| Submit your comments on this article |
| Hardliners’ victory in Iran to make diplomacy easier |
| 2004-02-18 |
| Now there’s one I haven’t heard before ... Western diplomats may not give Iran’s parliamentary election campaign high marks for democratic procedure but they acknowledge that the expected conservative sweep could make their jobs easier. Most embassies here say their task of negotiating with the Islamic republic on key areas of concern -- notably the nuclear and al-Qaeda issues -- will be simplified after conservatives cement control over all branches of the regime. Diplomats interviewed here were critical of the move by the Islamic Republic’s conservative Guardians Council to blacklist most reformist candidates from running in Friday’s polls. "Let’s not make any pretences here: the elections do not meet our standards of democracy," a senior Tehran-based European diplomat told AFP. "But the reformists are not, and have never been, pulling the strings. Whenever we get to the brunt of an issue, the conservatives have the final say. The regime has been giving us a clear signal: we can shake hands with the president, but if we want to get down to the nitty-gritty and have a result at the end, then we deal with conservatives." When foreign ministers from the European Union’s "big three" -- Britain, France and Germany -- sought to bring Iran into line with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) demands for greater transparency over its suspect nuclear programme, it was a prominent conservative they dealt with. Reformist President Mohammad But with reformists in the executive, diplomats have been spending many frustrating hours at the negotiating table with interlocutors who openly admit to wielding no real power. The talks that matter have been in private, with regime hardliners. After the polls, President Khatami and some of his cabinet colleagues could be the only reformers remaining in public office, unless they choose to resign or the new parliament promptly impeaches them. The mild-mannered cleric’s second and final term as president ends in mid-2005, and diplomats and analysts say they have already detected manoeuvres in the regime to see him replaced by Rowhani. "There will be no prizes for guessing who will win on Friday and who is being lined up to replace Khatami," joked another Western diplomat. "But I don’t think you’ll see many of us making a fuss and slamming the door." "These are issues that we have to deal with security people on -- in other words the conservatives," noted a diplomat from a close European ally of the United States. "The reformists have never been in the loop on these kind of things. Having conservatives running everything may not be a reflection of the will of the Iranian public, but it will probably make our job -- as diplomats trying to deal with the people that matter -- much easier." |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #8 Shipman, you had me. I thought you had embraced the dark side - appeasement. Why is it mandatory that the US engage the kooks in every corner of the earth? There are too many people in the world for us to kiss absolutely everybody's tush? Let's play the Toaist emperor and tune in some American Idol while the idiots from Bam try to make emplosives in a rickety mobile lab while riding the rails to oblivion. Casey Jones you better watch your speed... |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-2-18 8:17:43 PM |
| #7 My 6 was aN effort in Demo thought. But deep down, where my tiny ego lives, I think we will likely need to PINCER THE BASTARDS! |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-18 5:14:20 PM |
| #6 I can't make a case for dealing with the hardliners in Iran.. But IMO we probably have less leverage in Iran than any other country on earth... I think we have more with the nutty NORKS. I think positive engagement and lots of smutty videos are the way to go. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-18 5:12:10 PM |
| #5 hmmm...I have a problem with this. Oh sure, there is truth to this...but isn't this like saying, we don't reach out to Martin Luther King, because he doesn't represent the white power structure? Or..how about ...ignore Thomas Jefferson - it is really King George who is in charge? I think I agree with Robert Crawford. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-18 11:20:33 AM |
| #4 however, it will make the job of newspaper reporters more difficult because they won't be able to pretend in a 'moderate' Iran. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-2-18 11:13:46 AM |
| #3 Remember, diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" while reaching for a/an (insert weapon of choice here). Recall from yesterday that the JDAM production won't be complete untill 2006. If the Izzoids choose to get totalitarian in the meantime, well, that makes the obvious next move easier to justify in 2006. Besides, historicaly totalitarian regimes tend to weaken their militaries in order to insure political reliability. That makes any military option all that much easier. |
| Posted by: N Guard 2004-2-18 10:57:09 AM |
| #2 It was much easier for Chamberlain once Hitler pulled the gloves off too. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-2-18 10:52:05 AM |
| #1 Having conservatives running everything may not be a reflection of the will of the Iranian public, but it will probably make our job -- as diplomats trying to deal with the people that matter -- much easier. And this, more than anything else, makes it clear why diplomats are among the lowest scum on the planet. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-2-18 9:12:19 AM |