16 December 2008: Middle East Times
By Claude Salhani
When it comes to foreign policy the United States has much to learn from European diplomats who tend to have a better understanding of the wants, needs and fears of others.
One of the first hurdles conflict interveners encounter when attempting to establish dialogue between parties in conflict is the fact that all sides ardently believe they are right. In some instances the parties concerned are so convinced they are right that they bring their god into the conflict, claiming that whatever sins, lies or atrocities they are about to commit, or have committed, will be or was carried out in the name of their god.
Take the conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States. This dispute has been going on for the better part of 30 years. During these three decades there has been very little contact between the U.S. government and the religious leadership in Iran, with both sides standing firm on their beliefs.
Not only do both sides think they are right, but both sides are fully convinced they are. Both the Iranian theocratic leadership and the American president are, without hesitation, convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are the "good guys," and the other side is the "bad guys."
Both Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and U.S. President George W. Bush claim to have had conversations with God. And both say that God talks to them. And although both sides claim that they are in favor of dialogue over armed conflict, there has been little dialogue.
The only exchange of ideas has been carried out at the propaganda level and the only dialogue between Tehran and Washington has been the trading of harsh words over the airwaves.
As keynote speaker at the International Institute for Strategic Studies' 5th Manama Dialogue conference in the capital of Bahrain last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates pointed the finger at Iran and Syria, accusing them, particularly Iran, of meddling in affairs of other countries in the region.
Without a doubt, the accusations made by the U.S. secretary of Defense are correct. Iran meddles to various degrees in the affairs of neighboring Iraq; Iran meddles in the affairs of Lebanon through its support of Hezbollah; Iran meddles in the affairs of the Palestinians through its support of Hamas.
Likewise, Syria, too, meddles in the affairs of Lebanon to varying degrees. But as a Swiss diplomat attending the Bahrain conference commented to me shortly after Gates' intervention: "What about the U.S. intervention in Iraq? Is that not meddling in the affairs of other countries?"
One could call it that.
"You want to know the trouble with the American attitude?" asked the Swiss. "They don't know how to listen to the needs and concerns of others," he said. "Iran, too, has major security concerns which need to be taken into consideration."
Indeed, say what you want about Iran; call it a member of the "axis of evil," as Bush did; criticize its regime for its dismal track record when it comes to human rights; denounce its support of terrorist organizations and its attempts to destabilize other countries in the region, nevertheless, this does not diminish the fact that the Islamic Republic has some very serious security concerns. No doubt, some of those concerns are quite legitimate. And as such, their concerns deserve to be heard.
Two major events in the Islamic Republic's recent history have scarred the Iranian leadership. More likely than not, it is those two major developments in the region that frightened the Iranians into developing their nuclear capabilities.
First was the ignoble war launched against them by then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and in which about half a million Iranian soldiers lost their lives. Indeed, Iran came very close to losing that war altogether. A good percentage of Iraq's arms came from the West. Hoping that Baghdad would carry out the Western powers' dirty work against the Iranian regime the United States, France, Britain and others, sent Saddam practically limitless amounts of weaponry.
And second was the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Tehran's thinking was that if the United States was bold enough to march all the way to Baghdad, it could as easily march on Tehran.
That latest incident spooked the Iranians possibly more than the eight-year war they fought against Iraq.
The Bush administration has consistently talked about U.S. national interests in the region without ever stopping to imagine that others, too, may have similar needs.
--
Claude Salhani is editor of the Middle East Times.
