Dr Yusef Molayi, Tehran University professor in international affairs talks to Rooz about US President Barack Obama’s new approach to Iran. He believes the assertive posture of the fundamentalists in Iran could be part of a larger strategy of getting concessions. Read for the conversation.
Rooz (R): The issues that the US raises with Iran are specific, while those that Iran raises are general historic and normative ones. Do you think talks are possible in this situation?
Yusef Molayi (YM): It is true that American calls are more tangible and objective. But behind Iran’s rhetoric, it is really indicating its calls that it wants to have its share and influence in this area as its regional power. The Americans know that when the issue of talks gets serious what issues Iran will raise. Regarding the nuclear issue, there are currently a number of UN resolutions over Iran and more pressure is on its way. When Iran says its wants a change in US attitude, it wants a different US policy towards issues such as the nuclear issue. Regarding political issues, it wants the US to provide some form of a pledge that it would not interfere in its domestic affairs including regime change. These issues are known to both sides while each is using its own language or way to express them. The language used by the US is more objective because it has greater diplomatic experience.
R: The Americans have repeatedly said that in their meetings with Europeans, and particularly the one regarding the nuclear issue in which the US representative too participated, Iranian diplomats do not specifically express what they want and that instead of talking about specific issues, resort to generalities and raise historic issues. Is this true?
YM: Iranians certainly are aware of this. This is the method used by Iranian diplomats when they know that conditions are not yet ready for effective discussions. So while they do not wish to reject the opportunity, they also do not want to present themselves to be too eager. It is customary for Iranians not to be specific when they feel that conditions are not suitable.
R: During the last month images of Obama’s portraits being burnt by Iranians were dispatched by news agencies to other countries which makes some analysts believe that Iran is not ready for change even with Obama as US President. At the same time, some hardliners in Iran have made some harsh and hard remarks against Obama. How important are the impacts of this?
YM: These events have taken place and they can impact the situation but they are not decisive. In other words Iranian policy is certainly not driven by these events or the postures of a newspaper or a speech. I do not believe that those who know Iran and understand international politics from a practical perspective and understand the fundamentals properly do not judge official policy on the basis of one or two snapshots or comments. They understand that special conditions exist in Iran and that some of the remarks that are made do not constitute the country’s official policy. At the same time, these assertive comments can be part of the larger policy of extracting concessions.
