The trouble with Tehran

With the November 24 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency fast approaching, and efforts to find a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear issue whirring through the air at a furious pace, there's been a steady flow of variously disappointing, unsettling, surprising and even encouraging developments which, sadly, have received little attention from most news organizations here at home.

First of all (and despite my hopes to the contrary), Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his ancillary officials have demonstrated through their recent misbehavior that they are either woefully amateurish statesmen who are stubbornly unwilling to improve, or are, instead, completely and dangerously unhinged.

At the precise moment that Ahmadinejad was receiving strong editorial, diplomatic, and IAEA support for his contention that U.S. accusations against Iran were unfounded and inflammatory, he began an inexplicable series of belligerent, defiant statements, revelations, and actions which have lent credence to his detractors, and distressed even Iranian allies in the global community.

Further lie was given to Ahmadinejad's statesmanship and promise of a "modern" Persian state by his cabinet's unapologetic rebuttal of a weekend U.N. resolution expressing "serious concern" about Iranian human rights violations. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi disingenuously stated,

"It is politically motivated and this selfish attitude threatens human rights in the world. This resolution is part of an attempt to divert public opinion and its content has nothing to do with the real situation in Iran."

Encouragingly, however, the Iranian President's behavior has generated a considerable amount of opposition reaction at the highest government levels in Tehran, including concerns among leading clerics. According to The Guardian:

In a sign of divisions at the top of the clerical establishment, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has until now supported Mr Ahmadinejad, said "irregularities" in the government's behaviour would not be tolerated.

This should be taken by the Bush Administration as an optimistic sign, and a window of opportunity to work diplomatically within the U.N. in a way that will not bully and sanction, but instead will appeal to those moderate elements who can help enforce some checks on Ahmadinejad from inside Tehran.

Indeed, the White House's familiar, aggressive approach thus far has only exacerbated tensions. The obvious importance of changing that approach is underscored by an Iranian source, who warned that

western threats of economic sanctions or military action against Iran were strengthening Mr Ahmadinejad at the expense of moderate conservatives, liberals and reformers.

It doesn't get much clearer than that - and the Administration would be wise to take note.

Mr. Bush should also carefully contemplate the weakened state of credibility in which the U.S. now finds itself, thanks to his duplicity and ineptitude in Iraq, and not be quite so arrogant with his bluster when alternative approaches to Tehran exist - and they certainly seem to. As evidenced by recent global skepticism toward "laptop computer evidence" of Iran's nuclear weapons plans, the American reputation for reliability has been seriously compromised by our Commander in Chief.

In addition, U.S. forgiveness of Pakistani subterfuge in Iran has come under scrutiny by India, itself a key player that is passionately divided on the Iranian question. At times, world opinion seems to be that, much like Ahmadinejad, Mr. Bush and his ancillary officials are either woefully amateurish statesmen who are stubbornly unwilling to improve, or they are, instead, completely and dangerously unhinged.

In fairness, though, Friday's announcement by the President that he supports Russia's compromise plan is a tremendous sign from Mr. Bush that perhaps, just perhaps, the Administration is beginning to realize that a slower pace with Iran might be the smart move after all. And whether that realization is because of a spurt of sudden wisdom, or simply abject resignation to the low political standing of the current neo-con game plan, a more measured response can only be a good thing.

There are hopeful indications that a diplomatic solution can be reached among all the nations involved in Iran's nuclear issue without further military threat - or escalation. It may be a fortuitous coincidence that the Administration enters this week's IAEA meeting battered and bruised, doubted and scorned, in that it lessens the chance that the drastic step of U.S.-backed Security Council condemnation and sanctions will be voted into effect.

Nevertheless, the recent glimpses Ahmadinejad has given us into his recklessly aggressive vision for Iran have raised the stakes considerably higher. That's why it is more important now than ever to try and supervise (and, if necessary, restrain) the excesses of the Iranian President through diplomatic negotiation, and policies that provide support for moderate factions within the Iranian government itself.

It's my fervent hope that the White House will finally recognize the delicacy of this issue - and that this time around, it will abandon its unproductive lust for confrontation.