Green Zone.”
Harrison said that the Iranian perception is that the U.S. is to blame for “stepping up the power struggle among Shiite factions” because they believe the U.S. hoped that moving up the provincial elections would increase Sunni strength in the councils. He said “we’ve started something that will be difficult to stop, but from Iran’s point of view ending the “Sunni Awakening” must go with cooperation in stabilizing Iraq.” His view is that if the U.S. withdraws and if Iraq tilts to Tehran, the Sunnis will have to “accept rule by the Shiite majority” and that the U.S. has a moral obligation to “join with Saudi Arabia to prevent their persecution.”
Harrison also provided a “word about the nuclear issue.” He said that “the U.S. is not serious about a negotiated settlement or it would not be insisting on the suspension of enrichment as a precondition for negotiations.” He said Iran was conned into suspension at the onset of negotiations in 2004, and that they will not be conned again. He believes that given a settlement in Iraq, a freeze on weapons-grade enrichment under IAEA inspections will be possible, provided the U.S. “is prepared to make a formal commitment not to use U.S. nuclear weapons in the Gulf.”
Harrison said that in Washington “the focus of most discussions on Iran is the nuclear issue,” but in Tehran “what they want to talk about is Iraq.” He said that when President George W. Bush “destroyed the Saddam regime in the name of democracy” Iran hoped that the Shiite majority “would come into its own and that Iraq would tilt toward Iran after the American occupation ended.” He said the president did not have the “Iran and the Shiite connection on his mind” and that Pentagon advisors “were not worried about empowering Iran.” But he says now “we have to give serious attention to Iran’s view of what should come next in Iran.”
Harrison said he has been told that Iran is “ready to cooperate in stabilizing Iraq” but only if the U.S. sets a timetable to gradually withdraw combat forces and accepts Iran’s “right to be a major player in postwar Baghdad.” He said Iran wants a “friendly” Iraq, meaning one dominated by the Shiite majority. The Iranian officials he met with envisioned a bargain where the U.S. would “end its current military offensive against Moqtada Al-Sadr [Shiite politician in Baghdad]” and Iran would “pledge not to give him missiles capable of hitting the Green Zone.”
Harrison said that the Iranian perception is that the U.S. is to blame for “stepping up the power struggle among Shiite factions” because they believe the U.S. hoped that moving up the provincial elections would increase Sunni strength in the councils. He said “we’ve started something that will be difficult to stop, but from Iran’s point of view ending the “Sunni Awakening” must go with cooperation in stabilizing Iraq.” His view is that if the U.S. withdraws and if Iraq tilts to Tehran, the Sunnis will have to “accept rule by the Shiite majority” and that the U.S. has a moral obligation to “join with Saudi Arabia to prevent their persecution.”
Harrison also provided a “word about the nuclear issue.” He said that “the U.S. is not serious about a negotiated settlement or it would not be insisting on the suspension of enrichment as a precondition for negotiations.” He said Iran was conned into suspension at the onset of negotiations in 2004, and that they will not be conned again. He believes that given a settlement in Iraq, a freeze on weapons-grade enrichment under IAEA inspections will be possible, provided the U.S. “is prepared to make a formal commitment not to use U.S. nuclear weapons in the Gulf.”
tagged 
Iran, Iraq, Shiite, Tehran, nuclear programs, sunni in News/Commentary, Pentagon
Iran, Iraq, Shiite, Tehran, nuclear programs, sunni in News/Commentary, Pentagon
Israeli President Shouted Down By Protesters
Israeli President Shimon Peres spoke today in favor of peace in the Middle East, but some in the audience likely couldn’t hear his call, as protesters within the room shouted him down. Three eruptions of protesters in the audience were stopped by police. The protesters shouted from tabletops and waved signs saying “stop the occupation” and “free gaza.” This all transpired at the Washington DC Convention Center, at a conference led by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Peres spoke of his commitment to the peace process, saying that one of the big challenges they all faced was to “disconnect religion from terror”, so extremists are not killing in the name of a higher power.
“History is on the side of peace... history’s on our side,” Peres said. He continued that the extremists leading Iran “are on the wrong side of history.” Peres acknowledged that most Iranians are good people whom he respects, but pointed his finger at extremists like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as being the problem.
“Iran is not threatened by anybody,” Peres said, and continued that Iran’s new missile programs are unnecessary. He said that Iran’s missile development and nuclear program are a threat to Israel “and the global community at large.”
Peres said that he trusts President Obama to make meaningful bilateral negotiations, and to contribute significantly to the peace process.